Meh, all I remember of what the Bible says of heaven is it will be none stop worshipping of god. Like hillsong forever or something.
Communism in theory: A stateless, classless, moneyless utopia where everyone shares resources based on need. Communism in practice: Authoritarian regimes, economic inefficiency, suppression of dissent, and a state that never ‘withers away’ like Marx imagined.
Every major attempt, USSR, Maoist China, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, has resulted in centralized power, mass repression, and economic collapse. The problem isn’t just ‘bad leaders’; it’s that a system requiring absolute cooperation and selflessness on a societal scale is fundamentally unworkable. Human nature, resource scarcity, and the need for incentives all get in the way.
So yeah, communism sounds nice on paper, but history proves it turns into a dystopia instead of a utopia every time.
We need to stop idealizing communism because it doesn’t work.
removed by mod
I’ve always wondered about this. One of the Great Filter issues is that a species must cooperate together instead of destroy itself. Maybe in our evolutionary history we needed some of those narcissistic traits to survive as individuals, but now we need to evolve.
It’s not psychopath sociopathic narcissists that don’t allow communism not to work it’s general human Nature on a large societal scale.
The Spartans practiced a form of eugenics and they were one of the greatest societies in human history and that still doesn’t make them right about what they did.
I highly recommend that you go back and read through some human history before making idiotic comments like this.
All of human history is selective breeding. The lunatic desert people in the Middle East where 1 rich guy has 10 wives and 40 kids is one way of doing it. And, thankfully, post-Magna Carta cultures and ones with greater-female-human-autonomy cultures have another method of selective breeding. And what you just said about broad human nature supports my original statement because fundamentals of human nature change and not just from environmental conditions but inherited tendencies.
Side note: what was so great about Spartans? They seemed like slave-dependent authoritarian assholes that disappeared in a flash.
700 years for a society as strict as Sparta is a pretty big blip whatever a blip might mean to you. Especially since elements of their society is still incorporated in our own.
It sounds like you’re using lots of 100 dollar words in 10 dollar sentences without knowing what they mean. Did you read up on any of that human history we talked about before?
What you lack in reading comprehension you make up for in smarmy quips.
Ya. That’s what all you dodos say when I point out your gibberish.
Are the same time you call the era of the Spartans a blip. 🤷
The ubermensch concept was very popular in the early to mid 1900s, and has even been attempted before! Refer to world War 2 and Nazi ideology for more reading on that topic.
If you mean Nietzsche type ubermensch then the broad genetic cultivation needed among most humans that I’m talking about for communism to work is very close to the opposite of that. Nietzsche strongly suggested that humanity needs to go back to a predatory morality that predates Christianity. He advocated that cooperation and communal good was a slave morality and a bad thing.
If You are cleverly hinting that purposeful breeding among humans is a bad thing because Nazis advocated it, then you should go hound people that grow rose bushes and condemn governments that have health departments because Nazis also did that.
If you are surmising that I am personally advocating these things then you have glanced over what I wrote too hastily. I will leave the details as an exercise for you reread and figure out in your own.
You sound like a Nazi. That is literally 100% out of their playbook. Musk would be proud of you.
I’ve addressed your misunderstanding in another response
Based and food pilled
Human nature, resource scarcity, and the need for incentives all get in the way
For now. Why not keep looking and find a way to make it work?
Of course we need to continue to do this just not with Communism.
Couldn’t you use that argument to disqualify most government types? I mean show me a type of government that hasn’t been perverted. Does North Korea disprove all democratic republics? I mean they call themselves a democratic republic therefore they are a republic right? That’s what you’re using as a definition to deny communism right? Hell I don’t even have to look at the worst example is there a good example of a government that hasn’t been perverted?
deleted by creator
They’re saying the opposite
No, but objectively, some governments are far better than others. For example, I wouldn’t want to live in the Republic of the Congo or North Korea. Despite the issues we face in America, I still live a comfortable and peaceful life here, and I have no desire to leave. If I were in North Korea or China, however, I would likely be looking for a way out.
Your comment does however provide great examples of the no true Scotsman and appeal to purity fallacies. Though I’d argue that acknowledging the flaws in all governments doesn’t mean they are all equally bad. Some are demonstrably worse than others.
That’s because of Vanguardism
China is in no way, shape, or form, a “Communist” nor “Socialist” country, it’s just State Capitalism.
No Socialist/Communist movement could be successful without democracy. People wouldn’t be able to control the means of production if there is no democracy.
So you’re saying of this vanguard existed I mean as it would work?
Unchecked capitalism also leads to bad outcomes, including ecological collapse.
We need something that isn’t “a handful of people have all the power”
Totally agree. I would also say that what we have now in America is really capitalism anymore… It’s something else.
Like decentralized socialism?
Social democratic republic with heavy consumer backed regulation and woodchippers
It would be important that the regulation is constantly protected. The forces of greed will constantly be trying to dismantle it, and people are kind of stupid.
Maybe the woodchippers do some of the heavy lifting there, but you then need to make sure they don’t get used for evil
Democracy requires eternal vigilance. Democracy would fall if people stop caring about elections, and the socialist policies would be dismantled along with it.
We need an overhauled political system and convince a supermajority of the country to vote infavor of a constitution that entrenches socialist values within it. (A supermajority is essential for better legitimacy, 51%-49% is very flimsy and people would doubt the results, but a 60%-40% is a very high margin and people would be less likely to doubt the results) Then we need a “Constitutional Court” with people who share those values to be seated in the court to defend the constitution.
Sort of like Germany’s “Defensive Democracy”, but with added socialist values.
But in the end, it still requires the people in power to actually do their job. (I’m not sure why Germany still haven’t banned AfD 🤔)
Probably also need to really invest in education. People don’t just magically know political theory, and a lot of bad ideas can sound good at first
Interestingly enough, it’s mostly the right wing that is anti education.
If only they could listen to Jesus first
You can read you through it all, no magic involved. Jesus is the only hero I’ve ever looked up to
The pope literally wrote a fucking document called “Rerum Novarum”. What the hell are these people even discussing? Christians are a joke politically because they can’t have their own political stance and keep inheriting liberal beliefs.
Religion is like a shoe. Yours won’t fit me and mine won’t fit you. So let’s just let each other walk.our own ways without trying to push us along our paths
Replace “Religion” with “Truth” and you’ll see why this doesn’t work.
With our concept making apparatus called “mind” we look at reality through the ideas-about-reality which our cultures give us. The ideas-about-reality are mistakenly labeled “reality” and unenlightened people are forever perplexed by the fact that other people, especially other cultures, see “reality” differently. It is only the ideas-about-reality which differ. Real (capital-T True) reality is a level deeper that is the level of concept.
We look at the world through windows on which have been drawn grids (concepts). Different philosophies use different grids. A culture is a group of people with rather similar grids. Through a window we view chaos, and relate it to the points on our grid, and thereby understand it. The ORDER is in the GRID. That is the Aneristic Principle. Western philosophy is traditionally concerned with contrasting one grid with another grid, and amending grids in hopes of finding a perfect one that will account for all reality and will, hence, (say unenlightened westerners) be True. This is illusory; it is what we Erisians call the ANERISTIC ILLUSION. Some grids can be more useful than others, some more beautiful than others, some more pleasant than others, etc., but none can be more True than any other.
Religion is a tool to manipulate people according own will based on stories that happened similar in real world. Similar, meaning, the religion master picked stories that helped them explain why people have to behave like he says and maybe added som flavour here and there.
Please, people, can we just stop falling for it?
And what do you think the Buddha’s big master plan was, what with telling people to seek enlightenment?
And you think the BBS accurately represents the teachings of the Buddha, and the whole of Buddhism? I asked about the Buddha’s master plan, you’re trying to answer my question with this BBS article?
Well, one can use religion manipulation for things that are not evil as well.
Doesn’t makes it any better in my eyes, as think it is disrespectful, telling people fictional enhanced stories to manipulate. I prefer the scientific way of thinking and explaining. People understand way more than you think, if you just try to explain it in logical steps that they can follow.So you think Aesop’s Fables are bad?
I don’t know them, but if they are written to manipulate I surly dislike them, yes (I assume that because of the style you are asking)
There are plenty of Christians who specifically and deliberately oppose attempting to make life on earth more like heaven. They’re not being hypocrites for this, this is their belief system. To disagree with them is to wade into a theological debate, not just a political one.
Jesus was a socialist
Agree.
Jesus was a first century Jew, he was almost certainly not a socialist.
I don’t have an issue with communism, but with communists.
communists
*Self-Proclaimed “Communists”
(spoilers, they don’t actually believe in communism)
I’m kind of the opposite. I have no problem with (well intentioned and rational) communists. But if we had full blown communism with Trump in charge, it would be game over for everyone.
Does that make Trump a communist if he would actually love if the US was a communist state? Maybe I actually agree with you.
The state of communists right now is:
I know what’s good for you, you suffer from propaganda. You don’t have to vote, otherwise the people who don’t have your best interests in mind will get into power.
This has nothing to do with an ideology. It’s just the people who claim to follow this ideology are being authoritarians.
They aren’t called tankies for nothing.
Any ideology can be forced upon a society through authoritarianism. Communists aren’t popular in democracy. So they long went with the authoritarian way.
Me listening to tankies describe communism as a moneyless, stateless, classless world, then criticise anarchism
people still use the word tankie ? my guy most communists these days are anarcho communists.
tankie was never funny anyways
What’s a tankie? I know what it means but for others that don’t go ahead and drop an egg of knowledge on them.
A supporter of the Soviet Union and its habit of using tanks to suppress uprisings.
I choose to imagine it’s actually because they all wear tanktops
We can only make the world stateless by having one all-encompassing state. Anarchism would result in a mosaic of states.
Nice satire
sadly I actually do believe this. help me 😭
What if we have zero states?
I’d rather 0 than 51
Well that’s what anarchism tries to do
There’s a very easy answer that most Christian conservatives will quickly provide - God makes all things possible. Whether in its most primitive, logic-defying form, or in the more thought-out “Humans are imperfect and thus cannot run a perfect system, unlike God”, few Christians will actually be caught on the surface-level contradiction.
Can we just have tiny villages where we tell ghost stories and just all contribute to each other’s well being?
Why are we censoring “communism”?
same reason people say “unalive” and “fuggen” and “child 🌽”… the Internet has become a place for self censoring idiot babies afraid of being algorithmically demonitized/banned
corporate monopolies of all popular platforms has kneecapped actual free speech by training entire generations to be afraid of violating terms of service, I guess
Alternatives:
“unalive”
in cases of homicide: “Ended [Person]'s Life”
or, in cases of suicide: “Ended their own life”
it bypasses most mainstream censors while maintaining the seriousness of it
“child 🌽”
“CSAM” is usually the term that people use these days, I don’t think the term "CSAM is censored
Also too fucking lazy to redo the “meme” without censorship (and sometimes, better quality)
deleted by creator
When I was fairly young my mom described Christian heaven. I remember struggling with the idea of not struggling and being happy all the time. Then she hit me with if someone you love doesn’t make it to heaven you forget them. That’s when the fracture began for me.
Severance
Basically heaven is a mindfuck.
It really is. It’s not even a pleasant thought experiment.
Its not that you forget the person. You gain a perfect understanding of the situation. Like when your child has to go to jail for some crimes they committed. You may be sad they went to jail, then understand why they went to jail, then agree it was right that they were put in jail.
Not a perfect analogy, but something like that.
So we join with the God-mind in order to understand why the person we previously loved isn’t worthy of love after all…
Not what I said.
But at the end of my lifetime, it’s someone I loved, but that God doesn’t love (not enough to bring them to heaven, anyway…), and so my feelings about them get updated with God’s perspective?
So I learn why I was wrong to love them?
Edit: I’m just saying that Hell as a concept, alongside an all-loving God, doesn’t compute, to me.
Whereas Hell as a concept, introduced by human church leaders, to keep tithes up, makes perfect sense, to me.
So it feels like an Occam’s Razor situation, to me.
This isn’t preaching, I’m just going to explain it so maybe you can understand it better.
As far as God only bringing people to heaven if He loves them, there’s more to it. If God created everything (humans, animals, earth, stars, etc.) then He has authority over it. He has laws we are to follow, and if we break any of them then we are guilty of sin. Just like in human society, when someone breaks a law, they get punished either by paying a fine, going to jail, etc. Hell is jail; everyone has committed a sin against God, and deserves to go there. The bible without much detail, tells us there are varying degrees of punishment in hell.
In response to your edit, think of God as a judge. If a human judge has a child trafficker in his court, and the judge just lets him go free, would he be considered a good, just judge? No, we’d say he is a corrupt judge. Apply that concept to God, crimes must have a punishment. If God just brought people to heaven, then God wouldn’t be just. So you’re saying a loving God wouldn’t send people to hell. Well, God is loving, and had His son Jesus who never sinned crucified (willingly), paying for the punishment of the sins of anyone who puts their faith in Him as Lord. So, because God is loving, it’s very easy to avoid going to Hell. Which is why it’s also very easy to go to hell, we already deserve to go, so if we reject His offer of forgiveness, that’s on us.
Purgatory, I would say was an invention of church leaders since it’s not in the bible. They used the threat of purgatory to get people to pay for indulgences.
who gives a fuck what a stupid book written by idiot camel herders from 3000 years ago says? who even fucking cares one single fucking iota? seriously. WHO? slap the fucking piss out of the person that does.
destroy all abrahamic religions for the sake of humanity. no fucking mercy.
Holy Reddit atheists, Batman
Yeah. They’re the worst. They make it difficult to have actual atheistic views.
Whoah there buddy, we’re supposed to tolerate the sickness until they go on a shooting spree.
i didn’t get that memo
from 3000 years ago
The only parts that are even possibly that old are random bits of poetry.
and some of it was inspired or stolen from babylonian and egyptian mythology, so it could go even further back. which means absolutely nothing in the age of AI.
The elements borrowed from Babylonian mythology show up in the post-exilic period. Like, yeah, there’s Babylonian influence in the Noah story, because they had been held captive in Babylon and met Babylonians. We’re talking like 500s BCE here.
Flood stories are not really that impressive a commonality. Early civilizations were based on rivers. Sometimes rivers flood and that’s a big deal (the Nile floods consistently, which refreshes nutrients and is how Egyptian civilizations managed their longevity.)
Oooh baby, do you know what that’s worth? Ooh, Heaven is a place on Earth
