Between the Devil and The Dumbass

[welsh]

Slicer17- I really can't tell if you are being:

(1) sarcastic- and thus funny as hell, or,
(2) serious- and thus fairly disturbed.

Marx was a satanist?

Anyway, let's keep this conversation civil and no name calling.

 

[The Vault Dweller]

Nice pic Wooz...funny and creative.

Thank you Sander...thank you.

Okay I have quite a grand question. Of the people voting soon of those who were already decided long ago (like when Bush first entered office) how many have changed their minds. Basically how many Republicans have switched to Democrat and vice versa. I have a feeling things are so partisan that everyone already decided or were just uninformed.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

 

[Ratty Sr.]

<a load of bullshit>

Briefly I considered taking your inane posts seriously and replying to them in such manner, but when I read your nonsense about Marx being a Satanist, I decided against wasting my time. If you can't participate in a debate without pulling that kind of rubbish out of your ass, then I suggest you shut up.

Marxism is by it's very nature an undemocratic ideal, as it is merley about switiching roles in society, and not giving true equality (in the far, far future it is, but then again, but that's in tens of thousands of years).. True, the notion of the Proletariant Dictatorship was abused in the USSR (I'd argue that was inevitable, only stupid labourers are Marxists, and stupid labourers are too stupid to understand anything outside proporganda), but the notion was that the Workers would assume superiority over the Capitalists, and the Capitalists would become the underclass, the worthless, the vote less. Or be killed. Just as bad.

It is true that revolution is really one elite being replaced by another, but you seem to be omitting two very important details: 1) The new elite makes up 98% of the population. I'd rather be oppressed by millions of honest workers than by a handful of rich swines. 2) 'Dictatorship of the proletariat' is just the first stage following the revolution. Its purpose is to take the economic power away from capitalists and divide it among workers, while giving handles of economic control to the people's state. Thus conditions would be created for the next stage - communism, a social system based on principles of equality, freedom and welfare. This would be a lenghty process, but true socialism would probably occur in a matter of decades (and not tens of thousands of years.) As Marx said: "Democracy is the road to socialism." Nothing in Marx's teachings indicates that birth of communism must inevitably be accompanied by a slaughter of all capitalists. His only point that is truly extreme and controversial is the claim that the process of creating a communist society must begin with a violent revolution. Even I have trouble accepting that, since every revolution in the human history resulted in the rise of a totalitarian regime, usually even more brutal and oppressive than the former one.

 

[Murdoch]

Even I have trouble accepting that, since every revolution in the human history resulted in the rise of a totalitarian regime, usually even more brutal and oppressive than the former one.

*Murdoch sings the Star Spangled Banner and looks at Ratty questioningly* Not to mention other revolutions.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

*Murdoch sings the Star Spangled Banner and looks at Ratty questioningly* Not to mention other revolutions.

Heh, I was referring to social revolutions, not wars of national secession.

 

[Big T]

Even I have trouble accepting that, since every revolution in the human history resulted in the rise of a totalitarian regime, usually even more brutal and oppressive than the former one.

*Murdoch sings the Star Spangled Banner and looks at Ratty questioningly* Not to mention other revolutions.

He never said on what timescale. You might have a totalitarian regime in 200 years time that is a direct result of your revolution against the British.

Or maybe in the next four years

 

[Murdoch]

He never said on what timescale. You might have a totalitarian regime in 200 years time that is a direct result of your revolution against the British.

mmhmm, and by that application we still don't know the full ramifications of the French Revolution, or Christ's crucifixion either. Quit mincing my semantics!

Or maybe in the next four years

Believe me Big T, if it's going to happen, it'll be in the next four months, not years.

 

[Sander]

Slicer17, it seems you fail to grasp a great many things, one of them is citical thought, lack of decent research (ie. not reading a bunch of bullshit propaganda), and actually adhering to the definitions given instead of adhering to the implementations and abuses of others of a word as the definition of the word. Communism has nowhere in it the meaning of totalitarianism, but sadly totalitarianism has been the constant result of so-called communist revolutions. Communism is not what you think it is, and just because you read a bunch of bullshit saying Marx was a satanist (Give me decent sources saying that he was, and I might take this into consideration, but as such, you have given no such thing), doesn't mean he was, nor does it mean that everyone following the communist ideal is one.

Let me put this a little clearer: say that Marx's goal really was permanent revolution (something his writings obviously contradict), say that Marx really was a satanist (again, nothing in his writings says so), then why would communism as it is defined in his writings have anything to do with Satanism, and why would communism as defined in his writings have the goal of permanent revolution. Simply put: regardless of what he thought or believed, his writings define communism as a certain thing, so adhere to that definition, and don't change it because you think that Marx was a satanist or because Marx may have thought something else.

And to just make it a weeeee bit clearer:

Im tired of beating my fist (no not masturbating) So ill just make my point clear. No communist state has ever existed where there was no military or government forcing it upon them. Ever. Nuff said. whats that? Need an example?

No, I don't need an example. I've researched and read about this quite a lot. The fact of the matter is that the implementation has always fallen short of communism as it is defined by Marx. And because of that you change the meaning of communism, which is, quite simply, idiotic.

 

[Per]

I've read the Communist Manifesto. Does that entitle me to the knowledge that it's both explicitly anti-intellectual and explicitly anti-democratic?

 

[slicer17]

How blind can you guys be? i HAVE done the research. I am not the one that has been blinded here. You guys have fallen into the smearing of conspiracy backed up by PROOF - ACTUAL HARD PROOF - into right wing wacko talk. These things I am saying, i have not made them up! I have COMPLETE hard proof that Marx was a Satanist - Why is this so hard to believe? For God sake's the man LET HIS KIDS STARVE TO DEATH! Two of his children COMMITED SUICIDE IN THEIR LATER YEARS!
--- I know ---
"Thats not proof hes a satanist" Well, let me give you some-

But first let me run this scenario by you

A Man's goal is to deceive the masses and get back at God by turning as many men into murderers and killers as possible, and at the same time cause as much death and destruction as possible.

He is going to
A) Write books telling people the greatness of communism, a system deliberately flawed into creating a constant revolution (1984 anyone?), appealing to the mob that the hierarchy will be removed and the bounds of classes structure we be abolished.

or B) Tell everybody he wants them all to die and go to hell. Thus the need for communism/


Which of these will accomplish his goals the best? Get my point? What is so hard to understand about common deception?

Now, back to the proof. No, you have not read ANYTHING in Marx's book about satan. Of COURSE NOT! HIS GOAL WAS TO DECEIVE!

Lets start with the lesser proofs -
Marx was a profound writer of theatricals - OFten times the songs in his plays would have direct references to the underworld and how it was his master. not to mention many of his characters were devils.

Marx was also a writer of poetry. His poetry is the stuff of Goths - He talks about the murder of many, how he would deceive his own father and mother- How he would kill them - How he wants the world to fall into death. These are his words...

But grant it. you have to take poerty and theater as what they are. Art-
So lets move on to the next thing

We have many letters written to and from Marx. Dating back to his late childhood years (these are in a museum in europe- Its called the museum of marx or something) As i mentioned before, little things like marx's own kids calling him the devil, his wife calling him a high priest. (satanism, a religion with a high priesthood. The only religion with a high priesthood in the area of marx's abode)

Next - Marx DID NOT WORK for a living. How did he get money? Inheritance - but even more so from FREDRICK ENGELS!(marx's best friend) Another devout communist/ satanist - (oddly enough, their is poetry written by ingels, not to mention books, that are inverses of common biblical thoughts or verses. Such as the lords prayer converted into a satanist prayer.) How can a man that didnt work for a living declar the very thing that fed him as wrong?

There are letters between marx and his father (marx went to a protestant private school BTW,) where his father is Pleading with his son not to fall to the devil. What would have provoked such things? Marx later declared religion as the opiate of the masses. Although marx was known for his self deification philosophy, he contridicts himself in his own letters giving reference to higher powers. (or lower if your so inclined) This only furthers marx deception.

Karl marx was has written over 76 books. Only a few have been released. What was in these other books that the followers of Marx's will not release these books? I dont remember off hand where these are, i will have to do the research again, but for some reason the KGB is coming to mind. But i dount they have them!

Marx was once spotted by his made kneeling by his bed with candels lit with a phylactory hanging from his head. The maid described marx as a religious man. What religion lights candels and hangs phylactories on his head? Satanist, the occult.

Marx was a racist. For a man who believes in no God, why did he give so much credit to biblical writings? When describing one of his political rivals to Engals, he describes a gentleman as a "nigger jew, whom, must have been one of the niggers who joined Moses on his exodus from Egypt." Why make such assesments if the bible is a creation of man to deceive the masses? Hmmm......

I'm at work so i cant continue this now. Go do your own research. Get back to me. Your hero Karl Marx, wont be such a hero anymore...

NE - Ways - WHO ARE YOU GUYS GOING TO VOTE FOR? Smash my article, just make sure you throw a lil comment near the bottom of who your voting for and why - Back on topico!

Edit: Regarding the word communism - Yeah, it doesnt say " a constant revolution" if you look it up in the dictionary. This might be a silly way of putting it but, if you say car, do you think, a vehicle, 4 tires, seats, paint, a hood, engine. No! You think, what does this car do for me? What do i do with this car? I DRIVE IT! COMMUNISM DRIVES REVOLUTION! sorry. kinda silly but effective me thinks.

 

[Ozrat]

slicer, I hate to be jumping on the bandwagon, but there's something seriously wrong with your logic here.

I have COMPLETE hard proof that Marx was a Satanist - Why is this so hard to believe? For God sake's the man LET HIS KIDS STARVE TO DEATH! Two of his children COMMITED SUICIDE IN THEIR LATER YEARS!
--- I know ---
"Thats not proof hes a satanist" Well, let me give you some-

But first let me run this scenario by you

A Man's goal is to deceive the masses and get back at God by turning as many men into murderers and killers as possible, and at the same time cause as much death and destruction as possible.

What makes you think that Marx's goals were these? Placing meanings to his writings that aren't even there is hardly proof.

He is going to
A) Write books telling people the greatness of communism, a system deliberately flawed into creating a constant revolution (1984 anyone?), appealing to the mob that the hierarchy will be removed and the bounds of classes structure we be abolished.

or B) Tell everybody he wants them all to die and go to hell. Thus the need for communism/

Again, you don't even bother establishing why communism = evil before making that the basis of your argument.

Which of these will accomplish his goals the best? Get my point? What is so hard to understand about common deception?

Funny, because a lot of people would call identify deception with straw man arguments, which unfortunately was exactly what I just quoted in the above segments.

Karl marx was has written over 76 books. Only a few have been released. What was in these other books that the followers of Marx's will not release these books? I dont remember off hand where these are, i will have to do the research again, but for some reason the KGB is coming to mind. But i dount they have them!

Do you realize how many books and manuscripts there are in the world that never even come close to being published? This is nothing but pure speculation.

I'll repeat what has been said. If you want anybody to take you seriously on this Marx = Satanist argument, please pay close attention to the following:

linkorstfu

 

[Sander]

Slicer17, I asked for one thing, and one thing only, and if you came up with that I would be inclined to believe you: sources. However, you failed to come up with any, went off on a huge tangent claiming a load of things but not proving one, insulting people and generally not even adequately addressing one of several points directed at you.

So I'll just completely ignore the huge tangent on "Oh no, Marx was a satanist", and skip to the bits that are relevant, or are just completely devoid of reason.

For God sake's the man LET HIS KIDS STARVE TO DEATH! Two of his children COMMITED SUICIDE IN THEIR LATER YEARS!

So because someone's kids committed suicide, that means he's somehow evil, or is a satanist. You know, somehow, that doesn't sound really logical or reasonable to me.

But first let me run this scenario by you

A Man's goal is to deceive the masses and get back at God by turning as many men into murderers and killers as possible, and at the same time cause as much death and destruction as possible.

He is going to
A) Write books telling people the greatness of communism, a system deliberately flawed into creating a constant revolution (1984 anyone?), appealing to the mob that the hierarchy will be removed and the bounds of classes structure we be abolished.

or B) Tell everybody he wants them all to die and go to hell. Thus the need for communism/


Which of these will accomplish his goals the best? Get my point? What is so hard to understand about common deception?

Nothing, really, but what you are doing is taking the assumption that he wanted to do something satanic, and then looked at whether or not communism could possibly be a satanic ruse. And, surprise surprise, you find a reason that it can be a satanic ruse.
Let me apply that to the bible:
The Bible has as a goal deception and getting Jesus as much power as possible.

So Jesus can either tell people to follow him, or establish a cult around himself to get a lot of power.
Now, since the cult-establishing is obviously more effective, Jesus's goal must've been power, and the Bible must be a side-effect of that, and hence all its philosophies must be worhtless as well!

See, that's pretty much the reasoning you are using to "prove" that Marx was a satanist and that hence Communism is evil and the work of the devil.

Now, back to the proof. No, you have not read ANYTHING in Marx's book about satan. Of COURSE NOT! HIS GOAL WAS TO DECEIVE!

Lets start with the lesser proofs -
Marx was a profound writer of theatricals - OFten times the songs in his plays would have direct references to the underworld and how it was his master. not to mention many of his characters were devils.

Should I name some people who's characters were devils or like devils? For one, several people who wrote verses for the Bible, Dante Alighieri (quite a religious man, mind you) and many great writers, Christian or not.
Not to mention the fact that devils have always been an easy way to portray evil, and have therefore been often used. If this is a criterium for Satanism, I don't think there'd be many people left who aren't a Satanist.

Next - Marx DID NOT WORK for a living. How did he get money? Inheritance - but even more so from FREDRICK ENGELS!(marx's best friend) Another devout communist/ satanist - (oddly enough, their is poetry written by ingels, not to mention books, that are inverses of common biblical thoughts or verses. Such as the lords prayer converted into a satanist prayer.) How can a man that didnt work for a living declar the very thing that fed him as wrong?

So, basically, if you don't work for a living and think money isn't the greatest thing on earth, you're an evil satanist. Cool. So I was an evil satanist until the time of 13, and...well....lots of people would be.
The fact of the matter is that Marx couldn't choose the fact that he had received an inheritance, but what he could choose was to disagree with the capitalist society he was living in and write about it. And to continue living in this society, he needed money, since that's what it was fueled by.

There are letters between marx and his father (marx went to a protestant private school BTW,) where his father is Pleading with his son not to fall to the devil. What would have provoked such things?

The fact that Marx had given up on religion, had turned into one of the leading atheists of the day, for instance. Many religious people did 9and still do) consider turning away from God the same thing as turning to the devil.

Karl marx was has written over 76 books. Only a few have been released. What was in these other books that the followers of Marx's will not release these books? I dont remember off hand where these are, i will have to do the research again, but for some reason the KGB is coming to mind. But i dount they have them!

Then how, pray tell, would you know about these books?

I'm at work so i cant continue this now. Go do your own research. Get back to me. Your hero Karl Marx, wont be such a hero anymore...

Well, for one, I have done my own research, and I haven't come across a single thing even coming close to what you are describing. Maybe this shows my research to be faulty, but probably not. But whatever the case, you are the one who came up with all these suppositions, so you are the one who must come up with some sources for these things, not I.
And secondly, I am not a communist, and I do not consider Marx to be my personal hero, I never claimed so, and I have no idea as to where you got that idea. I may sympathize with communist ideals, but even that was never claimed in this thread by me.

Edit: Regarding the word communism - Yeah, it doesnt say " a constant revolution" if you look it up in the dictionary. This might be a silly way of putting it but, if you say car, do you think, a vehicle, 4 tires, seats, paint, a hood, engine. No! You think, what does this car do for me? What do i do with this car? I DRIVE IT! COMMUNISM DRIVES REVOLUTION! sorry. kinda silly but effective me thinks.

No, that wasn't even near my point. My point was the Marx writes down the idea of communism. Now, since Marx is currently dead as can be, he now has zero influence over Communism as it is implemented. So all we can do to look at communism is read the books and consider what is said there. And now that we look at the books and not at the persona of Marx, Marx' characteristics, habits and beliefs do not matter anymore since we are not guided by him, but only by his writings.
In other words, this entire tangent about Marx being a satanist and him having established communism to kill as many people as possible is completely irrelevant and useless as to what communism actually is.

 

[Roshambo]

 

[slicer17]

http://www.forerunner.com/predvestnik/X0013_Karl_Marx.html

Here a link you wanted. I believe its a direct reference from the book "Marx and Satan" The serach in google was "marx's ties to satan"

I wish these posts didnt get so long.

Quote:
For God sake's the man LET HIS KIDS STARVE TO DEATH! Two of his children COMMITED SUICIDE IN THEIR LATER YEARS!

So because someone's kids committed suicide, that means he's somehow evil, or is a satanist. You know, somehow, that doesn't sound really logical or reasonable to me.

Thats just dumb to make such a statement. Why do you choose to blind yourelf to the facts? These are not just coincidences that his children starved and that two of his children commited suicide.

Nothing, really, but what you are doing is taking the assumption that he wanted to do something satanic, and then looked at whether or not communism could possibly be a satanic ruse. And, surprise surprise, you find a reason that it can be a satanic ruse.

There are no assumptions being made. Marx spells out his plans. They are all in his letters. I will try and find a place for you to read them

So Jesus can either tell people to follow him, or establish a cult around himself to get a lot of power.
Now, since the cult-establishing is obviously more effective, Jesus's goal must've been power, and the Bible must be a side-effect of that, and hence all its philosophies must be worhtless as well!

Um, yeah, i guess that would have been true... If Jesus hadnt sacrificed himself on the cross. But i supposed thats a subject for a different time.

Quote:
Now, back to the proof. No, you have not read ANYTHING in Marx's book about satan. Of COURSE NOT! HIS GOAL WAS TO DECEIVE!

Lets start with the lesser proofs -
Marx was a profound writer of theatricals - OFten times the songs in his plays would have direct references to the underworld and how it was his master. not to mention many of his characters were devils.

Should I name some people who's characters were devils or like devils? For one, several people who wrote verses for the Bible, Dante Alighieri (quite a religious man, mind you) and many great writers, Christian or not.
Not to mention the fact that devils have always been an easy way to portray evil, and have therefore been often used. If this is a criterium for Satanism, I don't think there'd be many people left who aren't a Satanist.

Again, i will not ask you to make hard assertions based on this. As i stated before, at some point, we have to take art as art, and reality as reality. However, you can not deny the fact that a man is influenced by what he is, and influences others in the same way.

Quote:

Next - Marx DID NOT WORK for a living. How did he get money? Inheritance - but even more so from FREDRICK ENGELS!(marx's best friend) Another devout communist/ satanist - (oddly enough, their is poetry written by ingels, not to mention books, that are inverses of common biblical thoughts or verses. Such as the lords prayer converted into a satanist prayer.) How can a man that didnt work for a living declare the very thing that fed him as wrong?

So, basically, if you don't work for a living and think money isn't the greatest thing on earth, you're an evil satanist. Cool. So I was an evil satanist until the time of 13, and...well....lots of people would be.
The fact of the matter is that Marx couldn't choose the fact that he had received an inheritance, but what he could choose was to disagree with the capitalist society he was living in and write about it. And to continue living in this society, he needed money, since that's what it was fueled by.

Your very much taking this out of context. The point is, marx bit the hand that fed him. In essesnce he taught something he did not practice. This was the point.

Quote:

There are letters between marx and his father (marx went to a protestant private school BTW,) where his father is Pleading with his son not to fall to the devil. What would have provoked such things?

The fact that Marx had given up on religion, had turned into one of the leading atheists of the day, for instance. Many religious people did 9and still do) consider turning away from God the same thing as turning to the devil.

Now your making assumptions. I'm just giving out the facts. And with these kinds of facts I would make the assumption of occultism. However, i see what your saying.

Quote:

Karl marx was has written over 76 books. Only a few have been released. What was in these other books that the followers of Marx's will not release these books? I dont remember off hand where these are, i will have to do the research again, but for some reason the KGB is coming to mind. But i dount they have them!

Then how, pray tell, would you know about these books?

Its common knowledge that they are not being published. I will find out more later.

Quote:

I'm at work so i cant continue this now. Go do your own research. Get back to me. Your hero Karl Marx, wont be such a hero anymore...

Well, for one, I have done my own research, and I haven't come across a single thing even coming close to what you are describing. Maybe this shows my research to be faulty, but probably not. But whatever the case, you are the one who came up with all these suppositions, so you are the one who must come up with some sources for these things, not I.
And secondly, I am not a communist, and I do not consider Marx to be my personal hero, I never claimed so, and I have no idea as to where you got that idea. I may sympathize with communist ideals, but even that was never claimed in this thread by me.

I did not mean to be hasty. Excuse my sarcasm, sorry about the inferences. Communism in an ideal world is perfect. Jesus preached communism in some aspect( He also said let he who does not work not eat - not really against or for communism). But marx did not live in a perfect world, and he knew it. Communism at its root is not evil. Communism in the eyes of a man who knows a perfect world is not possible and (hopefully ive established and will do so later with proof) that whos goals were evil revolution, defintelly makes communism evil. I think that makes us in aggreance on this point.

If i insulted anyone i apologize, sander, murdoc. such is not my aim here. so to recap. Communism in its perfect form is not evil. Communism by marx is very evil- You cant take it out of context. Context being the world we live in. Lastly, marx is a satanist. There is proof enough for me to believe. I guess it just comes down to what you know about mans sin nature.

 

[Sander]

http://www.forerunner.com/predvestnik/X0013_Karl_Marx.html

Here a link you wanted. I believe its a direct reference from the book "Marx and Satan" The serach in google was "marx's ties to satan"

I wish these posts didnt get so long.

That's it?
You do realise that that book is full of suggestive silliness. It was written by a devout Christian, and obviously one who has done his utmost best to take anything which has remotely anything to do with the devil, and to steadfastly ignore the fact that practically anyone who is an atheist jokes with such things as "teh Devil" or uses such things metaphorically. Not a single piece of text in there is likely to be any indication of Satanism, but rather the effect of a former Christian becoming fiercely Atheist.
I'd expect you to do better than that stupid book if you want any form of credibility.

Thats just dumb to make such a statement. Why do you choose to blind yourelf to the facts? These are not just coincidences that his children starved and that two of his children commited suicide.

Wait, I'm the one who's dumb to make that statement? Say what? I suggest you learn what logic and reason are before trying to apply them to cases where you can't apply them.
His kids committed suicide, so it's likely he's a satanist is a completely silly statement. More probably he had a very dominant and difficult personality and was neglecting his children's health than him being a satanist.

There are no assumptions being made. Marx spells out his plans. They are all in his letters. I will try and find a place for you to read them

Well, considering the fact that

Um, yeah, i guess that would have been true... If Jesus hadnt sacrificed himself on the cross. But i supposed thats a subject for a different time.

Wait, you actually would believe that bit of logic if it weren't for the detail that Christ sacrificedhimself on the cross?
Well then, this must convince you:
Considering the fact that I just proved to you that if Jesus hadn't sacrificed himself he would've been a power-hungry deceiver, isn't it much more likely that Jesus didn't sacrifice but got killed after a trial, and that his followers then made up the myth of him having sacrificed himself?
There you go. According to your logic, I have now proven that Jesus was a power-hungry deceiver.

Again, i will not ask you to make hard assertions based on this. As i stated before, at some point, we have to take art as art, and reality as reality. However, you can not deny the fact that a man is influenced by what he is, and influences others in the same way.

What? Man influences others and is influenced by what he is? What kind of a useless statement is that? That has nothing to do with his satanism, nor is it any form of proof for his satanism.

Your very much taking this out of context. The point is, marx bit the hand that fed him. In essesnce he taught something he did not practice. This was the point.

Ehmm, I provide the proper context (namely that he couldn't do anything about that inheritance), and then I am the one who took something out of context? That's quite interesting.
Look, I'll type it up again so maybe you can begin to understand:
The fact that he had an inheritance was not anything he could do anything about. The fact that he did not need to work was not anything he could do anything about.
Now, as to him teaching something he did not practice, again, that's not correct. He never taught that you shouldn't accept inheritances and then use them to further the communist goals, nor did he ever teach that it was wrong to undermine a capitalist society by its own means.
He lived in a capitalist, and therefore abided by the capitalist rules until revolution would come.
Now how, exactly, is that not following what you are teaching?

Now your making assumptions.

No, I'm answering your question, and giving you facts.

I'm just giving out the facts. And with these kinds of facts I would make the assumption of occultism. However, i see what your saying.

Say what? You take one line of text, then ask yourself "Can this have anything to do with satanism", and that's what you call "making assumptions from facts". Hah! Learn to reason with a clear mind without any assumptions and then coming to the most logical conclusion, instead of the most farfetched.

Its common knowledge that they are not being published. I will find out more later.

Well apparently it isn't common knowledge, eh..

Bah. I could just as well say that it is common knowledge that the world is communist. Really, it is. Look at all the revolutions that have taken place, communism has taken over!

I did not mean to be hasty. Excuse my sarcasm, sorry about the inferences. Communism in an ideal world is perfect. Jesus preached communism in some aspect( He also said let he who does not work not eat - not really against or for communism). But marx did not live in a perfect world, and he knew it. Communism at its root is not evil

There you go, finally something I can agree with.

Communism in the eyes of a man who knows a perfect world is not possible and (hopefully ive established and will do so later with proof) that whos goals were evil revolution, defintelly makes communism evil. I think that makes us in aggreance on this point.

And then you come up with this. Really, this is just.....incredible. You look at Marx, say that he is a satanist, and then thereby conclude that his intellectual legacy must be evil as well. Instead of actually looking at that legacy to establish whether it's evil or not, you decide to look at, in this scope, irrelevant things such as whether or not Marx was a satanist. And these things are irrelevant because those are not his teachings, and we are talking about his teachings, not about himself.

so to recap. Communism in its perfect form is not evil. Communism by marx is very evil- You cant take it out of context. Context being the world we live in. Lastly, marx is a satanist. There is proof enough for me to believe. I guess it just comes down to what you know about mans sin nature.

So, to recap: You take a bunch of non-documented "facts", claim that Marx is a satanist through incredibly shaky logic, and then thereby claim that whatever his intellectual legacy is, it is evil.
You also use the words "out of context" in an extremely odd and unexplained (perhaps unexplicable) way.
Oh, and then claim that I know nothing about "mans sin nature". Thanks, mate.

PS: Thank you, Roshambo...

 

[Ozrat]

http://www.forerunner.com/predvestnik/X0013_Karl_Marx.html

Here a link you wanted. I believe its a direct reference from the book "Marx and Satan" The serach in google was "marx's ties to satan"

Thanks for the link.

Did you happen to read the very last footnote on your so called source?

* This book, Karl Marx, was written by a Christian dissident at the time of the Soviet Union.

Or even take a look at the publisher?

Greetings in the mighty, victorious name of Jesus Christ!

At this web site are articles from several Christian newspapers published by university students from the United States, the former Soviet Union, Latin America and China!

Media House International also hosts several web pages of related Christian organizations involved in promoting Revival in the Church and the Reformation of society.

Surely you can find a clearly-NOT-biased reference for us next time? You know, academic references?

I wish these posts didnt get so long.

I hope I made that as simple as possible for you to read (comprehend?) and to respond to.

EDIT:

Thread title: Between the Devil and The Dumbass

First Post:

Please refrain from posting some stupid shit you havent reaserched or looked up yourself, {Beats me likes a baby seal "cuz" I am STOOPID!} i guarante, if you post some rhetoric propoganda shit, somebodies going to call you on it.

Ironic.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

I don't know about Marx, but Vladimir Lenin appeared in The Bad Astronomer's shower curtain. If that isn't evil, I don't know what is. And I think it's funny whenever people call other people Satanists...I mean, really, the number of people that SERIOUSLY worship the Christian Lucifer must be somewhere around (3.3x10^-10)% of the population.

Politics and religion are both VERY bad things to discuss over the internet (anyone see the Real Life vs. The Internet episode of Red vs. Blue? "You die and you go to hell and you burn!") and it can really quickly dominate a forum (just look at fireflyfans.net). What I'm trying to say is, it's not worth it, and there's no use in arguing for the sake of argument, unless you're like me, and just do it for the PostCount++;

[edit]Why the holy fuck did I say "Stalin"? Also, added parenthesis to make scientific notation more readable.[/edit]

 

[Ratty Sr.]

<bullshit that makes my head hurt>

Listen, I hate to break it off to you, but all your 'evidence' of Marx's satanist beliefs is based on unsubstantiated rumors and insignificant facts about his life that can be interpreted in a million ways and really don't indicate anything about his religious beliefs. I won't refute each statement individually, for two reasons: 1) Sander already did that quite expertly, 2) They are all based on such inane reasoning, ridden with painfully obvious fallacies and deliberate misinterpretation, that it would be an unforgivable waste of time.

No wonder your arguments are so ridiculously flawed - you acquired them all by reading a minor book written by a religious fanatic and, being the clueless kid you are, accepted it as unquestionable truth. I would say the guy who wrote that shit is a lot more dangerous than Karl Marx, because he is spreading something far worse than communism - stupidity.

I wish these posts didnt get so long.

Then don't post them. We would all be better off without such uneducated nonsense.

There are no assumptions being made. Marx spells out his plans. They are all in his letters. I will try and find a place for you to read them

*anxiously awaits more straw man arguments, idiotic reasoning and blatant lies*

Again, i will not ask you to make hard assertions based on this. As i stated before, at some point, we have to take art as art, and reality as reality. However, you can not deny the fact that a man is influenced by what he is, and influences others in the same way.

Your very much taking this out of context. The point is, marx bit the hand that fed him. In essesnce he taught something he did not practice. This was the point.

Damn, you are right. That Marx is a two-faced, hipocritical bastard. The moment he decided capitalism is wrong and should be overthrown, he should have given away all his fortune, moved to woods and survived by eating leaves and grass. That would have also been a very smart move, since hermits living in complete isolation are known to have great impact on society and have an excellent opportunity to spread their ideas.

This statement is so stupid I simply have to comment on it. Slicer, I know you are ignorant and all, but surely you can see that Marx was pragmatical. His wealth allowed him to devote himself fully to his work and introduce his ideas to the entire civilized world. Even a naive dipshit like you should agree that pragmatism is a trait inherent to millions of people and has nothing to do with their religious beliefs.

Now your making assumptions. I'm just giving out the facts. And with these kinds of facts I would make the assumption of occultism. However, i see what your saying.

A few posts earlier you had "COMPLETE hard proof that Marx was a Satanist", and now you admit you made "the assumption of occultism." Strange how quickly you went from 'proof' to 'assumption'. What I find funny about people like you is how your unshakeable know-all attitude becomes diluted once you attempt to back up your weak arguments with flawed reasoning.

I'm at work so i cant continue this now. Go do your own research. Get back to me. Your hero Karl Marx, wont be such a hero anymore...

For me, Marx is not a hero. I see him for what he objectively is - a brilliant intellectual with tremendous knowledge and understanding of economy, politics and sociology, and a founder of one of world's most egalitarian and progressive ideologies. My judgement is based on his work, his teachings and the ideals that outlived him. Unlike you, I haven't based my opinion of Marx on silly rumors and distorted facts that no semi-intelligent person would take seriously.

Oh, and one more thing - it's incredibly arrogant and rude to make a controversial assertion (that also happens to be off-topic) and then tell others to research it. Such behaviour can loosely be described as trolling, and on most forums that is a serious breach of rules. Simply put, if you make idiot claims, at least have the dignity to back them with sources. Preferably, make these sources more credible than a biased book written by some right-wing lunatic.

I did not mean to be hasty. Excuse my sarcasm, sorry about the inferences. Communism in an ideal world is perfect. Jesus preached communism in some aspect( He also said let he who does not work not eat - not really against or for communism). But marx did not live in a perfect world, and he knew it. Communism at its root is not evil. Communism in the eyes of a man who knows a perfect world is not possible and (hopefully ive established and will do so later with proof) that whos goals were evil revolution, defintelly makes communism evil. I think that makes us in aggreance on this point.

I'm trying to comprehend how your brain works, but so far I've had no luck. Communism, an ideology entirely based on ideals of equality and equitance, is not evil. Check. Yet, communism applied to the real, imperfect world is evil. Huh? Guess what, Marx's teachings are focused on bringing about this just society. In other words, he discussed the transition from capitalism to socialism in great detail, and the whole god-damn point of his work is to establish how it's realistically possible to create a society of justice, equality and welfare, which sets him apart from socialists-utopists that came before him. The fact that all attempts to put his ideas to practice failed was not his fault, and only an idiot would claim otherwise. Socialism as a political and economic system didn't fail and lead to so much suffering because Marx intended so, but because his ideas were abused by politicians like Lenin, Zedong and Castro, who used them to amass public support and seize power for themselves. Though it would still be moronic to call them evil, I will agree that they were certainly unscrupulous and governed by their lust for power rather than public benefit. But only a complete dumbass would claim that Marx is somehow responsible for crimes that were committed in the name of his ideology long after his death.

Lastly, marx is a satanist. There is proof enough for me to believe.

Really? What proof is that? Because the irrelevant bullshit you asserted isn't proof - it isn't even an indication.

I guess it just comes down to what you know about mans sin nature.

Based on the inane drivel you posted so far, I can make a conjecture that even eating with a spoon represents a daunting challenge to you, let alone contemplating something as elaborate as 'man's sin nature'. Therefore, STFU.

 

[The Vault Dweller]

Well Slicer your convictions may be strong, but I think your being mislead.

The problem is when Capitalism and Communism were at odds it was believed by both that demonizing the other would be helpful propoganda. This lead to Capitalists trying to find non-capitalist reasons for people to hate Communism. As such it lead to the idea that Communism cannot exist with religion and hence the religious must stand up for Capitalist ideals. Considering that many religions preach that to be rich is to be greedy it would make sense if they slightly agreed with Communism which why it seems so perverted that it should side with Capitalism.

I mean why should a person's religion try to preach which economic system they support? Isnt pure religion supposed to be a system to live with by itself politics and economics aside?


For the life of my I cant understand why Marx would disavow religion to further a political aim. That was a bad move both, because it was unnecessary and gave his movement a bad taste. Too bad he couldnt keep it pure.

Otherwise we wouldnt have to deal with people accusing atheists of being Communist and vice versa. Dont get me wrong I despise them both...yet they dont belong in the same bed.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

 

[welsh]

I've read the Communist Manifesto. Does that entitle me to the knowledge that it's both explicitly anti-intellectual and explicitly anti-democratic?

Well Per, personally I think Marx makes a few good points but makes a few real bad ones too. The Communisty Manifesto was basically a pamphlet to get workers active in protesting and resisting- it's a political propaganda device done at a time where you did have lousey working conditions, horrible salaries, a powerful capitalist class that had significant control over democratic institutions. So yes, you can say he's not only anti-democratic, but his pitch is to the workers and that's fairly anti-intellectual. One could go so far that the guy does advocate violence as the means to overthrow what Marx sees as oppression against much of society.

Was Marx anti-intellectual. Well I've read a bit of Marx and while I favor Weber and think Marx makes a few mistakes, I would also say that you need to have some intelligence to get through it. Marx is not easy reading, and actually Marxism isn't always easy. That Marxism is still taught and considered by intellectuals reflects the population that has the time and willingness to argue him. But that's also true of the time. If you read the book "The Secret Agent" by Joseph Conrad, he protrays the early communist/anarchist radicals- a bunch of disgruntled intellectuals who are concerned with the oppression and corruption of the existing social system. These are not your typical workers but fairly bright guys. It is these folks that are to be the vanguard of the party- the leadership.

That said, I think it's fair to say that Marxism is an ideology and, like most ideologies, opposes alternative ideas. The language of Marxism alone seeks to force people to make essential assumptions before moving on- for example the priority of class struggle over other factional conflicts.

In that sense I have to agree with Slicer on one thing, communist states are hard core ideologues who look a heck of a lot like a religion. There is a teleological problem- they anticiapte an end point in history- a worker's paradise in a way christians anticipate a second coming of the messiah. They persecute those with conflictin ideas- much like christians and muslims have persecuted people of other faiths. In practice there is a heirarchical leadership that occassionally purged itself- similar behavior from Christians. This practice reaches its height probably under Stalinism where the primary faith is in the teaching of Marx and the Communist system. This was also the problem that the US had during the Cold War- it's enemies chief weapon was not missiles or AK-47s but an ideology that appealed to the mass numbers of poor throughout the world and which people became devout. It is hard to find a revolution in the 20th century after World War 2 that is not Marxist-Leninist or Maoist.

Furthermore I will agree that communism and christianity are inherently at odds. For the communist religion of any form is a distraction of their ideological basis and yes, they want to convert people to an ideological view. But for communist, religion is a false ideology based on a supernatural idea that blinds people from the true conflicts- class conflict- and may even prevent their ability to assume class conciousness or action. The most devout anti-communists are also the most devoutly religious. To the religious- the catholic church especially- communist was a form of the devil's work because it threatened the "holy" catholic church's power and had the ability to appeal to the masses.

SO it's an ideological war. One of the reasons why the Pope John Paul II was willing to work with the US to end the communist party in Poland. YOu will find similar views in many catholic countries where the church allied with repressive states to undermine communists.

But we can take that to far, which is where Slicer goes wrong. Yes the church and communism are at odds, but that's because they are both ideologies that inherently are in opposition. Was Marx a closet Satanistt? Not because his kids committed suicide, or because he got money from Engels (though he also made some money as a journalist). Not because he advocates violence, because at the time of Marx's writings the relationship of power within society suggested that the social order could only be overthrown through violence.

But I know of no sources that say that Marx was a stalanist. I can only recall Marx as being anti-religion. Unless you make the argument that every athiest is a satanist- a claim made by some of the most religiously devout for what agent but the devil could prevent a soul from coming to realize the existence of God!- than I doubt the argument holds up.

As the posters above note- Slicer, your sources are themselves propaganda. Marx is more anti-religion than pro-religion. If you look to some of the more current forms of rebellion, you have liberation theology that often accepts and incorporates some notions of Marxism with Christian teachings in order to protest for greater rights to poor rural classes. You have a mix of marxism with islam in other countries in the middle east to advocate another form of rebellion.