Muslim shoots up/blows up a bunch of innocents

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decree_against_Communism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic

The only difference between Muslims and Christians is that Muslims aren't cowards.

You're both garbage

...

Islam has always been the religion of the poor and orphans so it's perfectly reasonable to assume Muslim nationalism would be inherently socialist. The Taliban, al-Qaeda and ISIS are NOT real Muslims as their actions are huge violations of Islamic Law not to mention they're all CIA puppets. Real Islam is basically communism plus some elements of Arab tribalism.

NI DIEU NI MAITRE
NI DIEU NI MAITRE
NI DIEU NI MAITRE
NI DIEU NI MAITRE
NI DIEU NI MAITRE
NI DIEU NI MAITRE
NI DIEU NI MAITRE

this what Holla Forums actually believes

btw all abrahamic religions are disgusting and we are not liberal in the slightest, fuck off

My problem with religion isn't followers or the written teachings of the religions in question. The interpretation of scripture has historically changed and been revised based on the material conditions of the time, so there's no reason to assume that they won't adapt to socialist conditions as well. My problem with religion, especially in relation to its synthesis with socialism, is two-fold.

First there is the problem of organization and historical context. Christianity for example started out as the religion of the oppressed masses (which is admirable), but grew into a facet of the feudal system. Much of the Church structure (be it among Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, what have you) still carries remnants of such hierarchical systems of oppression and subservience. This is much the same with Islam, though Islam only sporadically took the identity of the religion of the oppressed.The point still stands that organized religions acts to preserve past societies and prevents the total transformation of our society and social relations.

The second problem I have with religion lies at the very core of what defines religious belief: the partitioning of things and ideas into the realms of the sacred and mundane. Now for material objects, this isn't that big of an issue; if a horde of people want to prostrate themselves before a golden statue (or whatever your analog of choice is) for an hour a day, that's their business. It's when ideas become sacred that you run into problems, because as is the case with all ideas, they carry ideology. Ideological influence on ideas is inescapable, but by making the idea sacred, the ideology that comes attached to the idea becomes untouchable. We are no longer able to formally recognize or critique said ideology, thus it unecessarily becomes a fixture of our lives and society that exists out of our control, beholden to rationale whose context is made irrelevant or lost in time.

...

religion needs to be exterminated along with all other irrationalist reactionary ideologies.

I'm curious, did you know there was a very active presence of secular leftist and moderate Muslims in the 20th century? Particularly in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. I think Žižek mentioned this once or twice.

Point is, with the rise of Ba'athism and Islamism as well as political instability in the middle east is what created today's climate of international Islamic terror. Yes, there are a ton of honor killing Sharia practicing maniacs, and they do represent a global plurality if not a majority currently, but keep in mind that there are just as many Christians who hold very similar beliefs, and the difference is that these Christians haven't been emboldened by a culture of "see no evil" on one side and on the other an organized all to violence.

This topic can't be simplified to "REEE MUSLIM RAPISTS!" or "B-but the crusades…" there are many problems, many factors, and many groups at work here. For more information on the state of geopolitics and Islam, refer to my flag or fuck off.

Christianity is essentially capitalism.
Protestants and their work ethic.

...

There was a strong secularization/westernization movement up until the 50`s in most of Islamic world. Then the whole Palestine/Israel conflict blew up and middle-east started to export oil form freshly independent countries that had been either british or french protectorates until the end of 60`s

As a former member of Greek orthodox church I kind of have to agree. On the other hand orthodox and catholic churches are both quite reactionary at their base(orthodox church even more so).

Pic related.

Thanks for reminding me of something OP, I have to read Ali Shariati. I remember a while ago on this board there was an Shia guy and he recommended to start with Red Shi'ism vs. Black Shi'ism, just saying this if anyone's interested

Protestantism basically was about destroying the Church hierarchy whilst preserving the spooks of Christianity. In that sense, I actually prefer Protestantism over Catholicism.

Luther literally wrote that small buissnessowners should re-invest their profits to their business instead of using them.

It's not dialectical you faggot

Religiousness is influenced by material conditions you faggot

And, there's an issue with that?

The issue is in exploitation, not in what people do with profits. If workers have a protestant work ethic and own their own businesses, then more power to them to focus on the businesses over personal matters.

Christianity is shit for turning people into feeble, dumb sheep though.

Take your imperialist propaganda and fuck off.

Im not even american, but I've had more trouble from fundamental christians than fundamental muslims in my life.

also
the fundies in my town dont allow their wives to vote and disown their children if they marry outside the church or leave the church.

How is Orthodox church reactionary?

Materialism is an assumption, just as much as you think religion makes assumptions. I see no reason to rule out for example gaining insight about the world through concentration during meditation. I also see no reason to assume that there is no kind of continuity after death.

Sure, I believe it - but I don't say I can prove it, nor do I tell other people to believe it. It's up to each practitioner to gain insight and prove it to himself.

I can't speak for religions which require unverifiable dogma.

Please don't mix christianity with organized religion.

I'm not a Christian, but I actually agree with this. Except the dogmatic fucks around these parts will argue against that sentiment, because lel imperialism or something and some 19th century loser didn't write it down for us to circlejerk into oblivion.

Where I disagree with you, OP, is that Islam has the same capacity to be what you're deeming proto-socialism–hell, giving alms to the less fortunate is one of the five pillars of the faith.

This is why you need to get purged.

religion is the sigh of the oppressed
an ideological response to real material conditions

all religions are just this and not a lot more. this directs people to act in different ways at different times, but it all will all whither away when socialism becomes widespread

under Catholicism manufacturing and farming were muh privileged, as lending money was illegal in a lot of places under cath. until the 1850s.

as part of Luther's destroying hierarchy he conveniently included allowing banks to be legal

protestantism tip the scales of latecapitalism towards finance being on top, which is basically where we are at today.

meditation is usually material at its basis, at least zen

you feel your 'animalness' to start by feeling your breath, feeling the floor under you, touching your hands together. noticing physical discomfort, and then watching how your animal brain works as ideas shoot around randomly in it, and letting it be as it is

mfw this thread

Really makes me think

This

...

Power hardly exists outside the mind. The human mind and body are degrees of frailty. For every strength, there's a weakness. Anyone, any philosopher who denies this, is simply out dated by our understanding now of the body as it is.

This is why I'm not a fan of, Nietzsche, or any talk of power. Really, we're all equally dead weight.

So long as the principles of the religion do not disagree with Socialism, what are you complaining about?

I shiggy

Show me one instance of a crusader blowing up innocents.
Pro tip: You can't.

Because a society founded on religion always reverts to capitalism, because capitalism provides a method of maintaining the social status quo.

I don't argue that society ought to be founded on religion (as there are of course people who don't believe in it), but I think people should be free to practice and form voluntary associations with other practitioners.

I don't think religion, at least necessarily, implies moving to capitalism. While some religions are apathetic to the idea of revolution and new ideas, only few are actively against it.

For example I don't see a conflict between Socialism and a religion like Buddhism. I'm a Buddhist myself, and I don't see a problem with revolution or breaking the status quo in the name of fairness for the proles.

Catholicism prioritized the clergy, not the farmers and artisans, who often joined Protestant movements.

Of course, not all Protestantism is the same. Lutherans aren't Calvinists, and both aren't anabaptists. Lutherans tend to be for monarchical power above all else. (Which was in the interests of the upper bourgeoisie merchants of the time.) Calvinists tended to be favored by the petite-bourgeoisie, the yeoman farmers, artisans, and small traders. (Though, France's Calvinists were mostly small nobles.) And, the anabaptists (And, Diggers/other radical protestants) were a peasant's movement. This is a simplification, but it roughly describes the class-nature of Protestantism.

Also, Protestantism came WAY before "late capitalism", and had little to do with the increased power of finance. Banks were also legal way before Luther, with entire merchant-run cities and ethnic groups engaging in banking. (Jews anyone?)

Because socialism is even more autistic than libertarianism

What do you mean by "beep boop"

It's always good to have a few idiots around

It is supposed to be a robot sound. Basically it's a mean of calling socialists mindless robots.
Classical dehumanization.

that's why jews ran the banks

Oh. Isn't that more of a Holla Forums thing? I mean half of us can't agree on shit. Half being a generous fraction.

Yes Arab Fascism is very socialist. Oil fiefdoms are very socialist, Turd Positionist dictators whose families control over 50% of the nation's wealth are very socialist.

Fascists are the definition of repeater boxes. They all use the exact same one sided arguments, memes and infographics to convert others to their faith of blood and soil

Socialists at least have some variety of opinions

Because the west set you in a Geopolitical position where radicals are funded and fight for wars for profit. There very fighting is the imperialism in motion. It's unfortunate, but anti-imperialism has become a military commodity.

Another victory for the radical change and struggle for Christian Socialism.

Is that the euphemism you use for pointless slapfights over minor doctrinal issues and endless sectarianism?

Yes, diversity of opinion tends to lead to sectarianism

Free thinking tends to lead to intellectual quarreling. The nature of the beast as it were