(May 9, 2020 at 3:55 pm)Agnostico Wrote:

(May 9, 2020 at 2:34 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Let me add, Communism isn't about oppressing religion, but any kind of dissent. There are Christian Churches in Russia, and even China, and Cuba has tons of Catholic Churches.

That's a good point. Any kind of dissent is either taken to the gulag or disappears

I recently found myself asking what the difference is between the communist and socialist economic structures
What I found is that we use the terms incorrectly, especially communism. There has never really been a communist country even though thats what we called the old Russians. Some dictionary definitions also has things mixed up

In a capitalist society the big money industries are owned by private entities

In a socialist society the big money industries are owned by the state

Communism is a Marx concept of a utopia. It says that the public have equal shares in companies whose profits are equally divided
Eg. A company has 100 employees. They all have an equal share in the company and earn an equal slice of the profit. 
Weather or not it could ever work is an interesting discussion

Then there is fascism. Its sits on the right hand side of the political spectrum which i don't really understand why
It's economical structure is the same as socialism with the state owning the big industries. So is it a form of socialism
I heard someone say "socialism is when the state dominates industry and Fascism is when industry dominates the state"
I don't really see much ideological differences either, both are very nationalist. Maybe someone here can better explain the differences between fascism and socialism

These are very basic definitions as the subject gets really complex

I think that when socialists want the electric company (for example) to be owned by the state, they're thinking of the state as being the representatives of we the people. 

In that case, the people own the electric company, but random individuals can't run something big like that, so our representatives do it for us. This is different from private ownership in that all the benefits of the company should go to the people. It is democratic at its base, because while regular people don't make day to day decisions in the factory, it is run for them and they can vote out the operators.

In fascism the state and the government work together for the good of the owners and industrialists. The benefits go to the powerful people and the little people have no say (or just get murdered).

(May 9, 2020 at 3:55 pm)Agnostico Wrote:

(May 9, 2020 at 2:34 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Let me add, Communism isn't about oppressing religion, but any kind of dissent. There are Christian Churches in Russia, and even China, and Cuba has tons of Catholic Churches.

That's a good point. Any kind of dissent is either taken to the gulag or disappears

I recently found myself asking what the difference is between the communist and socialist economic structures
What I found is that we use the terms incorrectly, especially communism. There has never really been a communist country even though thats what we called the old Russians. Some dictionary definitions also has things mixed up

In a capitalist society the big money industries are owned by private entities

In a socialist society the big money industries are owned by the state

Communism is a Marx concept of a utopia. It says that the public have equal shares in companies whose profits are equally divided
Eg. A company has 100 employees. They all have an equal share in the company and earn an equal slice of the profit. 
Weather or not it could ever work is an interesting discussion

Then there is fascism. Its sits on the right hand side of the political spectrum which i don't really understand why
It's economical structure is the same as socialism with the state owning the big industries. So is it a form of socialism
I heard someone say "socialism is when the state dominates industry and Fascism is when industry dominates the state"
I don't really see much ideological differences either, both are very nationalist. Maybe someone here can better explain the differences between fascism and socialism

These are very basic definitions as the subject gets really complex

‘Fascist’ is what social democrats call democratic socialists.

‘Socialist’ is what fascists call social democrats.

‘Communist’ is what conservatives call fascists and socialists.

Boru

(May 9, 2020 at 4:11 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 9, 2020 at 3:40 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: Tongue and cheek - amIright?

Sort of. Other people correct Brian and it’s not a thing. I correct Brian and get excoriated for it.

Funny old thing, life.

Boru

I get after him too.  I don't understand why certain people get all up on their high horses about it.  Has Brian stopped talking with either of us?  The answer would be no, no he hasn't.  I think he can take care of himself better than some people give him credit for.  He actually engages you and I as much he engages anyone else...with the exception of Zilla...who has been known to throw a snarky remark Bri's way from time to time.

But if they (the high horse SJWs) can sleep better at night after one of their little tirades then all's well.  shrug

(May 9, 2020 at 11:00 am)Nomad Wrote:

(May 9, 2020 at 12:11 am)WinterHold Wrote: Let's not forget about non-religious maniacs like Stalin.

Stalin was Russian orthodox christian for most of his life, including the years between 1941 and his death.

Quote:Stalin called for an "atheist five year plan" from 1932–1937, led by the LMG, in order to completely eliminate all religious expression in the USSR. It was declared that the concept of God would disappear from the Soviet Union.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USSR_anti-...80%931941)

---

Non-religious folks are the real danger

(May 8, 2020 at 5:35 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(May 8, 2020 at 10:02 am)masoni Wrote: threatening people with eternal damnation for not following him. seems pretty asshole-like to me.

By defining God in this way, which is certainly not the only definition, you include the conclusion in the definition. 

I get the impression you're not interested in talking about this. Maybe you're only here to repeat your emotional reactions? 

Anyway, here is a different view of hell, which comes from Neoplatonism but has long existed in Christianity as well. It's a minority, non-mainstream view, but a long-lasting one. (I understand that for some people on this forum, the term "Christianity" only refers to modern mainstream American Christianity. But there are other kinds.)

In the Christian Neoplatonic view, hell is a state not a location. God, in this tradition, is the One and the Good. It is complete integration and lack of conflict. The fall of man is not disobedience but perceptual closing, in which we forget that we are all part of the One and begin to focus on division and the selfhood. 

Hell, in this view, is the state of being in division. It is perceptual closure to the point where we only see the most obvious surfaces of things and not their infinite interconnectedness. It is the illusion which allows us to think we don't need others and can condemn them. 

God, in this view, condemns no one. We feel condemned or feel in a hellish condition because we perceive so little of the world. Going to heaven is not a spatial movement but a perceptual change. It can happen right where you're sitting. 

The condition of hell is maintained by a desire to continue in ignorance, by refusing to feel connection to others and to the environment, and by the pride of feeling that my selfhood is somehow better than others'. It is maintained by sitting around and calling other people assholes and saying "fuck those guys if they believe differently from me," instead of finding empathy and increasing one's own knowledge. 

Again, the rank and file who attend church in your neighborhood probably have never heard of this view. Nonetheless it is a longstanding part of Christianity, and some of the most interesting and intelligent Christians have written about it.

in our age, we have Fundamental Christians who firmly believe that before the end of the world occurs, they will be raptured up into the clouds to be reunited with jesus in heaven and thus, spared the discomfort of torture, ravenous locusts, plagues and the incineration of large portions of the earth. on the other hand, you have certain right-wing, fundamental islamics who are brought up believing that those who die while defending god’s edicts will be rewarded with an indescribable paradise which includes more willing virgins than currently live upon our planet. and both these groups are more than willing to bring doom down on the rest of us poor suckers just so they can enjoy their promised rewards!

(May 9, 2020 at 4:18 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(May 9, 2020 at 3:55 pm)Agnostico Wrote: That's a good point. Any kind of dissent is either taken to the gulag or disappears

I recently found myself asking what the difference is between the communist and socialist economic structures
What I found is that we use the terms incorrectly, especially communism. There has never really been a communist country even though thats what we called the old Russians. Some dictionary definitions also has things mixed up

In a capitalist society the big money industries are owned by private entities

In a socialist society the big money industries are owned by the state

Communism is a Marx concept of a utopia. It says that the public have equal shares in companies whose profits are equally divided
Eg. A company has 100 employees. They all have an equal share in the company and earn an equal slice of the profit. 
Weather or not it could ever work is an interesting discussion

Then there is fascism. Its sits on the right hand side of the political spectrum which i don't really understand why
It's economical structure is the same as socialism with the state owning the big industries. So is it a form of socialism
I heard someone say "socialism is when the state dominates industry and Fascism is when industry dominates the state"
I don't really see much ideological differences either, both are very nationalist. Maybe someone here can better explain the differences between fascism and socialism

These are very basic definitions as the subject gets really complex

I think that when socialists want the electric company (for example) to be owned by the state, they're thinking of the state as being the representatives of we the people. 

In that case, the people own the electric company, but random individuals can't run something big like that, so our representatives do it for us. This is different from private ownership in that all the benefits of the company should go to the people. It is democratic at its base, because while regular people don't make day to day decisions in the factory, it is run for them and they can vote out the operators.

In fascism the state and the government work together for the good of the owners and industrialists. The benefits go to the powerful people and the little people have no say (or just get murdered).

Thats not my understanding of Marx's interpretation. When i say the state that is the same thing as saying the government
 
The term democratic doesn't refer to the economical structure. It's a reference to the system used to elect a leader. Tyranny would be the opposite or dictatorship

---

(May 9, 2020 at 4:20 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ‘Fascist’ is what social democrats call democratic socialists.

‘Socialist’ is what fascists call social democrats.

‘Communist’ is what conservatives call fascists and socialists.

Boru

What about capitalist? LoL. Getting more complicated there but true i think. 
I'll try find this short 3min video which is cool

I notice in the USA the left have started to call themselves socialists and refer to Scandinavian countries as socialists despite them always saying their not
I think its being used now for a more state owned system. The more industries the state owns the closer to socialism they are...

(May 9, 2020 at 4:37 pm)WinterHold Wrote: Non-religious folks are the real danger

Your claims don't hold up to reality, as usual

A nice brief 3 minute explanation

(May 8, 2020 at 11:59 pm)WinterHold Wrote: The Quran never speaks about "cutting fingers as a sentence", or about "beheading" as a sentence; please use this Arabic to English Quran to bring the verse:

quran.ksu.edu.sa/

Otherwise, I advice you to educate yourself better about the book.

Hell is in the afterlife. But armies like the American army burn people to death in this life. While armies like the Egyptian army do worse:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_201...a_massacre

Quote:The raids were described by Human Rights Watch as crimes against humanity and "one of the world's largest killings of demonstrators in a single day in recent history".[9]

Humans are the worst animals on this planet, yet some of them -like you- are mad about a hell that will come after this life.

8:12
"I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off. "
finger tips mean our fingerprints in the verse talking about the resurrection. 

Here's another translation:
[8.12] When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

how is something so simple so capable of creating so many translations?

---

(May 8, 2020 at 11:59 pm)WinterHold Wrote:

(May 8, 2020 at 7:30 pm)masoni Wrote: if some god exists, that god doesn't care about the rape of a child, and, by extension, doesn't care about humans. that's how it is. live with it.
we humans are better than the loving, protector god, because we exist, and that god almost certainly does not

---

A sentence that quite contradict itself; you demand me to live by a vague statement about what you claim to be "non-existent". If God doesn't exist, then what does your sentence worth? and why are you even debating over it?

I'm talking about the so-called "god" in the rotten books of the religious.

Quote:Thats not my understanding of Marx's interpretation. When i say the state that is the same thing as saying the government

Accept they are not they are two distinct entities 
 

Quote:The term democratic doesn't refer to the economical structure. It's a reference to the system used to elect a leader. Tyranny would be the opposite or dictatorship

Democracy can be economic a tyrant is a dictator