It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jesus: The First Communist

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.

Also, socialism does not require denial of individual property rights. That's just ignorance and scare tactics.



Its object is humanity, not humans. Expressly soulless in nature.


As it should be.


Oh dear, a socialism denier.





posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Metallicus

But if people voluntarily gave the needy all that was necessary, it wouldn't have to be legislated.

There are plenty of Christians who have nice homes, nice furniture, and abundance of food, nice clothes, nice car.... and there are plenty of people in poverty with none of those things.


"If you did what I say, I wouldn't have to beat you."

-some bully



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

What? The right gives more to their community but it doesn't count as charity?



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Metallicus

But if people voluntarily gave the needy all that was necessary, it wouldn't have to be legislated.

There are plenty of Christians who have nice homes, nice furniture, and abundance of food, nice clothes, nice car.... and there are plenty of people in poverty with none of those things.


"If you did what I say, I wouldn't have to beat you."

-some bully


Legislating the distribution of money from the community to aid the poor is analogous to a beating? Really?



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Metallicus

But if people voluntarily gave the needy all that was necessary, it wouldn't have to be legislated.

There are plenty of Christians who have nice homes, nice furniture, and abundance of food, nice clothes, nice car.... and there are plenty of people in poverty with none of those things.


"If you did what I say, I wouldn't have to beat you."

-some bully


Legislating the distribution of money from the community to aid the poor is analogous to a beating? Really?


Really.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: TheJourney

That's your interpretation. Not mine. Far better men than thee and me have covered this and none have called Jesus a Communist.

By the way, as your posts seem to follow the vein of your thread, I point out I've never claimed to be a follower of Jesus.
Never have been.

In any event, I've made my point. Jesus lead by example, not enforcement. If a group of people liked his idea, please note he was addressing individuals that likely didn't own property of their own, not property owners.

As the VAST majority of property owners have earned that property through labor, savings and a lifetime of effort, It's safe to assume that Jesus would never have demanded those to give up that property in any way other than voluntarily.

So when you post all the properties, land or otherwise, that you've given away to the less fortunate, you 'might' receive some respect for your convictions....if not your intelligence.....



edit on 4-11-2015 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: TheJourney

Jesus believed in helping others not legislating it.


Non-answer, as predicted...at least your non-answer was short, rather then a rant.


It's his answer. Your non-answer label is nothing more than an attempt to gain traction in this thread with debate.

The simple responses are all that this premise merits. If any response at all, that is.


So:
"Jesus believed in helping others not legislating it."
Is an answer to:
"Would you like to be a part of a community in which there was no private property and everything was shared equally among everyone?"

Not sure you understand the nature of the relationship between a question and an answer...


His answer is implied as well as obvious.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

In a way I guess. I wasn't agreeing with the philosophy, just pointing it out.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

I think people who are truly beaten and battered will disagree with you.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: greencmp

I think people who are truly beaten and battered will disagree with you.


I would characterize that as argumentum ad passiones.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.

Also, socialism does not require denial of individual property rights. That's just ignorance and scare tactics.



Its object is humanity, not humans. Expressly soulless in nature.


As it should be.


Oh dear, a socialism denier.



Just making sure the facts are clear. What you posted was incorrect.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Which would've been just a cop-out to the legendary argumentum ad hominem. I like that, kinda funny in a primitive way.




posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.

Also, socialism does not require denial of individual property rights. That's just ignorance and scare tactics.



Its object is humanity, not humans. Expressly soulless in nature.


As it should be.


Oh dear, a socialism denier.



Just making sure the facts are clear. What you posted was incorrect.


Fair enough, I did add "totalitarian" to my next mention for clarity. As with Nazi Germany, control (and eventually ownership) over the means of production is sufficient to enable most of the ends of socialism.

Strictly speaking, communism is a closer variant of actual international Marxism.

What we have been for a century or more is interventionist which has gradually led to the socialization of the western world with its accompanying shortcomings.

What to do? The answer is always more intervention, eventually leading to socialism which, as an absolute government form, is necessarily totalitarian.



Three Systems of Plunder

The sincerity of those who advocate protectionism, socialism, and communism is not here questioned. Any writer who would do that must be influenced by a political spirit or a political fear. It is to be pointed out, however, that protectionism, socialism, and communism are basically the same plant in three different stages of its growth. All that can be said is that legal plunder is more visible in communism because it is complete plunder; and in protectionism because the plunder is limited to specific groups and industries. [4] Thus it follows that, of the three systems, socialism is the vaguest, the most indecisive, and, consequently, the most sincere stage of development.

But sincere or insincere, the intentions of persons are not here under question. In fact, I have already said that legal plunder is based partially on philanthropy, even though it is a false philanthropy.

With this explanation, let us examine the value — the origin and the tendency — of this popular aspiration which claims to accomplish the general welfare by general plunder."

-Frédéric Bastiat

edit on 4-11-2015 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.


This actually isn't true. That is the hijacked and bastardized version of Communism. Communism is SUSPOSED to be an economic system where all the workers in a company have equal share and say in the direction of the company.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Metallicus

But if people voluntarily gave the needy all that was necessary, it wouldn't have to be legislated.

There are plenty of Christians who have nice homes, nice furniture, and abundance of food, nice clothes, nice car.... and there are plenty of people in poverty with none of those things.


IT still doesn't need to be legislated. You are advocating theft from people and I am sure Jesus wasn't for theft, organized by a authoritarian government or otherwise.


It's not theft for me personally. I'm happy to give up a portion of my money in taxes that will go to help others. I give it willingly and without malice. I wonder how Jesus would feel about taxes that went to aid the poor? I bet he would like that better than taxes that went to aid the rich, don't you?


You are welcome to freely give all of your things away. The thing is you are making a choice and man-kind, even in a Christian sense, has always been allowed freewill. I admit I am not an expert of Jesus or the Christian religion, but I am sure that Jesus would not have been for government enslavement of the populace or to force his beliefs unto other people.

In my world we are both free to give what we wish to the poor. In your world people are enslaved to a Government and forced at gunpoint to give to the poor. Trust me, the IRS will bring its guns.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.


This actually isn't true. That is the hijacked and bastardized version of Communism. Communism is SUSPOSED to be an economic system where all the workers in a company have equal share and say in the direction of the company.


That is a great recipe for failure. Most people are idiots.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.


This actually isn't true. That is the hijacked and bastardized version of Communism. Communism is SUSPOSED to be an economic system where all the workers in a company have equal share and say in the direction of the company.


Its a complicated subject, what you are describing sounds more like syndicalism or trade unionism.

The communist mantra was "workers of the world unite!" rather than companies.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.


This actually isn't true. That is the hijacked and bastardized version of Communism. Communism is SUSPOSED to be an economic system where all the workers in a company have equal share and say in the direction of the company.


That is a great recipe for failure. Most people are idiots.


Which is exactly why we need to legislate things. Because most people are selfish idiots.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



Socialism is an economic system which denies individual property rights and awards the state exclusive monopoly control over the means of production.


Communism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Socialism is providing goods and services for all through the collective wealth of the people. There is a big difference.


This actually isn't true. That is the hijacked and bastardized version of Communism. Communism is SUSPOSED to be an economic system where all the workers in a company have equal share and say in the direction of the company.


That is a great recipe for failure. Most people are idiots.


Hey, I wasn't speaking about how successful the idea would be, just what it is supposed to be. Many people don't actually know what Communism was REALLY supposed to be about.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: TheJourney

Compelling others to be and do good as you see it isn't them being and doing good of their own volition. Christ wants you and I to choose to be and do good on our own without someone else coming to us and putting the gun of government force to our heads.

When that choice is taken from us, any good that may or may not be done through its agency is empty. Whatever good is done in the name of government is not and has not been done in my name and by my hand. Those works are all empty as they have not been done by me through my choice and personal sacrifice.

When I get to heaven, I will not be able to point to the Social Welfare State and claim it as my personal good works with the tired old mantra of "I gave at the office." I had no choice in the matter, there was no personal sacrifice involved in having to give to it, there is no good work done by me.

On the other hand, the very real donations of time and money I make after all the taxes the government takes ... those are another matter.


edit on 4-11-2015 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join