First they came for the White Nationalists
And I did not speak out
Because it was based
Then they came for the pro-Whites
And I did not speak out
Because it was based
Then they came for the pro-Western Culturists
And I did not speak out
Because it was based
Then they came for the anti-Marxists
And I did not speak out
Because it was based
Then they came for the Christians
And I did not speak out
Because it was based
Then they came for the Whites
And I did not speak out
Because it was based
Then I still did not speak out
Because there was no one left
to come after me
Fascism in a nutshell:
: “We are genetically flawless….VICTIMS!”Designed in a lab and grown in a vat for a singular purpose: To eat shit spectacularly.
Erm… mods!!! Admins!!! This “”“”““moderator””“”“”" is Ya[REDACTED]b posting anf most be banned posthaste!!!
What I’m learning is that it’s still legal to be cis? Not good enough
That post is from 2019 or earlier, fascists didn’t know what cis means back then
Why in 2019-2022 do they need to outlaw the same thing 4 times
Do you mean 2019-2023?
Christians can at least occasionally be leftist (see: Claudia de la Cruz), but anyone who identifies as one of the first four is 100% a fascist, no exceptions.
70% of all Christians aren’t white, and Christianity started in the middle east
Trump was in office in 2019 and 2020 lol
Not just Christianity, but all religion being illegal would be a net positive for the world.
I get where you’re coming from but the legal system is absolutely not the way to get there.
I think better, more extensive education is the only way really. And we’ve been seeing that fruit over the past century as schooling became more universal (as compared to 100 years ago, of course.)
The kind of educational system we’d have under a socialist world…
I get where you’re coming from but the legal system is absolutely not the way to get there.
Worst case scenario of this is something like France’s laicite which on paper is against all public flaunting of religion but in practice just means “fuck the Muslims.”
Yeah, religious norms become social/societal norms - or at least heavily influence them.
This becomes quickly problematic when you start thinking about how this can make it very easy to discriminate against more ethnic minorities/immigrants than anything since they’re more likely to dress differently (in a way that often is religiously influenced, even if they themselves aren’t devout)
Agreed. The legal system can still be manipulated and used to manipulate others. Education is truly the only way to rid the world of religion.
Hard disagree.
L take
It’s a meaningless wish.
How are you going to enforce making all religion illegal?
If attempted, I can’t think of anything more unifying and radicalizing for modern theists than this laughable attempt. That’s exactly how you’d probably end up with a new wave of hardcore theocracies.
It would be a generational process, not something immediate. Slowly educate and phase it out over time, until younger generations no longer see the need or rely on it as people do now. To act as if it is some completely impervious institution is just idiotic. It can’t be done immediately, but it can and should eventually be phased out.
This is white chauvinism bullshit. You gonna tell me you’re all for eradicating indigenous practices of colonized people. Because where you draw the line is important.
I would like to know how these Reddit atheists are going to convince Jewish people to give up Judaism (and not have them replace Judaism with Zionism).
Ah yeah. The two kinds of jew, religious and zionist.
“Eradicate” is overly charged. I don’t see any reason why ceremonies or cultural traditions would be erased by providing more scientific education to the masses.
The knowledge of our ancestors can still be taught, and traditions upheld without literally believing that there are dieties or ghosts or whatever.
I dunno, this just strikes me as the “veganism is flawed because indigenous people should be able to hunt” argument, but applied to religion.
Holy shit no. Though like with what 9to5 said any actual changes to religious or spiritual practices would be long after our times, but again there’s a bit of a false equivelency between exploitative structures like centralized churches and general practices of indigenous cultures. I have no issue with individual practice, just the structures that can arise from them.
You’re overcorrecting due to the shitiness that is new atheism, and willfully blinding yourself to the issues that stand with organized religion.
It’s not overcorrecting when we have had an issue with new atheist reactionary shit on this very site.
Alright, see, I can work with that. I don’t agree with it, but at least it’s more than a kneejerk reaction. The thing is, slowly phasing out religion or spirituality as a concept is something that would probably only happen long after the left has “won,” however that may look. So we are talking about something that is most likely not gonna happen within our lifetime if it ever happens. Its bascially a sci-fi at that point and at least right now not very relevant to the struggles or battles ahead.
Fair enough.
Nope. State atheism was the USSR’s biggest unforced error.
In retrospect, they should’ve just kept the religious status quo but made every single member of the clergy be a card-carrying member of the CPSU subject to internal party discipline while banning all other “independent” churches. Religious dogma should incorporate things like “Jesus said communism rules and capitalism drools” and “the bourgeoisie go straight to hell when they die because the bourgeoisie are not human.” Christians who don’t accept Jesus’s teaching that communism is based get excommunicated and send to hell where the rest of the bourgeoisie are burning as well.
Overall, China handled religion a lot better. There isn’t a hard push for state atheism (although I think the CPC is officially an atheist organization), but all religious groups have to swear loyalty to socialism with Chinese characteristics and submit themselves to the will of the socialist state. Those that don’t toe the socialist line like Falun Gong have the hammer dropped on them.
The way the CPC handled Tibetan Buddhism is an illustrative example. Instead of abolishing a particular branch of Buddhism that used the skins of serfs for their drums, the CPC incorporated Tibetan Buddhism within the state apparatus. Whenever some religious leader dies and a new “reincarnation” has to appear to take their place, by sheer coincidence, the “reincarnation” who eventually appears is someone who the CPC liked the most.
This is the way to go. People need to quit being Reddit atheists and think strategically about this.
State atheism was good actually. The orthodox church didn’t stop with their anticommunism before their marginalisation, during their marginalisation or after they were invited back. No amount of grace extended to the Orthodox or Catholic churches by communist movement has been received in good faith or with gratitude or had ever stopped them from trying to quell communism.
Lenin said that the church is nothing but an instrument of bourgeois reaction, and the church has spent a century proving him right.
While I agree it was an error, it’s hard for me to say it was the biggest.
In what way?
Willfully alienating a vast swathe of your population over a policy that gains you fuck all is bad politics
What’s really smart though is the communist government sanctioning an organisation actively involved in anti communism. That’s good politics.
No, the smart thing to do is to liquidate the existing clergy and replace them with communist clergy who incorporate communist ideology into religious dogma.
Coming up with a more unhinged version of god-building in 2025 is quite something
Hey, it worked for China.
I can’t word it better than this person did: https://hexbear.net/comment/6164345
Define religion.
I think that would have made 2025 unlimited genocide on the crackkkers of the first world
Paradox of tolerance. Hope this helps!
There is no paradox, tolerance is a social contract and the intolerant are those who reject it and are thus not entitled to tolerance themselves
Most paradoxes aren’t true paradoxes, they’re just things that someone can’t solve with their current information or way of thinking. 🤓
literally “if I can’t describe an ethical standard in one sentence or less then it must be a paradox”
Illegal to be White.
The same kind of people who tell BIPOC, “Racism doesn’t exist in this country anymore. Stop playing the victim!” as they gaslight us about the racism we’ve experienced act like the biggest victims ever just because they’re coated in mayo.
