I’m sorry, who are you?
You’ve interrupted our impromptu struggle session.
I am sorry to hear that 
1 Like
Being a libertarian, trust me, I have no love for big government either
1 Like
Wow we’re gonna need to fix that. ;]
But I won’t hold it against you too much 
2 Likes
Long as we’re all cordial about it, I won’t hold your beliefs against you either 
2 Likes
This thread is something else.
And probably proof enough that the forum Mods don’t really look at the story forum anymore. I’ve seen stuff axed for less.
3 Likes
This forum is like the Wild West of the forum sections.
1 Like
I also wanna mention that I find that most people aren’t that different when it comes to political beliefs
It’s how to implement ideas is where things usually start a fight
Isn’t it a glorious experiment in anarchy?
Also, Meringue has been typing forever. Can’t wait to see their epic post.
Well, to be entirely fair you could fill quite a few books on them…and people have. 
That is certainly how it is sold to people. Problem is, that in reality that is really a myth. In order to be a meritocracy everyone has to be on at least close to an even footing. Which just isn’t the case. A bit ironically, in order to achieve a true meritocracy would require things people typically associate with communism. Like removing inherited wealth, requiring equal schooling for all, no private colleges, free college for all, etc. Plus you would have to provide free support for people attending college, after all the experience of the guy working while going to college and the guy whose parents pay for all his food while he lives at home are VERY different from one another. The actual reality of Capitalism is that wealth of your family is the dominant driver of success. Merit actually has pretty little to do with success. That is how you can have a person inherit tons of wealth, then bankrupt 6 different companies and still have more money than the VAST, VAST majority of people in the country will ever see. If you start with wealth, you almost can’t lose. If you don’t, you have near zero chance of being wealthy.
I just want to pull this out real quick. That isn’t exactly accurate. Neither Communism or Capitalism really have anything to do with religion.
There tends to be an association people make between communism and atheism. I think a lot of that goes back to old propaganda and the fact that several of the big communist states were. But the things that caused that were separate from communism itself. They were more about the people in charge and politics between them and other countries.
On the flip side people think capitalism is tied to religion because big capitalistic countries, like the US, claim to be ‘under god’ and many politicians claim religious faith and devotion. But the reality is that it is more circumstances that lead to that and people putting on a show.
In all honestly, if you look at the tenants of most religions they actually don’t work real well with capitalism. Take Christianity, chasing after wealth is directly and clearly condemned multiple times in the bible. And chasing wealth is the whole tenant of capitalism. Most religions are actually more compatible with communism’s share everything philosophy.
It is important to be careful to separate out the rhetoric that some groups spout from the truth. In the US conservative groups tend to declare themselves the religious, faithful group. But if you read the Mosaic law much of it would be decried as socialist and bad by those same people. You know, things like giving generously to the poor, without holding back. The forgiving of debts every 7 years. On that one we even had a nice recent example with the college debt forgiveness, all those conservative, supposedly faithful Christian’s that came out HARD against it. Can you imagine how they would have reacted to every seven years: “Every creditor will release his neighbor from the debt he incurred.” There was even a requirement for farmers to set aside the edge of the field for people who needed food to gather. Etc., etc. I could go on. But the point is, be careful trying to ascribe faith/religion to/against government and economic philosophies based on what people claim. The reality is the rhetoric is more often than not, just empty manipulation.
Sadly, as a general rule the most important jobs are also the lowest paid.
True, that is why I was using the word nominally when describing them. Most people who claim to be Christian don’t remotely act Christ-like. I am convinced most of them don’t even know what he taught.
Remember what those reporting companies value the most. While the people running the various organizations have various levels of integrity. (For some it is zero ) At the end of the day, all of them have the same goal. Money. So, even if they are telling the truth and trying to be as accurate as possible, they are still motivated to make money. That means reporting things that get the most response and engagements. So, think about the differences in those two things.
In nominally Christian countries, which most of us are in, the Catholic church scandal is close to home for FAR more people. It is more likely to be their neighbor, friend, family, etc. Far more people are going to question what they have to do to protect their child. On the flip side, the Islamic story is distant for most people. Most are unlikely to know anyone effected. Which do you think would drive more engagement and response?
Additionally, again in an nominally Christian country, most people will have a already more negative view of Islam than of any nominally Christian religion. That means telling a negative story about Islam is more likely to produce a smaller response or reaction. Making it the less valuable story.
Reporting more negative stories regarding nominally Christian organizations is not them being biased or specifically targeting Christianity. It is simply them picking the stories that get the most return on their time. In short, not so much bias as it is them being capitalists.
I think the problem stems from how easy it has become for those whose selfishness does override the good of the tribe to slip into positions of power and abuse it.
More that I started typing and then work interfered and it was setting her for a long time. Stupid work.
2 Likes
And this is exactly how Marxists see it! Which is why the struggle is figuring out how to keep the selfish minority from taking over whatever societal structures exist.
1 Like
While it’s quite a rabbit hole, I’m fine discussing this because I feel we’re having productive, civil discussions on the subject, regardless of where we may or may not agree.
True that. I’ve got a few books on the subject myself, but there’s still more haha
There’s more involved in wealth when a trust-fund baby bankrupts’ companies so they get more money. That example is usually tainted by nepotism. For someone to be born into wealth, that usually means they have access to powerful people thanks to their rich relatives. Capitalism functioning ideally would also strip out said nepotism.
Plus, there’s still rags-to-riches stories happening (eg; love them or hate them and morality aside, people like Andrew Tate and major youtubers PewDiePie or MrBeast weren’t born into wealth).
While neither have anything to do inherently with religion, communism’s modern form was established by Marx and Engels, who were both atheists. Plus, communism reuses to acknowledge how flawed/corrupt human nature is. People can rise above it, but we’ll never get rid of it on our own power (despite what the humanists say).
Religion is more foundational to society and human nature because it addresses some of the issues that capitalism and communism both stem from - service and greed; depending on the religion, of course, while some major religions like Christianity and Buddhism condemn greed.
Like it or not, religion is an intrinsic part of human nature and civilization and will never truly go away (despite some wanting it to).
Mosaic Law wasn’t socialist because there was acknowledgement of God, different wages for different jobs AND there were property rights, three things communism rejects.
I can see where you’re coming from there. It’s especially bad in entertainment - we need plumbers more than professional athletes or comedians, but who makes more?
Sad, but true (though the “don’t know the teachings” also applies to many critics of Christianity, not that I’ll name any names here , but…). The Good Book says the things of the Spirit are spiritually discerned; one reason why many people get black and white teachings from the Bible wrong even when the text is right in front of them.
Except Islamic grooming gangs are also in Western countries. When I was talking about the double standard in coverage, I was mainly thinking of them in the UK. And I think the 2005 London subway bombing was also pretty close to home for them.
Not always. There are times when it is bias/prejudice/whatever, especially when we see how the different religions are portrayed in fictional media made at the time and how often they’re targeted.
We are all selfish by nature. Some more than others, some are more aware or it, more willing to get help overcoming it or are better at mitigating it.
I know the feeling!
I’m more center-right than full right, so I’m not sure I’d say we’re full opposites politically, but we really do agree on a lot, especially in WoW.
I do hold that we are inherently selfish - one of the many “gifts” of sin. Some are better at managing it than others, and some are more aware than others and willing to seek help (be it psychological, technological or Divine 
) to work against it (it’s not something humanity can overcome on its own power, despite what transhumanists say). I’m not sure I’d refer to animals as egalitarian, maybe, maybe not.
Question; do you realize that a lot of the things you use in daily life you have because of capitalism? The internet itself wouldn’t be how it is now without capitalism - the same internet you use to read and post here, to browse social media, without which this game wouldn’t exist… all because the US military let the public have the internet due to its utility in capitalism. Plus, the places where you buy your food and clothes, your computer and phones, and where you earn the money to pay for all this (except the people who live on government handouts or family wealth).
If you want to live in a society closer to communism in some ways, join the Amish (though if you’re also the opposite of me religiously, you’d have to convert to be Christian like we are - I’m Christian but not Amish).
Civil discussions on politics is a rare thing these day. Nice when it happens. Even if nobody changes views, it can still be a nice discussion.
Yes it would. But that is kind of what I am getting at. First off, with capitalism that has never happened in history. Second, and notably in order to do strip away that nepotism would require things people find counter to capitalism. Such equal school for all and free college. Also guaranteed income so people don’t have to work multiple jobs and can put effort towards advancement equal to people who grow up in wealthy homes and don’t even have to work. Etc, etc. Removing nepotism and free ride for family of the wealthy requires things that are not accepted in capitalist governments.
Exceedingly rarely. To the point the are more exceptions to the rule. And that has been true in other forms of government as well. Take for example Catherine I, she was born to peasants, orphaned at 3, and raised by a pastor. The Ming dynasty was formed by a peasant. There was also Nader Shah of Iran, at 13 his father was dead and he was supporting his mother and himself by collecting sticks.
Rags to richest happen. But exceedingly rarely. And should always been seen as exceptions, not the rule. That remains true today.
That doesn’t mean that communism itself also is. Honestly when looking at the modern world regarding communism and atheism we are dealing with a situation of correlation, not causation. And it is important to keep those distinctions in place.
I think you missed the point I was making. I was not saying the mosaic law was socialist. It could only be called socialist under a very loose definition of socialism. But many of the tenants would be considered socialistic by many modern day ‘theists.’
The Mosaic law understood the problem with life long debt cycles, so it made provisions to protect people from them. So, let’s look at that compared to modern day.
Take for example the load forgiveness. Even when it was just being called for, before anything was done, many of those “Christian” politicians called in socialist. There were speeches and accusations of ‘socialist take over’ used a lot. The Mosaic law called for MUCH more significant loan forgiveness. How do you think those same ‘religious’ people would react if a bill was put for to cancel ALL loans every 7 years. I can confidently say they would be screaming socialism.
So, what that tells us is the rhetoric they spout has really nothing to do with religion. They aren’t looking to the bible for direction. The claim it purely as a way of getting people to follow them. But, it is just an appearance of godliness. Many in positions of power claim Capitalistic governments are tied to religion, it isn’t actually true.
To me the stand out one is teachers. I would argue that is among THE most important jobs. But many don’t even make a living wage.
Honestly, I would put many service jobs are more critical to society than corporate positions. Especially the billionaire CEOs, which arguably do more harm than good.
They are. But think about numbers. What % of the population interacts with or knows people around any Islamic group? What % of the population interacts with or knows people around the Catholic church? I don’t know the actual numbers, but I can confidently say that the later is FAR, FAR more common.
Remember, the goal is to spend the most time/resources on the things people are more likely to have a connection to. It is more likely for them to know someone in or around the Catholic church than an Islam group. So, those stories get more weight.
And it was reported on a lot, especially in London.
In fact, if you shift away from scandals and to terrorism you will see a different trend. Islamic terrorism is reported VASTLY more than things like white nationalist terrorism. Why? Because the majority being reported to are white, and therefore wont fear being the target of white racists. But, they will fear being targeted by Islamic groups. More racial terrorism happens in the US than Islamic. But most people are not going to feel as threatened by it. So, equally horrible crimes (and likely cause the same disgust in most people) but one causes more fear. And fear drives more engagement. That means Islamic terrorism is more reported. Reporting is biased towards making money. And they need fear and engagement to do that. End of the day that is what it is predominantly about.
In some cases, yes. There are certainly organizations and groups with specific biases. For sure. For examples, Fox news is so biased it is less a news organization and more a propaganda arm than anything else. And while MSNBC reporting is usually technically true, if you don’t think they are picking and choosing which stories to even report and how to report them based on a political philosophy you are fooling yourself.
But overall, when aggregated, those tend to fall to the side and the overall system is just weighted towards making money. Especially when the stories are not directly tied to a political group.
I have known some truly selfless people. And everyone of them worked to become that way. I try to be as much as possible. I do agree that people tend to lean selfish from their nature. And many do largely overcome it.
Problem is it is also true that many do not, and lean into selfishness. And unfortunately those who are extremely selfish tend to seek out power to fulfill those selfish desires. And, unfortunately, that means those positions of power are often filled by the most selfish.
I personally do not believe the axiom that power corrupts. I have known people that I fully believe to be incorruptible. Everyone has the ONE thing that matters more than everything else. For some it is honor or faith or personal characters, etc. Some people do care more about those things than anything else, and power can’t change that.
Problem is, for those that do care more about self, greed, money, etc. power is the way they see to fill those desires. So, the axiom I hold to is: Power attracts the corruptible. So, there are always be more corrupt people seeking power than honest ones. Meaning more corrupt people end up in power.
Just a small add here. For my personally case I am not advocating one over the other. I am not convinced either is actually better. Both are fundamentally flawed systems that give outsized power to small groups who take advantage of it to rule over the majority population which effectively becomes a peasant class.
Closing as this thread has gotten well off course from the topic in the Story Forum.