Gospel of the day
I saw this tweet and wanted to post an answer :
https://capp-usa.org/socialism
I haven't read the rest yet but i'll agree to take these definitions. However, this isn't how i define these terms : democratic socialism was the original/radical expression for a "democratic socialism, in words and not in deeds".
I won't explain why the u.s.s.r. was democratic even with a single political party, especially in workplaces, partly because it took order from the population, and why it wouldn't have been authoritarian(, it wasn't nearly as much as their enemies described it,) if it didn't fear for its security(, the "first world" was after the "second world"), and we refused peace(, probably because we feared contamination since communism indeed promise more than workers' exploitation).
The new "democratic socialists" aren't socialists since they don't intend to give the power to the workers, the socialist/communist parties who didn't achieve socialism at least promise/'talk about' it, as long as they're sincere they're socialists.
A lot of country were socialists, but none were communists, at least in the final sense of "achieving a communist utopia", without classes and even more in my case since i assimilate communism with direct democracy and the 'c/C'ity of God. In these three cases we're speaking about ideals, but those who exclude the last two may still say that communism wasn't achieved if they also associate this "final form" with a moneyless and stateless society).
Now that i've read the rest i realize that i was arrogant, since what follows isn't the anti-communist propaganda i expected.
They don't have to share equally, but nowadays you have a scale of 1:100 or more in salaries, a scale of 1:4 should be enough for an incentive, i don't recognise the validity of this argument, if the only reason for people to act is to make money(, there wasn't any unemployment in the u.s.s.r.), then it's better than they leave their place to someone else, there are other motives in life, i don't think that the Church would disapprove bringing people closer to spiritual/immaterial motivations.
Furthermore, capitalists who are afraid of communism because of the government have to answer why they'd oppose forms of 'anarcho-communism'/'libertarian communism'(, weak against enemies), since that's also something our governments oppose.
And its popularity resulted from the republican revolutions, Marx was one of the actors who's useful for answer to economic refutations as well as being someone involved heavily in these movements of anarchism&socialism throughout the XIXth century, the technological progress of the last 70 years changed the situation compared to the XIXth century though. Utopic socialism is the movement i'm affiliating myself with(, but with as many experiments as possible, in order to find the best-working ideal within the natural laws).
Finally, it doesn't violate the right of workers to property, but claims that their right to receive the full measure of what they worked for is violated(, investments are necessary, and can be done without capitalists, but the profits nourishing these capitalists aren't). It violates private property rights by making them public(, and has nothing to do with your toothbrush or personal belongings, only those that gain money in their sleep, because theft is a sin).
We can easily say that we violate subsidiarity, and the Church fortunately violates anthropology, at least the one that depict corrupt&greedy humans as something natural(, the workers are also greedy, they weren't born in the right family(, individuals are free but statistics prove an injustice), after all public schools are part of a socialist ideal, we don't have the same starting line, which seems familiar to a past situation, will it degrade towards this "natural" state of submission ?)
This is probably getting boring for any eventual reader, so i'll be quick, there's no argument here that i haven't already discussed, these "rights" are the right to steal, shareholders, landlords, or those who lend with an interest, take a larger profit than necessary without working for it(, their money "works" for them).
Ironic :
That's the heart of the problem/propaganda, you just have to make the distinction between the common private property, and the lucrative private property, only the latter is criticised by socialists because it is unfair to the workers(, and/or the consumers), we'd be wealthier if we only paid the rent necessary for reparations, and if shareholders didn't exist, etc.
And collective ownership is even better for the development of every worker(, in the same sense as state ownership by their citizens, we become adult)
What is correct about this assession ? Ex-colonial powers maintained their supremacy over other capitalist countries, whose growth is the proof that being capitalist isn't enough, while socialist countries managed to continue their growth quicker than them despite the economic war/sanctions waged against them. And even if they're slower, as long as there's growth/progress it should be ok in a peaceful/harmonious world
There's a lot of propaganda and double standard about this, it's so easy to demonise someone. Once again, we were attacking them so they couldn't lower their guard easily, and 1991 proved that the capitalists take control of the state afterwards, just as the republics of the past.
Interesting :
yeah... :
I don't agree but have already said why, and external negativities affect every being :
Now subsidiarity, a bit more quickly :
The orders came from the population, and the soviets were worker's councils with imperative mandates.
And once again, there's anarcho-communism or other forms of libertarian communism which are conveniently ignored but could throw the same accusation towards our current republics.
Shouldn't this be applied to workplaces ? And what about a real (direct )democracy ?
And finally, anthropology, the usual argument about human rights.
I'm stopping there. Forgive me if i first thought i could make this argumentation pleasable to an eventual reader, i'm boring myself more and more so let's say it's done, i wanted to do so for some time since i saw their previous tweets about this topic.
I've read most of the rest, and didn't find much to add, let's continue with something more interesting.
We're at the last chapter of Zechariah, it speaks about the Mount of Olives at the fourth verse :
On that day God will stand upon the Mount of Olives, to the east of Jerusalem. The Mount of Olives will be split in half by a very large valley running from east to west. Half of the mountain will move north, and the other half will move south.
And interestingly, the last sentence is also referenced in the new testament :
There will no longer be any merchants in the house of the LORD of heavenly forces on that day.
If i'm continuing with St. John( the Baptist) :
At the 38th verse and at the 41th, it shows that it was destined for an other public(, it was written after Jerusalem destruction like the other gospels) :
[38] When Jesus turned and saw [John the Baptist and his disciples], he asked, “What do you want ?”
They answered, “Rabbi, where do you live ?” The Hebrew word “Rabbi” means “Teacher.”
[39] Jesus replied, “Come and see !”
It was already about four o'clock in the afternoon when they went with him and saw where he lived. So they stayed on for the rest of the day.
[40] One of the two men who had heard John and had gone with Jesus was Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter.
[41] The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother and tell him, “We have found the Messiah !” The Hebrew word “Messiah” means the same as the Greek word “Christ.”
[42] Andrew brought his brother to Jesus. And when Jesus saw him, he said, “Simon son of John, you will be called Cephas.” This name can be translated as “Peter.”
St.John's gospel is indeed harder to read, here's the last verse :
[Jesus said(, after something about a fig tree that was a reference to other gospels ?,) : ]I tell you for certain you will see heaven open and God's angels going up and coming down on the Son of Man.”
Here's the end of the second surah "The Cow" :
Those who eat Ribâ/usury will not stand( on the Day of Resurrection), except like the standing of a person beaten by Satan, leading him to insanity.
That is because they say : "Trading is only like usury", whereas God has permitted trading and forbidden usury.
So whosoever receives an admonition from his Lord and stops eating usury shall not be punished for the past ; his case is for God( to judge) ; but whoever returns( to usury), such are the dwellers of the Fire - they will abide therein.
[(A) Riba An-Nasî’a is the interest on lent money, while Riba Al-Fadl is taking a superior thing of the same kind of goods by giving more of the same kind of goods of inferior quality(, e.g., dates of superior quality for dates of inferior quality in great amounts).]
God will destroy usury and will give increase for Sadaqât(, deeds of charity, alms, etc.). And God likes not the disbelievers, sinners.
Truly those who believe, and do deeds of righteousness, and perform (Iqâmat-)As-Salât(, the prayer), and give Zakât, they will have their reward with their Lord. On them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
O you who believe ! Be afraid of God and give up what remains(, due to you,) from usury(, onward from now), if you are (really )believers.
And if you do not do it, then take a notice of war from God and His Messenger, but if you repent, you shall have your capital sums.
Deal not unjustly(, by asking more than your capital sums), and you shall not be dealt with unjustly(, by receiving less than your capital sums).
And if the debtor is in a hard time(, has no money), then grant him time till it is easy for him to repay, but if you remit it by way of charity, that is better for you if you did but know.
And be afraid of the Day when you shall be brought back to Allâh. Then every person shall be paid what he earned, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly.
O you who believe ! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as God has taught him, so let him write.
Let him(, the debtor,) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear God, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes.
But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable to dictate for himself, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men.
And if there are not two men(, available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them(, two women,) errs, the other can remind her.
[It spoke about women from that time, their parole didn't have no value. And two men/humans as witnesses is better than one anyway.]
And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called(, for evidence). You should not become weary to write it(, your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with God ; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, save when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down. But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do( such harm), it would be wickedness in you.
So be afraid of God ; and God teaches you. And God is the All-Knower of each and everything.
And if you are on a journey and cannot find a scribe, then let there be a pledge taken(, mortgaging) ; then, if one of you entrust the other, let the one who is entrusted discharge his trust( faithfully), and let him be afraid of God, his Lord.
And conceal not the evidence for he, who hides it, surely his heart is sinful. And God is All-Knower of what you do.
To God belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth, and whether you disclose what is in your ownselves or conceal it, God will call you to account for it. Then He forgives whom He wills and punishes whom He wills. And God is Able to do all things.
The Messenger(, Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم,) believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and (so do )the believers. Each one believes in God, His Angels, His Books, and His Messengers.
(They say, )"We make no distinction between one another of His Messengers" - and they say, "We hear, and we obey. (We seek )Your Forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the return( of all)."
God burdens not a person beyond his scope. He gets reward for that( good) which he has earned, and he is punished for that (evil) which he has earned.
"Our Lord ! Punish us not if we forget or fall into error, our Lord ! Lay not on us a burden like that which You did lay on those before us(, Jews and Christians) ; our Lord ! Put not on us a burden greater than we have strength to bear. Pardon us and grant us Forgiveness. Have mercy on us. You are our Maulâ(, Patron, Supporter and Protector, etc.), and give us victory over the disbelieving people."
[Interpret the last sentence of the second surah as you want to, in my opinion it was said to his followers in the context of war, if the goal was to wage war against every disbelievers then the Quran missed every time the occasion to be clear on that point, i'm sure that the Holy Quran(, and God a.f.a.i.k.,) would have preferred peaceful conversions through dialogue, which was indeed what happened in ~most cases]
Saint of the day : St. Maria Bertilla Boscardin, Virgin of Vicenza