Wtf, where is Stalin's comically large spoon? Everyone knows you must post a picture of the spoon if you're posting about the Holodomer.
You make a lot of good points about religion being a vector for anti-communism and I generally feel the same way about the influence of Christian groups. The instances where I disagree tend to be exceptions to how these institutions act.
For instance, there is a religious group that lives near me that isn't well known that has formed their own commune. I've found them to be very warm and accepting people despite having some beliefs that have no scientific basis. They aren't trying to spread their religion, they are accepting and hospitable to outsiders, and they just seek to meditate in their small commune. Anecdotal, yes, but I can't deny their existence and how compatible they are in practice.
Religious institutions and beliefs along these lines, groups that don't subscribe to the toxic, patriarchal views of most religions seem rather innocuous. Can they be vectors for the spread of reactionaries? I can't argue against that. These people are surely the exception to the rule and despite their openness to discussing ML theory, I've run into plenty of other more agnostic beliefs that absolutely led to the opposite, regardless of their willingness to discuss in good faith.
I think this is something I'll need to think about more. I generally think, so long as it does not interfere with scientific thought and despite it being antithetical to it, religious beliefs can be tolerated. I won't deny that they historically have very much been harmful to our cause, but we also can't be blind to how prevalent even agnostic beliefs are and how our reactions to this can alienate people that may otherwise be allies. There are plenty of examples of comrades who are religious and this makes me think tolerance is a better path, but I can't deny that you are right, religious beliefs are rooted in idealism and can be a conflict of interest vs class consciousness. Again, I'll need to think and read on this more.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Sometimes I listen to Parenti lectures I've already heard too many times just because I like listening to him. He was a great and passionate speaker.
It's been a long couple days for me and I haven't been able to read through this yet. Thanks for taking the time to type out this reply, I'll definitely get to it in the next day or two and see if I have anything to add to the conversation. From what I've read so far, you've given me some food for thought and I want to mull it over.
I agree with you on religion being very similar to liberalism, and on a personal level I see no reason to ascribe to any of it. My main concern is how many people cling to some type of faith and would feel alienated by immediate action against organized religion. That's the contradiction in my mind and my immediate reaction is to err on the side of not alienating people with strong religious beliefs, because that opens up roads for opposition, but you may have addressed that further on. I look forward to finishing reading later to see!
It's only stupid if you don't address the root causes of the problems that you are listing. If you don't do anything to lift the people out of their desperation and end the cause of that desperation, then of course they will sell it.
Your middle paragraph is the first part of what I'm talking about, do what is needed to help people lift themselves back up. Only a small part of that is helping with housing. The bigger problem is the second part, if you do nothing about the conditions that contributed to their downward spiral, then that first part will only be a temporary relief.
This second comment made it much more clear that you weren't just saying, "nah, fuck them," but covering all of the nuances of what needs to change just isn't a realistic expectation for text comments online. Frankly, I have a feeling you and I agree a lot on that first part of what is needed to help people, no clue about how you feel about the second part. I appreciate you coming back with a thoughtful answer instead of trolling, because I expect trolling.
I agree with your conclusion, my explanation was just a matter of addressing the context of the question, not covering how imperialism can operate under all systems, just the system in question.
I'd say that, generally, imperialist motivation is a matter of gaining power. In a capitalist system, capital is power, so they are seeking capital.
The way I explained it was meant to break it down into a modern context to help answer the question, not to address imperialism in the context of feudalism or other systems. End of the day, someone is exploiting someone else for their own gain. It was just a matter of the context of the question and I erred on the side of keeping the scope within capitalism.
Why do you think people are living this way? Do you think it's personal failure or maybe desperation? Where else do they have to go? If you tear down the buildings but don't address the root problem, do you think they will just stop existing or will they be forced to find a new spot to live? Were these places always this way? What would you like me to call them?
Please continue making assumptions about my personal life and deriding me for my choice of words rather than contributing something useful. I try to meet people where they are at, which means speaking to what they know. In this case, you seem to know the symptom, but not the cause.
Lol, if you really think communists don't believe in gun ownership, I've got a bridge to sell you.
This is the second time you've followed me to the comments to leave bad faith replies. Go find a better hobby.
@MeowZedong
@lemmygrad.ml