This thread is permanently archived
Commies, explain yoursleves
| Ask a question and we will answer
--Commie G/u/rl over--
| Why do most communist movements seem to be so anti-religion, when some of the closest things to communist-esque success were religious in nature? ie the Mormons in the late 1800's, and the construction of Notre Dame cathedral by the townspeople, among other buildings and social programs.
| Within the idea of a community working together and giving resources, time, and talent for the benefit of the whole, rather than individual gain. As for the Mormon example, a quick search gave me this:
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/consecrate-law-of-consecration?lang=eng
Also note that I said "some", not all.
| I always heard "Jesus was the first communist" from some commie peps and I guess its true
| commies aren't anti-religion but rather against the hierarchical organization of the church and it's abuses, but there's nothing wrong with loving thy neighbor, weither you found it on ethics or faith.
but if you're retarded enough to follow China or URSS as a proheminent exemple of gommunism then the problem rather lies in your definition of said movement rather than the movement itself
| I'd say the problem with religion is that it's the opiate of the masses. Why do people not revolt or kill? Because they are thaught to show the other cheek.
And materially the Church doesn't provide anything for a better life. (Now they do for some shelter less children, in turn the rape and abuse some)
|
Also the Church was always in bed with the Kings, to get more power.
Also, the whole institution is like a multi level marketing scheme.
They take the money of the poor and lie to them so that the ruling class (at the time the feudal lords and kings) can stay in power.
--commie g/u/rl over--
| Why are Jews disproportionately represented among communists?
| >>414282
Good question.
I see the same with 20th century communists ideologes.
Maybe we should ask the question why men (and Jews) are disproportionately represented among the 1%.
I'd say because of historical reasons. The man had the money and somewhat owned the wife (and the Jew was the only one who was allowed by their religion to lend money).
And maybe we should ask why men are disproportionately represented in communist movements of today.
|
Probably because not all men (or Jews) are part of the 1%.
The system isn't working for them.
On the economic bottom are disproportionately more men, than women.
The Jews at the bottom have all the racism (or had it) and not the benefits of being a rich Jew.
So what do those people do?
They try to change the system, the fundament of the system, to create a world in which they aren't the scum of the earth.
--commie g/u/rl over--
| >>414282 Jews were educated but still the bottom of society for a long time and communists were the only ones strongly preaching for equality of all, this attracted Jewish people to join their cause.
| >>414184 It seems to me that youre talking specifically about the Catholic church? Around here Ive seen lots of religious social programs. Food and clothing distribution, educational programs, and a bunch of other things.
| Commie here (actually socialist but close enough)
Personally I like the idea of helping other people who can't survive on their own. I'm not talking about lazy people, if you don't want to work and just get paid for nothing then fuck you, but if you legitimately can't work due to an injury or illness, then yeah I'll gladly give you a couple bucks until you can get another job.
| >>413910
>Why do most communist movements seem to be so anti-religion.
Because they see historical materialism as the primary driving force behind history and the economic reality as the basis of social hierarchy.
>when some of the closest things to communist-esque success were religious in nature?
I would rather call it "pseudo-communist". Also the biggest fail of communist movements was when some of their leaders made it a religious alike legitimation for their absolute power.
| >>413910
>social programs
The social engagement by religious institutions serves to proselytize people in the first place. Also Mafia organizations do some charity from time to time, not only for money washing but also for money making and to bind people. It doesn't change the fact they are nothing but criminals, preaching water and drinking wine.
| >>413918
>the idea of a community working together and giving resources, time, and talent for the benefit of the whole, rather than individual gain.
This is not the definition of communism, this is how ANY economy is supposed to work, including capitalism. Communism is all about the ownership of the "means of production". While in capitalism it is private property, in communism it is public property.
| >>414580 >>413918
The communism vs. capitalism debates are all about efficency, sustainability, economic success and last but not least distribution of wealth and power. It's not about supernatural power like from god(s). Even thought some assumptions in capitalist and communist ideology are still almost as speculative as the question if god exists and they also are preached like dogmas from time to time. But other than in reiligion, this is not how it is supposed to be.
| What is the difference between communization theory and anarcho-communism? They seem to broadly overlap.
| >>414627
I never heard about communization theory. The issue is that the term "communism" became semantically so much overloaded in theory and missused in practice that it overlaps with almost everything.
To me communism is a class free society achieved overcoming capitalism by making the private property of production means public and it has to be done by international revolution in the major industrialized capitalist countries.
| >>414364
That doesn't answer the question. In typical SJW fashion youbjist tried to make it about gender.
>>414380
So communism allows people that no one likes (for whatever reason) to gain power, and that is a good thing?
| >>414282
Easy question, complex answer:
Reason 1: The emancipation of jews especially in germany starting in the 18th century, by assimilation
Reason 2: The opression of jews in feudal europe, which remained strong in eastern europe until today and even during "communism" (stalin was an antisemite).
Reason 3: The abtility to read and write a common language while beeing spread all over the continent creates some affinity to internationalism.
| >>414871
You're right, it needs some more explaination to understand.
Emancipation:
After a long history of opression and persecution during the feudal era, the new secular nations gave jews three opportunities:
- Assimilation as bourgeois
- Revolution as communists
- Emigration as religious nationalists to found an own nation (Zionism)
Assimilation only worked for those who were successful in the new capitalist society, which is always a privilege of a minority.
...
| >>414871 >>415021
Emigration and founding an own nation was not a realistic option back then. It just existed in the heads of some conservative elites.
The most attractive way for the majority of jews was revolution. Especially in the early industrialization socialist movements were very popular. While in the west socialists were opressed and finally defeated (also thanks to antisemitism) in Russia, socialists stole the show from the bourgeois class and managed to revolt against...
| >>414871 >>415025
...the backwarded, still feudal and antijudaist tsarist regime. Of course many jews joined the socialist movements and get into leading positions. They did not expect that at some point a guy calling himself "stalin" would break with socialist ideas and make use of antijudaist and antisemite prejudices to fight his political concurrents (which often were jews).
This and more prominent the Holocaust made Emmigration the most popular option for jews in the end.
...
| >>415031
...
The founding of Israel was in the beginning supported by the soviet Union (for geopolitical reasons) and later by the west (driven by a powerful jewish lobby in the USA)
Now in the 21th century jews are not that prominent anymore in the weakened socialist/communist movements. It's the opposite case, as Israel (like all other nations these days) becomes more and more lead by nationalist and even racist politics. Saying that will make publicity brand you as antisemite.
| Why having a conversation with fucking reds? Just throw them out of helicopters. Am I right?
| >>415170 >>415224
-When you bully the Emo kid into sucide-
*A Picture of Stalin laughing*
*A Picture of Hitler being dead*
| >>415232
*a picture of all countries transformed into capitalist shitholes after communism was destroyed.
| >>415279
*a picture of my ass*
are you talking about the baltic states and eastern Europe that got totally ruined when the soviet union took a hold of them and still feel the consequences to this day?
or perhaps cuba, that are still stuck in the 50s.
surely you mustn't be referring to west Germany and its very capitalistic economic miracle, or any successful country nowadays on earth (all are capitalist)
name one successful communist country today that isn't a shithole/dictatorship
| >>415034
Thanks for your perspective. Given the admitted overrepresentation of Jews in (high and low) places within the communist system I wonder why there is so much confusion about antijudeaism given how much so many people suffered? The soviet Gulags were such an incredible crime against humanity, how can Jews play victims of the holocaust then turn around and be disproportionately responsible for an even crueler system? This is what conspiracy theory and racism feed from
| >>415314
>The soviet Gulags were such an incredible crime against humanity
They were nothing but a heritage from the tsarist regime taken over by stalin, who was no jew but an antisemite.
>how can Jews play victims of the holocaust
They did not just "play" victims. People that were considered to be "jewish" were systematically murdered in those camps, which was a whole different and much more stupid story than the stalinist gulag tragedy.
| >>415321
here's a commie deflecting and blaming everything on others even though the bolshevik terror and the organized famines and the purges and the execution squads was a thing that happened and where they also murdered the whole tsar's family
this is basically holodomor denial, implying the commies wheren't mass murderers and tortionners
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3dclBmvZk4
glorious revolution amirite?
and we're all supposed to be heartless, cruel, horribly horrendous capitalists, right?
tell you what: most communist countries were totalitarian.
most communist countries had mass killings and torture.
the worker didn't mean shit.
in fact, working hard didn't even mean much.
most capitalist countries today are democratic and the key to success there is hard work.
there's your respect for the worker.
bang.
| the hard worker is a capitalist.
| >>415334
Lol yeah, Stalin paid the clouds not to rain- that damn bastard.
And after the Ukrainian farmers didn't want to share their crop with their fellow countrymen the Bolsheviks wanted to seize it.
And before they could seize it those fuckin idiots burned their crop. Because what's the difference if you get no money am I right. Nice market logic.
So they seized the rest and put those reactionaries into the gulag.
They deserved it tbh.
| >>415334
No real fuckin communist calls capitalists heartless or cruel.
We don't critise the individual, we aren't fuckin liberals.
We critise the economic system, the logic those individuals have to follow.
Capitalism served us for some time, ofc it enslaved people, starved Ireland and India, and destroyed the trade family through not paying enough wages-and letting even the children work on horrendous conditions. But it also brought us a way out of feudal times which is nice.
|
We communists just think that now capitalism doesn't serve us no more, we serve it. God is dead but we can't imagine a world after capitalism. Capitalism is our new believe system. And it coopted liberal post modern ideology (which is opposed to marxism [Google "the new left"]) and enables us to be "free" to choose everything we want regarding social questions. Now we can even choose our own gender.
But we aren't allowed to change the neo-liberal globalist economy.
|
We can't change one bit, because experts (Goldman Sachs and other big capitalists) tell us that it's not possible.
But I believe we can do better as humanity. With the food we throw away we could feed humanity 3 times. We could already explore the stars with right allocation of resources. Or even tackle climate change.
But the capitalist market logic doesn't allow us to do such things.
--commie g/u/rl over--
| >>415327
The problem about monarchy is, that as long one member of the monarch family is alive, conservatives can hope on the Restauration of the dynasty - and if it's only as a puppet to another ruling class. What about all the liberals and socialists that were deported, tortured and murdered in the name of the royal family? You always harvest what you sewed! I'm not a Stalinist and I condemn what happened in the Ukraine. I'm sure that this was not was Marx and Engels were about.
| >>415371
they deserved to die for starving? communist logic everybody. it simply doesn't exist. also note the heartless sadistic approach often used by reds. they'll do this to your kids. don't let em.
>>415374
so how are ya gonna fix that? by starving ukraine and destroying meritocracy? the idea behind communism is an utopian one which simply doesn't work in practice.
>>415522
i'd take up arms for my empress... at least there's a slice of honor in that. unlike communism. china.
This thread is permanently archived
| Hey, OP here again. More specific question this time, but the same general kind of idea as last time. Keep it civil, bot really looking for "correct", just looking for the opinions of you gurls to better understand.