3 ms·

== but you want to find an excuse to the supporters of the things you agree with.== We should be aware of our mind’s ability to play this trick. Have you analy

== but you want to find an excuse to the supporters of the things you agree with.== We should be aware of our mind’s ability to play this trick. Have you analyzed if you might be falling into this trap? Who is it that I agree with, exactly? I don’t remember stating. It seems you have filled in your own details of who I am and what I believe with a nice straw man that you can attack. Ironically, I’m struggling to think of a historical figure that was more socialist than Jesus. == or that "those bastards deserved to die."== And I’ve heard from plenty of “Christians” that the Crusades were justified, slavery wasn’t that bad, immigrants are rats, Manifest Destiny justifies Native American slaughter, and on and on.

rglullis 5y ago
The absurd things that you have heard Christians say are not supported by their leadership. In contrast, there are barbaric actions done by the so-called "heroes" that are defended and even praised by many self-professed socialists. Don't you see a difference at all?
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > The absurd things that you have heard Christians say are not supported by their leadership. The absurd things that I have heard Christians say (as a Christian myself) have been disproportionately directly from leaders in the Christian community (particularly, but not exclusively, the elites of the American Christian Right, some of whom are also significant figures in one of the remaining heirarchical churches in America.) That includes the examples specifically cited by the poster upthread. (There are, of course, other Christian leaders that disagree.)
  - rglullis 5y ago
    By "leadership", I meant those that founded and shaped the religion. IOW, the ones that led by example and showing skin in the game. The "leaders" you are referring to are anything but.
- long_time_gone 5y ago
  This all depends on what you define as “leadership”. I have absolutely heard prominent pastors (local religious leaders) make those claims and I suspect anyone being honest with themselves has too. When you say leadership are you referring to the leadership who abused small children (local level) or the leadership who covered it up (national/global level)? The constant “whataboutism” towards socialism doesn’t answer any of those questions. Socialists aren’t a global society like Christians. They don’t have a universal set of instructions to run on (like the Bible). Giving money to a local “socialist” running for office doesn’t trickle up to a global socialist network like the church. You see the difference, no?
  - rglullis 5y ago
    > This all depends on what you define as “leadership”. See comment in sibling thread. > Socialists aren’t a global society like Christians. Surely you are joking? - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Paulo_Forum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Paulo_Forum - http://www.internacionalsocialista.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticlePageID=931 http://www.internacionalsocialista.org/viewArticle.cfm?Artic... May I also point out that the greatest schism in Communist groups is over Leninism/Trotskyism, and how their divergences come exactly from the fact that one of them believes that Communism can only be achieved when (what you call) Socialist practices are applied universally? > set of instructions to run on (like the Bible). I let the silly comment about "Jesus being a Socialist" slide, but if you see the Bible as a set of instructions I'd suggest you actually go learn more about Christian Theology and Philosophy before comparing all Christians to fundies.
    - long_time_gone 5y ago
      I grew up Catholic attending Catholic school for 13 years, so that is my reference point. The New Testament was absolutely viewed as instructions from Jesus on how to live a meaningful life. He was showing us how to put God's word into everyday action. Certainly the Beatitudes and the Golden Rule are instructions on how to live, right?
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > May I also point out that the greatest schism in Communist groups is over Leninism/Trotskyism The Stalinist/Trotskyist split is a split within Leninist-derived Communism, and it hasn't been the “greatest schism” in that community since at.least the rise of Maoism; I’m not sure there are any Trotskyists left (in the US, leading ex-Trotskyists went on to form a significant part of the core of the neoconservative movement.) AFAICT, Leninist-derived Communism is all Stalinist “socialism in one state” now. The biggest split in Communism (at least, the Marx-derived subset) seems between developed-capitalism first Marxists and Leninist-derived vanguardists, though the former subset is also less tied to old orthodoxy and so has mixed a lot with non-Marxist socialism and is less easy to draw a firm bubble around than the Leninist vanguardists.

rglullis 5y ago

The absurd things that you have heard Christians say are not supported by their leadership. In contrast, there are barbaric actions done by the so-called "heroes" that are defended and even praised by many self-professed socialists. Don't you see a difference at all?

dragonwriter 5y ago
> The absurd things that you have heard Christians say are not supported by their leadership. The absurd things that I have heard Christians say (as a Christian myself) have been disproportionately directly from leaders in the Christian community (particularly, but not exclusively, the elites of the American Christian Right, some of whom are also significant figures in one of the remaining heirarchical churches in America.) That includes the examples specifically cited by the poster upthread. (There are, of course, other Christian leaders that disagree.)
- rglullis 5y ago
  By "leadership", I meant those that founded and shaped the religion. IOW, the ones that led by example and showing skin in the game. The "leaders" you are referring to are anything but.
long_time_gone 5y ago
This all depends on what you define as “leadership”. I have absolutely heard prominent pastors (local religious leaders) make those claims and I suspect anyone being honest with themselves has too. When you say leadership are you referring to the leadership who abused small children (local level) or the leadership who covered it up (national/global level)? The constant “whataboutism” towards socialism doesn’t answer any of those questions. Socialists aren’t a global society like Christians. They don’t have a universal set of instructions to run on (like the Bible). Giving money to a local “socialist” running for office doesn’t trickle up to a global socialist network like the church. You see the difference, no?
- rglullis 5y ago
  > This all depends on what you define as “leadership”. See comment in sibling thread. > Socialists aren’t a global society like Christians. Surely you are joking? - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Paulo_Forum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Paulo_Forum - http://www.internacionalsocialista.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticlePageID=931 http://www.internacionalsocialista.org/viewArticle.cfm?Artic... May I also point out that the greatest schism in Communist groups is over Leninism/Trotskyism, and how their divergences come exactly from the fact that one of them believes that Communism can only be achieved when (what you call) Socialist practices are applied universally? > set of instructions to run on (like the Bible). I let the silly comment about "Jesus being a Socialist" slide, but if you see the Bible as a set of instructions I'd suggest you actually go learn more about Christian Theology and Philosophy before comparing all Christians to fundies.
  - long_time_gone 5y ago
    I grew up Catholic attending Catholic school for 13 years, so that is my reference point. The New Testament was absolutely viewed as instructions from Jesus on how to live a meaningful life. He was showing us how to put God's word into everyday action. Certainly the Beatitudes and the Golden Rule are instructions on how to live, right?
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > May I also point out that the greatest schism in Communist groups is over Leninism/Trotskyism The Stalinist/Trotskyist split is a split within Leninist-derived Communism, and it hasn't been the “greatest schism” in that community since at.least the rise of Maoism; I’m not sure there are any Trotskyists left (in the US, leading ex-Trotskyists went on to form a significant part of the core of the neoconservative movement.) AFAICT, Leninist-derived Communism is all Stalinist “socialism in one state” now. The biggest split in Communism (at least, the Marx-derived subset) seems between developed-capitalism first Marxists and Leninist-derived vanguardists, though the former subset is also less tied to old orthodoxy and so has mixed a lot with non-Marxist socialism and is less easy to draw a firm bubble around than the Leninist vanguardists.