• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    26 months ago

    You said you blame capitalism for problems, I assume you like Communism/Socialism?

    Stalin co-opted Communism, that means Communism supports authoritarianism right? National Socialists are obviously Socialists since they took the name and published a lot of stuff right? That means Good Communists support Siberian prison work camps and Good Socialists support the Holocaust, right? Any Communist or Socialist who acts like a decent human being in spite of the evils done in the name of a twisted simulacrum of Communism or Socialism is a Bad Communist/Socialist, right?

    Otherwise, you’d have to acknowledge that sometimes, over the course of a movement, bad actors try to co-opt the name of that movement for their own corrupt personal gain, and that sometimes if those bad actors have secured significant political influence they can manufacture consensus on the “official” beliefs of that movement through “official” publications.

    So choose: is Hitler a Good Socialist, or is Paul a Bad Christian?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’m sure we can both agree that Hitler wasn’t a socialist.

      The difference here is that you presuppose people are poorly interpreting the bible when they choose one contradiction over another.

      There is no interpretation of communism where the current state of China is permitted.

      The bible CLEARLY endorses/encourages/condones MANY fucked up stances and never corrects for them.

      Paul is a good Christian, since what he says is in the bible.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16 months ago

        There’s no difference, you’re just a hypocrite. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander: either a message is corruptible, or it isn’t. Either the total corpus of Christianity/Communism is canon, or it isn’t. Either the evils enshrined in later “Communist” literature is sacrosanct, or the evils enshrined in later “Christian” literature is suspect. “The Bible” is a political corruption of Christianity no less than modern China is a political corruption of Communism. If the Bible denotes the definitive Christianity, then Mao denotes the definitive Marxism.

        To claim otherwise it’s hypocritical double-speak. Are you a hypocrite, or do you acknowledge the Bible might be a slightly more politically compromised document than you’ve heretofore claimed?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -16 months ago

          You’re a hypocrite.

          There are no inconsistencies in the communist manifesto as far as I’m aware. It certainly doesn’t endorse totalitarian dictatorships or genocide (though the bible does, multiple times).

          Yet, your bible details rules for slaves and never corrects itself. The bible endorses and encourages slavery. You just choose to ignore it.

          I’m not a hypocrite.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            The Bible is a particular selection of disparate writings collected over centuries and codified millennia after the events described.

            By like comparison, Communism as a corpus is composed of the exploits of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

            The gospels of Christianity are more similar to the Manifesto itself, and contain none of the dictatorships or genocides to which you allude. The gospels do not encourage slavery. If you judge the Bible based on the commentaries and political corruptions, then so judge Communism by gulags and genocides. If one is corruption, then both are. If one is canon, then both are. If you judge Christianity by Paul, judge Communism by Mao. Mao published. Paul published. If it’s unfair to judge Communism by Mao, it’s unfair to judge Christianity by Paul.

            Make up your mind.