• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Socialism and the Far Right

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
everyone is generally social, the problem is when someone thinks they deserve more than another based on some physical attribute vs mental/spiritual attribute. exploiting people for gain is a capitalist action, not a socialist one.
Churchill got it wrong...
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

The brutal inequality is even greater under socialism.
(The murdered just don't complain much.)
Russia discovers ‘road of bones’ on frozen highway in Siberia
The Soviet Famines: A Stalinist Genocide? | History News Network
How Joseph Stalin Starved Millions in the Ukrainian Famine
Killing Fields - Wikipedia
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Churchill got it wrong...
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

The brutal inequality is even greater under socialism.
(The murdered just don't complain much.)
Russia discovers ‘road of bones’ on frozen highway in Siberia
The Soviet Famines: A Stalinist Genocide? | History News Network
How Joseph Stalin Starved Millions in the Ukrainian Famine
Killing Fields - Wikipedia
capitalism is a service to self action
socialism is a service to all as self and based on merit and ability, not exploitation based on some physical attribute.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
capitalism is a service to self action
socialism is a service to all as self and based on merit and ability, not exploitation based on some physical attribute.
Socialism is nothing but "the people" owning the means of production.
Of course, "the people" is the government. As we've seen in historical
examples of socialism, the people serve the elite who run government.
The people die building roads thru Siberia, while the elite feast on
caviar.....or gold plated steak.
Communist Leader Eats Gold-Covered Steak With Salt Bae After Visiting Karl Marx’s Grave
 

1213

Well-Known Member
everyone is generally social, the problem is when someone thinks they deserve more than another based on some physical attribute vs mental/spiritual attribute. exploiting people for gain is a capitalist action, not a socialist one.

If so, I don't think there are any socialists. All socialists that I know, try to exploit others by various ways. Common for most socialists is that they tell some arbitrary reason why others should give money, or other benefits for them, without doing anything to deserve it. They probably are the most greedy people on earth.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Socialism is nothing but "the people" owning the means of production.
Of course, "the people" is the government. As we've seen in historical
examples of socialism, the people serve the elite who run government.
The people die building roads thru Siberia, while the elite feast on
caviar.....or gold plated steak.
Communist Leader Eats Gold-Covered Steak With Salt Bae After Visiting Karl Marx’s Grave
again it is a capitalist mentality feasting on caviar and gold plated steaks. capitalism is based on exploiting, not service to all as self. capitalism is based on hierarchies, classes, orders. so the action betrays the truth that a capitalist doesn't really want social service; except for themselves.

what one calls themselves and what one does are not necessarily the same thing. some people will pretend to be anything and everything to get what they want.
 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
If so, I don't think there are any socialists. All socialists that I know, try to exploit others by various ways. Common for most socialists is that they tell some arbitrary reason why others should give money, or other benefits for them, without doing anything to deserve it. They probably are the most greedy people on earth.
socialists that exploit others are only socialist in name. in action they are capitalists.


you cannot serve love and self alone.

so anything that exploits for self gain purposefully is capitalizing. doesn't matter what someone claims they are, it matters what they do. so then a capitalist will lie to gain power, or a service to self will lie to gain power. the service to self type is a hypocrite. the golden rule doesn't apply to them. it only applies to other as self.
 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
*** coal mining WAS the industry in eastern Kentucky****

Jesus turned a few loves of bread and fish into enough to feed 5 thousand people. Why didn’t he keep doing that if he was such a Socialist?

Jesus wasn’t an enabler! He didn’t intend to create a professional dependent class of alms seekers!

Socialism compels the thrifty producer to support the improvident which produces more of them.

If families can walk across South America to get to better paying jobs in the U.S. then Kentuckians can walk their butts right on out of rural Kentucky to better jobs in other states. It’s a little harder considering that half of the population of Kentucky is obese, but generational poverty won’t change unless people change!

this isn't about kentucky. it's about service to self vs service to all as self. ultimately the service to self type fails. the problem is that they eventually realize their are in competition with the absolute; unfortunately only the absolute can be of service to self type. so then the service to self type has reached it's limit and must be absorbed in to it because it can't beat the Absolute.

so then, it isn't about feeding someone, it's about teaching someone how to feed themselves. you give a man a fish, you fed him a day. you teach a man how to fish, you fed them for a lifetime. the idea is mentoring to those who need the skills to pass on to the next generation. it isn't about trying to gain from the ignorant and less powerful.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
again it is a capitalist mentality feasting on caviar and gold plated steaks. capitalism is based on exploiting, not service to all as self. capitalism is based on hierchies, classes, orders. so the action betrays the truth that a capitalist doesn't really want social service; except for themselves.
Then it seems socialism just takes the worst features
of capitalism, & owns fully them.
what one calls themselves and what one does are not necessarily the same thing. some people will pretend to be anything and everything to get what they want.
The no true Scotsman, eh.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Then it seems socialism just takes the worst features
of capitalism, & owns fully them.

The no true Scotsman, eh.
not all socialists take the worst features of capitalism. plenty of simply living folk in many monasteries and nunneries throughout history that were and are true socialists. this isn't anything new. we know it works without capitalism being involved. spiritual communities have been doing this for milleniums.


if i dress a chinese person up in a kilt, give them the name of MacCallan and they were never born in scotland the fallacy has nothing to do with that.


you have to have been born or lived in scotland to qualify. you can take the child out of the country, but you can't take the country out of thej child. they have the experience and conditioning. conditioning is a verb.

being socialist or capitalist, service to self vs service to all as self is based on action, not a label. a servant isn't like a capitalist who sits at the head of a table waiting to be served.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
this isn't about kentucky. it's about service to self vs service to all as self. ultimately the service to self type fails. the problem is that they eventually realize their are in competition with the absolute; unfortunately only the absolute can be of service to self type. so then the service to self type has reached it's limit and must be absorbed in to it because it can't beat the Absolute.

so then, it isn't about feeding someone, it's about teaching someone how to feed themselves. you give a man a fish, you fed him a day. you teach a man how to fish, you fed them for a lifetime. the idea is mentoring to those who need the skills to pass on to the next generation. it isn't about trying to gain from the ignorant and less powerful.
In America 3,000,000 young people quit the free school offered to them each year! They don’t want to learn how to fish! They want to play video games and hope some virtue signaling Leftist volunteer other peoples earnings subsidize their incompetence.
 

ameyAtmA

~ ~
Premium Member
so then, it isn't about feeding someone, it's about teaching someone how to feed themselves. you give a man a fish, you fed him a day. you teach a man how to fish, you fed them for a lifetime. the idea is mentoring to those who need the skills to pass on to the next generation. it isn't about trying to gain from the ignorant and less powerful.
I agree with you, but easier said than done.
Where do you start? At home?
If a child is not staying in school, then homeschool till they get back and stay in school, and stay motivated.
If a child is too lazy, too scared or does not have enough skillset, motivation, education, whatever else to go out in the world and earn money -- be an entrepreneur and employ them in your family business.
It is hard.

At a community level? There are support systems to motivate, encourage and assure people right?
Either people have to seek that or when young, the parents have to enable that kind of social structure, exposure and framework.
It is mAyA we are combating with with these small attempts.

Someone talked about healthy families - the obvious support system. Lots of love - not blind, but aware love. Fuel for motivation.

It appears that children have a lot of cultural peer pressure to drink alcohol and party simultaneously with their education, and be independent from parents too soon (peer pressure).

And speaking at the society level -- means tough combat with mAyA*.
Love versus mAyA. Good luck.

Side note: Isn't religion a way to spread Love? (that is what Krishna has been doing for 5000 years - we call it religion), but even religious messages get tainted by mAyA and hence rejected by people.

----
*mAyA -- term used in Hindu dharma for "that which is illusory, misdirected, misidentified" which generally is the case with the physical world.
 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
In America 3,000,000 young people quit the free school offered to them each year! They don’t want to learn how to fish! They want to play video games and hope some virtue signaling Leftist volunteer other peoples earningssubsidize their incompetence.
that is again a service to self, self serving choice. being a socialist requires everyone to be of some service according to their ability. one cannot do just what ever they want. they must contribute, find a way of being of service. capitalism isn't about just money, or monetary types. its about gain over another. it's about power. it's about enslaving others because they want to be boss and not service.

you seem to think that being leftist is socialist. that it is thinking in terms of black and white. being somewhere more in the middle is socialism. it isn't the physical, financial, or emotional responsibility of another to keep anyone up; unless they are physically, emotionally, and/or incapable of doing so. immature things need mature guidance. take steven hawkins for example. he still contributed and was wheel chair bound. again a service to self type comes from both the left and the right. j

humans have basic needs. those needs have to be met for the individual before the individual can be of service to anyone else. this is why people have to have support throughout their life span. NO one can be everything to themselves, let alone to another.


this isn't rocket science, or brain surgery. its just common everyday sense.

all work and no play makes jack a dull boy. all play and no work makes jack a dull boy from hunger and want.

nothing to excess. excess is a mental disease, disorder.
 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
I agree with you, but easier said than done.
Where do you start? At home?
If a child is not staying in school, then homeschool till they get back and stay in school, and stay motivated.
If a child is too lazy, too scared or does not have enough skillset, motivation, education, whatever else to go out in the world and earn money -- be an entrepreneur and employ them in your family business.
It is hard.

At a community level? There are support systems to motivate, encourage and assure people right?
Either people have to seek that or when young, the parents have to enable that kind of social structure, exposure and framework.
It is mAyA we are combating with with these small attempts.

Someone talked about healthy families - the obvious support system. Lots of love - not blind, but aware love. Fuel for motivation.

It appears that children have a lot of cultural peer pressure to drink alcohol and party simultaneously with their education, and be independent from parents too soon (peer pressure).

And speaking at the society level -- means tough combat with mAyA*.
Love versus mAyA. Good luck.

Side note: Isn't religion a way to spread Love? (that is what Krishna has been doing for 5000 years - we call it religion), but even religious messages get tainted by mAyA and hence rejected by people.

----
*mAyA -- term used in Hindu dharma for "that which is illusory, misdirected, misidentified" which generally is the case with the physical world.


maya is associated with the physical, material, and not the spiritual, mental. maya's sister, counter is lila. like buddha said suffering comes from attachment. attachment is to material forms, objects, that are basically fleeting, fading, decaying. dust to dust.
 

ameyAtmA

~ ~
Premium Member
maya is associated with the physical, material, and not the spiritual, mental. maya's sister, counter is lila. like buddha said suffering comes from attachment. attachment is to material forms, objects, that are basically fleeting, fading, decaying. dust to dust.

Agreed - but mAyA is also emotional attachment to temporary relationships of this world as "mine" - possessive attachment.
I said it is a tough combat against mAyA.
How to motivate, encourage others to get out of mAyA , wearing your own oxygen mask first.

The big mAyA hurdle is in society and culture.

This is what you are "supposed to" be -- mAyA whispers in their ears : Drink alcohol, drive fast, be cool in the eyes of your peers. You have to have a girlfriend/boyfriend. You have to compete. Otherwise you are not cool. Wear branded clothing and leather. Otherwise you are not cool. -- these are the whispers of mAyA - a small example.

First the parents and other adults have to be role models and themselves out of mAyA AND that is not enough - they then have to wear the oxygen mask, to pull the young out -- assuming they are in acceptable presentable listenable form to the next generation.

However, that does not mean someone who worked hard and earned good money and is simply being a responsible citizen is wrong. They can learn or be motivated to do some service or the other - without getting overwhelmed with the zillion problems in the world.
 
Last edited:

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
I think it would be best if all those would be voluntary. If one wants those, he pays for it.
So you would be down for privatized companies handling fire fighting while charging extravagant fees to stop your house from burning down? Or a toll booth for every street and road? An admission charge for city parks?
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
In America 3,000,000 young people quit the free school offered to them each year! They don’t want to learn how to fish! They want to play video games and hope some virtue signaling Leftist volunteer other peoples earnings subsidize their incompetence.
Adorable straw man.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Socialism is nothing but "the people" owning the means of production.
Of course, "the people" is the government. As we've seen in historical
examples of socialism, the people serve the elite who run government.
The people die building roads thru Siberia, while the elite feast on
caviar.....or gold plated steak.
Communist Leader Eats Gold-Covered Steak With Salt Bae After Visiting Karl Marx’s Grave
What historical examples would these be? Hutterites? Bruderhof communities? Catalan Anarcho-Syndicalism? Mondragon? Or are you referring to repressive, hierarchical, authoritarian regimes with "socialist" or "peoples" in their official titles?

Socialism is society/economy as family; with everyone coöperating for the common good, each contributing according to his ability and benefiting according to need.

In socialism there is no élite, and no centralized, overarching "government" independent from the people. Decisions are made democratically and transparently, by the consensus of those affected by them.
Noöne starves, noöne is enslaved, noöne is thrown out onto the street, noöne is impoverished.

But this is misleading. Vis: your link in post #107. The socialism the "radical socialists," AKA: 'Social Democrats' advocate -- and conservatives condemn -- are the various social programs Americans have grown to love since the 1930s, and the 'socialist' Nordic governments -- mixed economies -- where the welfare of The People trumps corporate interests.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Things cost what they cost.
Anyone who can & wants to work can get great pay.
And here we see the Great, American, Conservative Myths:
1. That there are job opportunities for everyone
2. That what jobs there are pay a living wage.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
What historical examples would these be? Hutterites? Bruderhof communities? Catalan Anarcho-Syndicalism? Mondragon? Or are you referring to repressive, hierarchical, authoritarian regimes with "socialist" or "peoples" in their official titles?
I cited countries where there was no private ownership
of the means of production. The "people" owned it.
Socialism is society/economy as family; with everyone coöperating for the common good, each contributing according to his ability and benefiting according to need.
That's not the definition of "socialism"....that's
what you want, ie, your dream of how eliminating
private ownership would play out. But it doesn't
work that way.
In socialism there is no élite, and no centralized, overarching "government" independent from the people. Decisions are made democratically and transparently, by the consensus of those affected by them.
The people owning the means of production doesn't
preclude there being an elite. Nay, it guarantees
there'll be an elite....one with an iron boot on the
necks of the masses. It's just what happens.
Noöne starves, noöne is enslaved, noöne is thrown out onto the street, noöne is impoverished.

But this is misleading. Vis: your link in post #107. The socialism the "radical socialists," AKA: 'Social Democrats' advocate -- and conservatives condemn -- are the various social programs Americans have grown to love since the 1930s, and the 'socialist' Nordic governments -- mixed economies -- where the welfare of The People trumps corporate interests.
Capitalism has a better record than socialism.
Freedom to start & run businesses is fundamental
to liberty. Without that, government controls all.
 
Top