You cannot call yourself a leftist if you support religion. Religion and leftism are incompatible

Kys

Top kek. Who made you the end all be all descion maker?

Jesus was a socialist.

This is the type of shit post that feeds the cultural marxism meme. Enough with this indentity politics bullshit

I'm not even religious and even I think you're a faggot.

lol

The only thing Stalin did right, was banning churches

because annihilating the nazis was such a travesty

and annihilating the nazis

who cares what a made up person "did" or "thought"

or can i start citing my comic books if it provides moral justification for what i personally think is right and wrong

Your pic related is actualy what atheism is turning into.

A RELEGION!

Have you ever heard of the God Emperor of the Mankind? He too tried to get rid of relegions. He become one.

Same as Stalin worshiped as a saint.

It's not "relegion" that's the broblem. It's using IDEOLOGY (relegion is ideology + god) as a tool of justification.

So, sure. You can believe and be a socialist.
You cannot be a fanatic and be a socialist.

...

Everything DOES happen for a reason, that's just a shitty way of phrasing it. Any bad situation can be fixed or learned from.

Their enlightened ones are basically gods

It's true though.
According to Christianity, paradise on Earth is impossible and lefties are fools for trying to achieve that and should be stopped at all costs.
Only God realms has paradise and we should spent our entire life preparing for that.

Unlike you, I went to church.

Religion is about dogmaticly promoting an idea.

IMO, even Veganism is becoming a relegion

Yep. Ideology gone to the next level. Relegion.

It's all about the dogmatic part. "I don't believe in god and noone will!" =/= "I don't believe in god and don't care about you".

Gahndi wasn't a Leftist?

Leo Tolstoy wasn't a Leftist?

Martin Luther King Jr. wasn't a Leftist?

Malcolm X wasn't a Leftist?

I agree with you that a Communist society will be a majority secular society and has to be, but this idea of "any religious order whatsoever is antithetical to Leftism" is just a bunch of liberal New Atheist bullshit that you haven't thought about for more than two seconds. Fuck off with your no-critical-thinking-skills-but-thinks-he-has-aton-of-critical-thinking skills ass fuck nigga

I am an atheist but this thread is a little too fedora for me.

Leftism is about equality

Malcom X certainly wasn't about equality

Post Stirner memes.

LOL nigger nazis amirite?

How on Earth did you reach this conclusion?

Leftism inherited the values of equality from liberalism, but simply had a more complete programme for achieving a just and equal society.

I would argue that Leftism is more about fairness than "equality" which are similar concepts but not mutually inclusive.

Am I wrong here?

In the traditional dialectic there would be a transition period of extreme inequality (the dictatorship of the proletariat) that would however be a more just (or "fair") inequality than capitalism, which is neither just nor equal.

Communism however is a society which is both just and equal since there's no bourgeois/proletarian classes remaining.

This pointless dogmatism.

Pic related does 'leftism' better than you.

No, you are not wrong.

"Equality" is too broad a concept to describe the foundation of anything.

I think leftism is more about moving towards a better society, leaving spooks of the past behind.

The trick is, to define the spooks.

New Atheist "Secular" humanists, Christians, Muslims, Jews…spooks…all of you…ARE SPOOKED!

How? I'm not saying one is better or the true way? In fact I said I might be wrong here

That's basically what I'm trying to say. I think "eqaulity" is actually way spookier than "fairness" even though most people see it the other way around. Like, it's fair that someone doesn't have to fucking die because they'd rather paint than build chairs. But they might not be equal in subjective ability to the person who builds chairs you know?

Drop the trips.

Not an argument :^)

Drop the spooks.

Can we achieve communism without the transition period, whether it ends up in traditional Marxism-Leninism (which i am certainly not interested in) or a more Leftcom "demsoc" government? I'm not so sure m8

says who? trips are identity politics

You don't know what words mean friend

No they aren't.

...

If I did I'd be a leftist :^)

No one on Holla Forums know what identity politics is.

thread derailed

hey see what you think of this shit I posted in another thread, because it's dead but I wanted an anarcho-nihilist in particular to comment on it:

"I'm giving a final analysis of IdPol, its bullshit defenders, and its bullshit attackers here.
This is the way IdPol functions; it places the identity of the individual (which there is no problem with representing in the narrative of class struggle) ABOVE the identity of the struggle itself. Or, to put it another way, identity becomes like the State or God and ends up being a Being which must be bowed to. Therefore, the main problem with Identity Politics is that it ends up embracing ends-in-themselves which are contradictory to the aim of most Identity Politicians (IE to end oppression, exploitation, etc of all kinds)
This pursuit of something outside of the real struggle, the struggle of struggles, does indeed hinder said struggle. BUT the even MORE DANGEROUS component, as many have pointed out here, is that it creates an anthesis in the self-described "true Left" (Holla Forums and its affiliates) that are just as reactionary as Holla Forums elements

. While right to criticize the specter of IdPol, these elements become useless since they embrace the warm comfort of reactionary ideology just with a "human face" of class struggle in front of them.
Therefore we must recognize both tendencies and in recognizing them overcome them. For they are tendencies born from spooks which are the spookiest spooks of all. That is, the spooks of the "self" as an object rather than a subject, the spook that the SELF has some INNATE right to assert its spooks as if they were facts, the ultimate spook. When we dismantle this attidude we will see how utterly absurd and stupid the whole "Idpol VS Not-Idpol" debate was from its fundementals and began a debate that is "The Opressed vs The Privleged" in a true sense, rather than this COINTELPRO Neoliberal sense of "Privelege vs the Opressed" which not only underlines IdPol but also underlines and emphasizes in even greater strokes its opposition

tl;dr shut the fuck up god damn"