• ProbablyBaysean@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    Well, something that the Mormons have is they tried out communism. They called it the law of consecration. They had some fun times with trying to handle being productive and redistribution and poligamous. They ultimately concluded that they weren’t ready for it yet so they went back to default capitalism with tithing and poor/fast offerings.

    Tl;dr: Mormons believe in a kind of communism in heaven, and they go hungry for 2 meals (24 hrs) to remember to give generously to the poor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_consecration?wprov=sfla1

  • skozzii@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    That’s because there are no brown people in their version of heaven.

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    The thing to understand about Christianity is that it was originally a reaction against the Roman empire and then got co-opted and integrated into it. As a result, ever since like the 4th century Christianity has been about basically the opposite of what Jesus talked about. It turns out all that stuff about turning the other cheek stops being relevant if the emperor has his soldiers paint crosses on their shields while they’re out conquering and enslaving the Gauls. Of course, you can keep all the mythological stuff, who cares, but anything relevant to politics or the material world mysteriously seemed to reverse once they entered the halls of power.

    The carrot of being accepted into the empire was matched with the stick that if you didn’t go along with the imperial-approved form of Christianity you’d be burned at the stake as a heretic. Any sects still clinging to anti-imperial sentiment get hunted down and exterminated just like when they were being fed to lions, but it’s the Christians doing it to each other now, so you don’t even have to get your own hands dirty. This approach worked way better at suppressing dissent than just trying to ban Christianity altogether.

    Of course, a lot has changed over the centuries. And originally it wasn’t perfect or anything either. But imo, it was when Rome Christianized that Christianity Romanized, and ever since its real values have had more to do with Rome than with Jesus. The meme’s, “moneyless, classless, stateless” ideal of heaven is a relic of the original teachings that gets shunted off to the purely mythological side, where it not only doesn’t matter, but also occupies a place in their brain that could have otherwise been sympathetic to making good things happen in the material world. That’s already resolved, there’s no need to worry about it, there’ll be pie in sky when you die.

  • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    And no one has to work, they are provided with everything they need. Almost like a universal basic income or something.

  • TheFogan@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 days ago

    Sadly… that doesn’t really track with Christianity.

    I mean you can add the overall benefits of everyones needs are automatically met. There’s no talk of toiling for food etc…

    But on top of the automatic fact that angels clearly have a hierarchy, god is clearly a full power ruler, there’s tons of verses that talk about people that will be the least in heaven, or greatest in heaven (Matthew 5:19). On top of building treasures in heaven (Matthew 6:19) etc…

  • 6R1M R34P3R@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Well that description suits better anarchism. Also Heaven doesn’t exist it was invented by catholic church like many other stuff they made out of nowhere. Christian God wants to make a non-human monarchy (so God and Jesus as king) and remove all human based States. So pretty much not a communist. Of course you can argue is not anarchism either and is just common monarchy, since there is still some form of authoritarianism, even if not human-based, but from my personal perspective if it truly were a perfect reign I wouldn’t mind at all

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Communism is stateless, but not without government, or what Engels calls “The Administration of Things.” For Marx, the “state” is made up of the instruments of society that uphold class distinctions, such as private property rights, and special bodies of armed people for those purposes. Public ownership and socialized ownership quite literally makes those aspects of society redundant, and thus “whithers away.”

      • easily3667@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        So it’s stateless but there’s a state according to the common definition but not according to a different definition that is less common. Got it.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Basically. Marx wrote in the 1800s, so there can be confusion from those who only keep a surface-level understanding of Marxism, say, by sticking to Wikipedia summaries. If you want, I can provide sources that help elaborate on what I’m talking about.

      • takeiteasypolicy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yes, and eggs are perfect spheres in Vacuum. In real world, any and every attempt at communism will lead to a situation where government becomes an all encompassing over bearing State. that’s why Socialism is a far better and much more practical model than communism ever will be.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 day ago

          I think you’re a bit confused on terms, here, as well as history.

          Socialism is just an economy where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, rather than private. It’s a transitional system towards Communism, because markets naturally cebtralize and create efficient networks for central planning all by themselves. Cuba, the PRC, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, former USSR, etc are all examples of Socialism.

          Communism, the point at which the entire global economy can be publicly owned and planned, has not been reached. There have been Communist parties in charge of Socialist economies, but Communism itself is still in the future.

          I think if you’re going to be discussing the practicality of Communism and Socialism, you’d do well to familiarize yourself with the systems more. Socialism is not in opposition to Communism, and is a prerequisite for it. I made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list if you want to become more knowledgeable about Socialism and Communism.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yep! Lemmy is primarily developed by Marxist-Leninists, and is generally structured in opposition to Capitalist networks. It allows Communists to form our own spaces without corporate censorship.

      • Muyal_Hix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Which is why it’s a big irony when people come to Lemmy to complain about communism/socialism.

        Like, man, you are on a decentralized network run by volunteers who don’t want to be monetized. You want to enjoy the benefits of socialism but at the same time complain about how bad it is and promote capitalism.

          • MoonMelon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 day ago

            You’re fucking incredible, Cowbee. I’ve watched you spend literally days patiently and politely responding to dozens of confrontational, probably bad-faith posters in thread after thread with nothing but solid information. I really admire it.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 day ago

              Thanks, I really do appreciate it! At the end of the day, I try to only speak on what I know, so that helps me not get frustrated if someone comes in in clearly bad-faith, haha.

      • Grapho@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Libs when free, open source, distributed and community supported platforms are not made by people who love capitalism and corporations 🤯🤯🤯🤯

  • galanthus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Well, it does not have an economy, so why would it have money?

    Also, it doesn’t have politics and society in the conventional sense, but men are clearly subordinate to God. Christ is king, this is the way Christians think, so I am not sure this is a correct comparison.

    The question of “should Christians strive for a classless society” is a complex one. Egalitarian ideals are very new compared to Christianity, but some Christians now think that in the “fallen world” authority is undesirable as it can be abused. This is not common though.

    However, Marxism is an anti-religious ideology. Marxists both believe that religion will disappear after “the base” changes and it will become, ultimately, obsolete, and also have historically persecuted and enacted violence on Christians. So I am not surprised there are not many Marxist Christians.

    • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Egalitarian ideals are very new compared to Christianity

      Run that one by Jesus and I think he’d be surprised