Theocracy or Godless Communism?

[Tyler Durden]

Hey not really.

But let's have a little speculation here. In Michigan, Dick DeVos (uber "Christian" and AMWAY scion) is even with Jenifer Grantholm, Center Left Democrat. Our legislature is solidly rePuke (Hey. We build CARS. We ain't geniuses.)

Let's say the rest of the country goes that way. OR...you get a choice here...Socialist-Style communism.

Which way do you go?

Tick/Tock.

[wryter2000]

1. That's not a choice I'm willing to give them

That's what the rw nuts would claim are our choices. I know you're only joking, but I don't want to play their game. :)

[Tyler Durden]

2. Just tryin' to have some fun, kiddo.

Hey, the old guy is trying to cool out with a beer and and a bump.

Actually wouldn't cry too hard if the world went socialist, though.

Burp.

[cyclezealot]

3. both are dogmatic.

I fear theocrats are better snops than Commie's even.

[kevinbgoode]

4. Hard for me to even believe that a uber-christian

is running even with Granholm - has she been unpopular? Or are Michiganders into hate politics so much that they believe their troubles will float away if the big white God in the sky smacks around the gays and turns Michigan into a flat-earth society. . ?

[Tyler Durden]

5. Nah, we just that STUPID.

Conservative assholes abound.

The local Baptists brought a bunch of "Chick" tracts by this morning while the wife and I were sitting on the front porch.

Yuck.

[BlueStorm]

13. "Conservative assholes abound."

Yep you're right Tyler, especially on the west side of the state.

Blue

[Igel]

6. I'd go with the theocracies.

They tend to flip-flop less. You learn the rules, you learn how to get around them in non-obtrusive ways, and you keep low.

With most of the communist (or secular, ideologically 'rigid') countries, the rules keep undergoing thorough-going changes. You adopt early Stalinist or early Maoist policies--of course, with the fervor necessary--and miss a cue, and you're suddenly an enemy of the people.

They work out about the same if you keep a sufficiently low-status job, don't aspire to education, and stay in one place.

[DetroitProle]

16. actually, education

is one of the few real achievements that "communism" in practice, has achieved.
In the Soviet Union, education was free and available to anyone who was willing and qualified(higher education for those who performed well enough academically). The Soviet Union, in less than a generation, produced a nation of highly educated people with high expectations.

[leesa]

7. How did a center left Democrat morph into a Godless Communist?

Aren't you either a Socialist or a Communist? What do any of these terms mean? I truly wish Americans would educate themselves about socialism, communism, capitalism, etc.

[Warpy]

8. Let's see, a right wing oligarchy versus a right wing oligarchy

What kind of choice is that? It matters little whether the oligarchs are churchmen lying about god or an inner circle of a party lying about socialism.

Besides, it would be communist style socialism, not the reverse.

Try giving an alternative.

[newswolf56]

9. In truth, "Godless Communism" (with its forcible suppression of...

Abrahamic Fundamentalism) is the only truly effective way to cope with the theocratic threat -- which is precisely why, under Communism, Abrahamic religion (Christianity, Islam, Judaism) is so severely restricted: not only is it the antithesis of everything Communism stands for, it is also the doctrinal source of Communism's arch-enemy, capitalism.

Those who who make the spurious claim there's no difference between the two have been drinking too much U.S. public-school Kool Aid. Think again: compare the exaltation of science under Communism versus the suppression of science by Abrahamic theocracy (Sputnik versus the Scopes Monkey Trial); the imposition of Biblical hierarchy versus a conscious striving toward economic democracy (Franco and the Catholic Church versus the populism of the Spanish people, the Fundamentalist impulse to tyranny versus the human impulse to liberty); the notion every living being has a right to education, adequate healthcare and meaningful employment (Castro and Chavez versus the United States).

One cannot transcend one's national history. Communism has fallen victim to the national histories of Russia and China, neither of which have even one scintilla of democratic traditions. Russia's is a history of czarist (Byzantine) absolutism -- tyranny shaped by a dozen centuries of warfare against Norse, Germanic and Muslim invaders; China's is a history of militant imperial ambitions alternating with total isolationism, from the Chinese perspective, the 5000-year struggle to preserve Chinese civilization against the barbarian onslaught (with Occidentals merely the latest in a succession of barbarian invaders -- again tyranny shaped by warfare: 50 centuries of it). Communism in these realms is bound to be authoritarian simply because the mandates of such history cannot be transcended in a decade or even a century.

Lastly there is the fact that Marxism is about change and adaptation -- the dialectic -- while Abrahamic theocracy is about forcibly imposed eternal stasis. If the corporate ruling class succeeds in imposing Abrahamic theocracy on the United States (as it has already succeeded in the Middle East), the result will be not only the resumption of the scarcely-ended Christian Dark Age, but this time a Dark Age that lasts literally forever. No change will be allowed, now or ever. Marxism by contrast allows for the possibility of the evolution of genuine liberty: indeed that is in fact its stated purpose: the destruction of capitalism so that the human spirit -- freed of the chains imposed by the greedy -- can at last flourish.

Better Red than Dead? Absolutely -- especially since under theocracy I'd be among the first of the dead anyway, publicly tortured to death for the alleged crime of recognizing humanity's first and oldest deity: the Goddess.

[newswolf56]

11. The last comparison in my second paragraph above should have read:

(inadvertently dropped text in italic) "the notion every living being has a right to education, adequate healthcare and meaningful employment versus the Abrahamic notion a comfortable life is proof of divine favor and is therefore to be ruthlessly restricted -- reserved only for those so blessed (the policies of Castro and Chavez versus the policies of the United States)."

(Sorry for the omission, folks, and my apologies also for discovering it too late to edit; that's what happens when my writing gets interrupted by an infuriating telephone call from a telemarketer -- never mind the fact I've been on the don't-call list for years.)

[kestrel91316]

10. Under "godless communism", you can still have your religion.

You just don't get to parade it everywhere and force it uppon others. Since religion is (or should be) virtually all inside your head, composed of THOUGHTS, and to some extent in actions which any normal human being engages in anyway (kindness to others, etc), there is no reason why poeple can't have their religion under "godless communism". The Vatican, Jerry Falwell, and the Mormon hierarchy may differ with me on this, but I don't value their opinions.

[meow2u3]

12. Trick question

I say neither of the above.

Let us all have a right to practice our own religion without government interference.

[newswolf56]

14. But what if -- as with Abrahamic fundamentalism -- the practice...

of religion includes a mandate to destroy everyone else's freedom? (And in the case of Abrahamic fundamentalism, this is not just religious liberty but all political liberty as well.)

[Iniquitous Bunny]

15. Communism isn't so much about religion.

It's who controls the means of production and wage distribution. In it's extreme, it holds the same dangers as does capitalism in it's extreme- a concentration of wealth in the hands of too few people. The absence of religion can be a sort of fascist totalitarianism in which people have to be alleged to the state first and foremost as opposed to anything else. The same dangers exist in a theocracy which will equate nationalism with religion itself. Each one has similar and inherent dangers.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. How about non-denominational Anarchism instead of either?

To hell with the bosses of either (or any) stripe.

[DetroitProle]

18. communism all the way.

Even in practice, in history, communism has meant progress.
The Soviet Union, in less than a generation, became industrialized and educated. In a few decades, the nation went from over 97% peasant to a primarily urban nation. Literacy rates went from single digits to near 100%. Education was totally free and available.
Also, communism(I am speaking of Soviet-style), work was available to anyone willing to work. You could get a job and obtain at least the bare minimum standard of living. In the United States, sadly, this is certainly NOT true.
Another huge difference is discrimination. Under the Soviet Union, women achieved the same rights in less than a decade that American women fought for over a century for. Communism has certainly been brutal. But brutality has not been based on race but on class.
Of course, there are essentially the only human achievements of communism. But it certainly beats religious fascism.

[mandyky]

19. I trust socialism to better accept the Constitution

These religious freaks have no problem lying to people, as GWB has proven.

I didn't vote, because I want the Kennedy /Johnson / FDR style of Democracy back.