/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10375295]

was he a communist

[Anonymous No.10375302]

nah
His teachings did lead to the foundation of the idea of communism though, by corrupting and twisting their meaning.

[Anonymous No.10375305]

I think he would be fine with it but individual freedom was important to him because the choices people make are what is important

[Anonymous No.10375306]

>>10375305
>I think he would be fine with it
>religion is the opium of the masses

[Anonymous No.10375308]

>>10375306
What does that have to do with communism?

[Anonymous No.10375316]

Define communist.
He was definitely not one by the Marxist definition.

[Anonymous No.10375323]

>>10375308
Communists like this motto really much.
How can you not know this?

[Anonymous No.10375324]

>>10375295
No, welfare leeches got kicked the fuck out of the clubhouse.

[Anonymous No.10375332]

>>10375323
There are no rules about belief

[Anonymous No.10375335]

>>10375295

more like socialist

[Anonymous No.10375337]

>>10375332
but there are. name how much of the mass murderer communists were not atheists.

[Anonymous No.10375347]

>>10375332
That's rule one

[Anonymous No.10375365]

>>10375332
Prove it.
Even if you do, IRL commies don't like religion and use that precise quote.

[Anonymous No.10375534]

Jesus was a pure anarchist. Against all forms of institutions. Ellul wrote a great book that studies why the teachings of Jesus developped into a civilization, when everything written in the bible points to the opposite. The book is called The Subversion of Christianity.

[Anonymous No.10376223]

Do narcissistic sociopaths even have political beliefs?

[Anonymous No.10376309]

>>10375295
He wasn't a materialist, so no.

[Anonymous No.10376316]

>>10375306
you seem to have misunderstood that quote, opium is fucking great

[Anonymous No.10376375]

>>10375295
More of a strict moral socialist? No excess obviously and raising up of the lowest class, one would assume he was working towards an equilibrium between the richest and the poorest, I don't really know if it theoretically goes past " rich people give your rich people stuff to the poor people so they aren't starving anymore".

I think he was more concerned about peoples souls.

[Anonymous No.10376391]

>>10375295
Depending on your epistemic foundations he could be whatever you want him to be. But the first Christians and the Church Fathers have not seen him as anything similar to communism.

[Anonymous No.10376923]

>>10375306
>>10375332
>>10375365
This is a quote from Marx himself, contrary to what you might believe, Marxist theorists have interpreted and expounded upon his ideas in a number of ways.
Pic related Christian Socialists ww@?

[Anonymous No.10376949]

>>10376923
>that pic
>implying a syndicate isn't an idol in itself

[Anonymous No.10377013]

>>10376391
>But the first Christians and the Church Fathers have not seen him as anything similar to communism.
They were literal communalists

[Anonymous No.10377072]

No because he gave people food

[Anonymous No.10377093]

>>10375305
>I think he would be fine with it
>Christians are shot and kicked into mass graves under Communist rule
Hmmmmm

[Anonymous No.10377096]

>>10375295
No, he was a zealot that disrupted order of the Roman empire

[Anonymous No.10377106]

>>10375295
He lived before the historical era that produced communism, so no, as interesting as that might be. He was a Palestinian apocalyptic prophet.

[Anonymous No.10377115]

>>10377072
>le food maymay

[Anonymous No.10377146]

>>10377093
>All Communist tendencies are Leninism
A number of South American Marxist groups are/are tolerant of Catholicism

[Anonymous No.10377152]

>believing in Christianity

[Anonymous No.10377158]

>>10377146
Oh yes, the not real socialism meme. Do I need remind you that Marx himself advocated for intermediary states that would take the form of Stalinism and Leninism before les real communism could be implemented?

[Anonymous No.10377169]

>>10377158
>intermediary states that would take the form of Stalinism
no
>Leninism
arguable; Lenin makes a pretty valid interpretation of the Critique of the Gotha Program

[Anonymous No.10377187]

>>10377169
well, Lenin the writer was different to Lenin the writer-statesman after the 1917 '''''''''''''''revolution'''''''''''', so I take your point. But how about you communist scum expand on the 'not real socialism' meme. As a group average, you are the most historically illiterate scum of scum. Qualify your statements. Tell your friends.

[Anonymous No.10377201]

>>10377158
>the not real socialism meme
I'm telling you that groups have pursued socialism in a number of ways, plenty of which were not hostile to religion. Leninists are Marxists but not all Marxists are Leninists
>Marx himself advocated for intermediary states that would take the form of Stalinism and Leninism
Marx was dead long before either of them wrote anything, they pursued the intermediary states in their own ways. Honestly that you're going to conflate the two is pretty indicative of your lack of knowledge on the topic

[Anonymous No.10377204]

>>10377187
Lenin was a realist; he knew that an ideal socialist revolution would look a lot prettier and cultured than the Russian Civil War, but the Russian Civil War was not an ideal socialist revolution. It took place in an isolated, culturally and economically backward, mostly illiterate semi-feudal shithole with nearly every major advanced capitalist country on Earth trying to defeat the workers. No one could have higher ideals in a time and place like that.

[Anonymous No.10377210]

>>10377013
I know you never read any, it's okay.

[Anonymous No.10377246]

>>10377187
>if I am belligerent enough and type enough quotation marks I will seem like I know what I'm talking about

[Anonymous No.10377249]

>>10375295

Then you're one too because he is you.

[Anonymous No.10377271]

Go on commie scum, let's see how your apologetics presents itself in your generation. Is explaining away the Holomodor and Dekulakization still under the same 'not real socialism' banner?

[Anonymous No.10377284]

>>10377271
The Holodomor was not intentional, nor was it as bad as academics say, nor is it essential to communist thinking. And there is literally nothing wrong with Dekulakization .

[Anonymous No.10377291]

he was a social democrat

[Anonymous No.10377296]

Not at all.
>>10377284
>holodomor was not intentional
>nothing wrong with dekulakization
Hmmm.
Really makes me think.

[Anonymous No.10377297]

a spiritual communist maybe but not a political one after all "render that which is Caesar's unto Caesar"

[Anonymous No.10377308]

>>10377296
>make fortunes by stealing other people's farmland and selling their grain to starving poor people at exorbitant prices
>get shot
explain how this is bad

[Anonymous No.10377316]

>>10377284
I wish you weren't larping, or if this is truly your sentiment, I wish your comrades would be as open as you publicly so I could flatten their nose without much guilt. Embrace your scumminess.

[Anonymous No.10377320]

>>10377316
I was mostly just trying to piss him off. I'm a Trot. The collectivization programs were a disaster and millions of people died for literally no reason.

The Kulaks were still scum, tho

[Anonymous No.10377326]

>>10377308
>stealing
I know your kind has a whole different dictionary than the rest of the world, but I must remind you that you are still subject to the same normative grammar and legal definitions as the rest of us until you set up your scum commune on some unclaimed ground.

[Anonymous No.10377333]

>>10377308
Simply due to the fact that it is a complete fabrication.
Also rape and torture isn't the same as being shot.
In Romania, for example, when the peasantry revolted they just killed the boyars, no need for torture. Why couldn't that be done in Russia too?
Gommunism.

[Anonymous No.10377337]

>>10375295
he was an anarcho-monarchist, anarchism on Earth, sovereignty in Heaven. All earthly powers are evil and figureheads that worship Satan and draw their Earthly powers from him. Satan is the Lord of the World and was given dominion over the flesh of all the creatures of the Earth until judgement is passed and Original Sin is completely purified from the world soul of mankind. All religious figures, money, political leaders, military archons are evil and are empowered by Satan. Again, this is spelled out obviously in the Bible over and over again. The only authority is God, no other being can claim dominion over mankind. Mankind was put here to worship the Lord, not to follow each other, man is sinful and wicked he cannot lead others to salvation. The kings and presidents of the Earth are Satan's servants, unwittingly or knowingly. They style themselves after his nature and follow his inversion of Christian values. All popes, kings and presidents are servants of Satan, all bankers and money lenders and economists serve Satan. All production and economic activity is against God's will. Sustenance is the only thing you are permitted, you are at the mercy of God, nothing else. If you put faith in anything outside God you lose your soul immediately and are vulnerable to Evil. only through God's mercy can you be saved. God loves you and you turn away from him for money and power.

[Anonymous No.10377339]

>>10377326
Do you think Kulaks became Kulaks by virtue of their free market savvy? They cruelly and maliciously profited off of the bankruptcy of the small peasant and rural proletariat, using all sorts of horrid trickery, terrorism, and political corruption.

[Anonymous No.10377347]

>>10377291
This. Jesus was an Einar Gerhardsen-era Nordic Model social democrat.

[Anonymous No.10377356]

>>10377339
>maliciously profited off of the bankruptcy of the small peasant and rural proletariat, using all sorts of horrid trickery, terrorism, and political corruption.

how about you unpack and qualify that statement. Was the standard of extermination based on the means by which affluence was acquired by independent farmers, or was it merely an arbitrary level of affluence and independence itself?

You truly are a disgusting bunch.

[Anonymous No.10377421]

>>10377337
that's certainly an interesting perspective
not one held by most however