Who gets the bullet?

But are memes revolutionary?

If the new right can hijack them for their spooks, how can we and have full meme warfare? What is the end goal? To distribute the means of frog posting?

Feelings are spooks.

🇻🇳

@Deleted User Speaking out of my ass, but I would wager 'compulsory charity' in terms of religion is something that exists to admit to the needs created by a society that recognizes property ownership in the sense there's a ruling class that takes its wealth from the backs of others, and so trying to operate within that without rocking the boat the major religious institutions may advocate for a support of people within the community who otherwise may not be able to fend for themselves because the system puts them at a clear and devestating disadvantage.

That's my take on the issue at least.

On a related note, I read Sebastian Junger's book "Tribe", which kind of goes over it. And from that it could be argued that charity as advocated by religion is an extension of the old tribal traditions and concepts of supporting one's own so the whole unit can survive to take care of you; of course adapted or largely abandoned to the point it's vestigal as soon as feudalism and shit happens.

@Deleted User It is a safety net in the sense that it keeps individuals from going so far under that they die. But at the same time as it seems to be practiced doesn't actively seem to tackle the issues that put these individuals in that position. Some might re-train some people, but at the end of the day those chairites are moving the individual from one disaster to another on the horizon imo.

I see a lot of typing, and now I am [concerned]

@Deleted User Some would say we're not much better off as slaves being paid an hourly wage for our work. But the full benefits of charity on the whole may not be fully realized so far as charity isn't interested in really changing the underlying problem and is only looked on as a temporary feature in someone's life until they can 'pick themselves up by the bootstraps'. But as it is, I'd argue too many people use it far too much while society as a whole likes to see charity as the temporary measure so people end up being indirect slaves in a way; it's why I'm worried about Universal Basic Income too, sure it looks good on paper but then what are we really doing when we all get a free 20,000 a year just to live? Is our existence then just to prop up the current system without having to actually change it in anyway?

There was also a TED talk I watched where the speaker talked about charities and how we need to change the way we think about them, as in we need to do away with the notion everything they bring in needs to go out to people in need and charities need to operate with a higher over-head and in general behave more like companies. So now the dependents are commodities of their own in this sense.

@Deleted User Certainly, and people need to hold themselves up. Society as a whole can make it easier, but without any contributions into it then what are they but consumers paid to consume? This becomes stickier though if we let the trend towards something like automation continue, where now the question is do we destroy the machines taking our jobs just so people can work and contribute into society with produce that they own, or do we render the machines the common property of all individuals and they can take freely from them whatever they want or need as it's produced?

@Deleted User Depends on how you want to interprete it. On one hand you do have individuals within faith or entire sects that advocate some kind of material modesty so that everyone can have equal access to what they need in life, but on the other hand you have people who legit preach being wealthy and having more property is a sign of God's blessing so if you're not wealthy or not trying to get excess wealth you are not in God's good grace or working to be in his good grace. I suppose it could be compared to any sort of ideology where people with a mission in mind can and will cherry pick elements to build a case for their own personal ambitions.

Personally I prefer Buddhism if because it emphasizes working on yourself by surmounting problems posed by excess materialism, where as Christianity tends to externalize issues (if life's rough; pray to Jesus, he'll fix you right up) or out-right say man-kind is irredeemably terrible and rendering the entire human race as being monks and nuns is the only way for global salvation.

On that subject, I do like Arianism as a concept and I wish it was still a thing.

It does. On a related note: I've read points and speculation that Islam was to be a step to abolishing slavery by granting leniancy to slaves, which'd be a spring-board to total abolition of the practice at some future date. Sort of an early-US approach to it to draw parallels there (paraphrased: "We can't do this thing now, it'll totally destroy the Union in its infancy. We need to ween the country off slavery at a slow and consistent pace!"). So instead of screwing over everyone who might matter early on it was put into limbo that got forgotten about and even as jurors across the Muslim world cried foul the political establishment kept onto the practice because it was too advantagous to their economy or their politics.

I might cautionarily point out that you have to be a little careful lest the class roles reverse themselves. The then-slave, now-ruling class could just become another slave-owning class repeating the some practices as before. Though thinking about it too, that's looking at the issue through only the lens of a specefic short period of history (Mameluke Egypt, for instance). In the grand scheme of things that role reversal where the ex-slaves are the slave holders today are where we are today.

>tfw this is real, despite being comedy. https://youtu.be/A4-3TKy2A28

I used to go through his stuff a lot when I was on a George Carlin binge a long time ago. I actually forgot about him until recently until someone posted this in a thread about supporting a four-hour work day.

Or it was a twenty-hour work week.

Either-or.

Your oppinions have been seen and registered into the dialectic. Have good day.

@Deleted User They do, and the lack of consensus on how to get there - or really the initiative to get around to it - has admittedly kept a low faith in the left. Personally, I'd say moving ahead what needs to be done is to figure out how to build it up on a local level, so that way there are pockets where concepts can be physically played with. And at least to me here in the States I feel if there was substantial change at the local level then everything up top will slide into place in the higher echelons, or if revolution were to actually fucking happen there are areas already working at a real socialist or communist capacity. Getting some kind of alliance with like-minded religious organizations couldn't hurt either.

I've never really maintained a hard atheist outlook myself, so I don't have much an issue with it myself. Like, I was raised religiously but sort of phased out of church without any qualm with them and drifted about as an agnostic before picking up Buddhism and getting into religion in the far-east.

@Deleted User I haven't really thought about toeing the line much. If I can make another parable with the Early US I'd argue more often there's more Thomas Jefferson's on the left in that ideology is all that matters as opposed to practical types like maybe George Washington where pragmatic execution of ideology as it applies to the real world is what's important; but to the later I'd certainly say something needs to be carried out to test shit out so people can be raised in the mindset or come into in much the same way as the generation of 1776.

I've also been reading a lot about that time too, so it's all on my mind.

@Deleted User Once a fairly middle of the road liberal (though I was also so young it would be more accurate to say I didn't have any politics then) who drifted further left through the George Bush years. Flirted with the likes of Tankies back in '08 or '09. By the time this last election went through I threw in the towell and bailed out into Left-Libertarianism. I've jokingly said I swim the waters between Anarcho-Mutualism to Bolshevism. I don't entirely rule out armed insurrection, it's just a question of if there's anyone who has the merit of making sure it's done right and won't let it degenerate.

It's not totally unworkable, but it's a big role of the dice for the future. The American revolution could have gone a completely different way early on. If Hamilton's federalists had completely won out over Jefferson's Republicans in the early days and the party didn't have a total meltdown after Hamilton's death then there may have been a class of political aristocracy like in Venice that could have steered the country down a path where we'd have a Doge-like president.

And if all this pissing about of foreign interference in the elections is any indication it's not unlikely the non-revolutionary way either, it's just a fact of life right now, imo. One way or another someone'll pay someone some sugar daddy money.

T'is. Though how we're going to get the working class in America here for instance to believe that when the oppinion is that Mexico and China is stealing jobs is going to be the challenge. There'd need to be a new enemy made up to inspire them.

lol

It is an off-handed remark. But when all what we see is "Made in China/Mexico" on all our products then the mentality is already externalized. I don't have an answer to shift this internally, like getting them to think with class conciousness. It'd be a long trial and error to shift that way of thinking.

Maybe though, setting up something they can control and see the product of their own labor on their own resources and time in their own community would help to shift the mind-set from one without an external foe to more, "We need more of this shit, this shit right here". So all they need is to be told, "You can have more this shit, and I/we are willing to fight for it if you are willing to join in".

It'd be like an extension of the locally sourced trend here; even if that tends to be something the middle-class likes to worry more about than the working poor who just need cheap anything to keep their head above water.

I honestly wouldn't mind bring some good-old community faith back into the thing. Something to simply emphasize being together as an entire unit.

And like coming back to your using Islam initially, something on that scale can bring people of many nations together; and if it's something that advocates everyone taking up the same language like Latin or Arabic to wholly understand or convey the faith than it can break down national borders. Malcolm X's hate towards white people was dissolved when he first went on Hajj and met plenty of white Muslims that he learned were cool dudes, so they went to see the pyramids and shit together on their pilgrimage. And when he came home he was of a new mind.

Like-wise in Albania I think it is, there's strong inter-faith relations between the Christians and Muslims. There's a festival tradition there where a cross is thrown into a river and people are challenged to dive and retrieve it, and Muslims even join in on the fun. This would be useful to look into so the lines between religions can be blurred and it all doesn't fall apart on an inter-faith crusade.

Indeed, though use of religion - like race - can support nationalist tendencies. So moving ahead it would need to be considered how it can transcend borders and how the "our race/nationality are god's people!" preachers can be cut off and outplayed so religious nationalism can be dissolved.

Which I guess comes back around to how the bourgiese can be removed from power and an international proletarian "state" can assume the helm.

So in the end, basically wait for the cult leader to die before moving ahead?

@Deleted User tfw the turning the other cheek is too strong

Buddhism is nice because it's applicable to about anything. It's very syncretic.

God or the concept of a God isn't important, but it isn't totally out of the question. It's adopted into itself and been adopted into plenty of religions in the far-east.

I don't know about elsewhere, but around here the issue is more like going from church to church to find the one most comfortable or appealing to you as a person. I don't know what sort of options are avaible elsewhere. Though, at the same time around here the choice all boils down to varying degress of Christianity and it's tedious or difficult to duck into a congregation of another faith, I think there's one Buddhist monestary around here but I've never found it.

Then there's the people who drank the dogma really deep so might feel averse to someone claiming to being a Buddhist-Tengriist-Christian in their midst. It'd feel like some adhoc paganism to them and they'll be compelled to force Jesus on you.

I literally got a pamphlet while in town one day by some random missionary that was a short comic about how we're all sinful and we need to read the Bible and live by it word-for-word and pray to Jesus so he can help absolve us of our sins when we die.

I'll probably go and play vidya games so I may be busy doing other shit by the time you do come back.

Thank you too, and you're welcome.

The description of Stirner advocating humankind's return to being animals reminds me of Posadas' bit where he claims under Communism man will obtain the science to communicate with the dolphins and shit and the animals will be like the humans and have the same rites accorded to them

If Lenin had a fursona, what animal would he be?

Stallinium is best material. All hail Stallinium

All politics is LARP, we are doomed to terrestrial hopes and dreams, living the same nightmareo ver and over.

If we got some speed, could that ten-book project be done?

Maybe Chopin will be like a new DeVelera.

I am Microsoft, I will ban you from life >:c

CIA, GET OUT OF MY REGIME

Individualism is a spook

Everything is a spook

Life is spoog

death is spoog

Memes are axis

axis is not spoog

holy shit I like fascists now

"Did you just assume my ideology?"

Am I being detained?

muh taxation is theft

mor privat roeds

Maybe if we came to a voluntary agreement with the trees we can have an exchange of oxygen and CO2.

Treat each other as the proletariat that we are.

Last I checked they're just Democrat lapdogs since they're so powerless ultimately.

Meanwhile the pagan revivalist movements just sort of sit around trying their damndest to be a thing.

Unless you're Slavic pagan revivalists. Then you harrass the shit out of, or attack Christians for not being Slav enough.

Interestingly on that front I've had some Russians complain to me about the Rodnovers that they're ebil neo-fascists.

tbh the only neo-paganism I respect is Romuva, if because the Romuva faith was damn impossible to kill off, and its rediscovery at least comes with a certain admission that it's something beyond Lithuania. Rodnover is sorta, "lol slavs only" and Heathenism is having an internal dispute over its associations with Nazi symbology.

In some places there are, but I can't say for certain if that's groups within those communities questioning it or people from the outside getting uppity.

Well, you could also certainly argue that Romuva - like Heathenism and Rodnovery - is a localization of European paganism. On principle as I've read and heard it Paganism in the passed recognized Gods as having domain over certain local areas. So the pantheon wasn't supposed to be ethnically centered or even culturally, but geographically. All the same, many of the figured in each regional pantheon have their counterparts across the way so it's not hard to simply make an offering to a god of something but recognize him, her, or it by a different name.

The matter really changes under Monotheism where The God in the faith is the supreme god over all else, so it becomes much more universal than Zeus or Thor.

tfw the Japanese literally have a god for every rock and mushroom ever.

I like the idea that Catholicism is basically Paganism in denial.

I like Eastern religion, they're fun.

tfw Lao Tzu was basically a proto-Anarchist.

Aye.

The version I picked up too had a part added by the translator where he wrote his own story to reorganize his thoughts on Taosim and set them to a loose narrative.

Listening to Allan Watts from time to time and he gives parables like that often, if for Zen sometime. Like the Zen master showing his students a stick and asking them what it is, if they say it's a stick he thwacks them over the head.

There's also another story I should look for and read again because I think I missed the point it was trying to make the first time. But it talked about a Chinese student of early Zen seeking out the master somewhere in Tibet I think and petitioning him to teach him about inner peace. Each time the master would refuse him until eventually the student offered him a gift of his own severed arm. Some words latter and the student was given inner peace.

More like Sharia-Stalinist!

I for one like a good left-wing market cooperative. If as a staging operation from whence the mindset of the people as a whole can become accustomed to the idea of it. In my experience most people falter at the idea of communally or collectively owned industries because they believe the people as a whole would not be capable in the "complex" problems of managing regular payrole.

It's what most people seem to not understand, fundamentally paperwork isn't the most complex thing in the world to do ever. Maybe buisiness finance is a lot harder than home finance, but if you're all having trouble then someone could be appointed by the whole to do it, or like most of them do; have independent accountants do the numbers.

I mean shit, if the company Gore can run on this very idea with over 9,000 paid employees then why can't the rest of us?

Gore is a company here in the States that makes special fire-resistent fabrics for cars, fire-fighters, and the US Army; recently they branched into computer parts. They have some 9,000 employees, none of which are superior to the other and even the founder carries the same title as everyone; associate. They're structured completely horizontally and found that in order to surmount the challenges of having a totally horizontal company with such a large pool of members it's to continually split their factories/shops. Every time one shop goes above 150 people ("We start seeing cars park in the grass" as I've heard someone put it) they go to build or establish an entirely new autonomous plant for another 150 people.

They've been rated one of the best companies to work for for awhile now. The idea is based on what their founder learned working at DuPont where small autonomous groups would be formed if only to form as-needed problem solving units, and they worked so well the guy figured, "Why not all the time?"

More off of personal experience, so no. It's not like the guy read Proudhon and thought, "I like this guy. Let's do Proudhon."

He did it, they worked out the kinks as the organization grew, and it is as it is.

I'm not sure. I tried to look into that myself. But I'm sure they have some people going between to figure out what each other are doing. There has to be some level of inter-shop management. But all I've read stresses the horizontal-ness of it and some of the criticsm leveled against going that route (ie: some critics like to talk about how it's easy for people to hide their unproductivity in this manner of organization).

But if it's gotten as big as it had, it's worth looking into some more and consideration. I know there's a few other companies I link to when people complain about how a lack of hierarchy is bad to underline how you can have an effective large company without supervisors or managers; Mondragon in Spain is another I use too.

Last I checked they're a bike manufacturing co-op.

Or so they're called on de webz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation