Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 334507560180908032
"Max Stirner" is a spook
Feelings are spooks.
@Deleted User
That makes no sense, you uneducated ghoul
"I do not step shyly back from your "sense", but look upon it always as my "sense", in which I respect nothing"
:delet_this:
🇻🇳
anybody want to c
why is nobody talking
Idk
wtf
@rogbo#9920
You're an anus
nobody in vc
nobody talking
is this a good talking
@BoleslawBierutLover
It's a reel beach, comrade
@BoleslawBierutLover
Are you calling out for some company?
@¡PeePee Silvia! Fuck u buddy.
What is the important differences, if any, between socialism and compulsory charity?
You asking me dude?
Specifically, as practised in history by religious institutions.
I am asking anyone who can answer.
Is there, for example, an tenable position for 'partial socialism'? Taxes and so on, upheld by a strong theoretical framework?
are you all commies and tankies in here?
@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.
well said
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.
@AaronMk And so you are saying that charity does not address the key issues of class and exploitation? But doesn't it? Like a safety net? If charity comes from a kind of primitive communism.
@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]
Nah
@AaronMk You make it sound like slavery would be better than charity. It depends on how well the charity is used. A charitable program could result in measurable results and goals and not wholly be concerned with only meeting material existence. Speaking of slavery, one extreme would be to elevate the slave to such a focus that they are planned to surpass the master in knowledge and ability. For example in the Mameluke Empire in Egypt. It is not clear whether it is always bad for the slave or receiver of charity.
Or the Turkish Janissaries, who were also 'slaves'.
@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.
