No.1818661
>>1818368Explain how they can't. Priests can be communists, and serve the exact same role to a socialist state as they have in other states, i.e. as disseminators of ideology. The only difference would be that this would be a revolutionary socialist ideology justifying the socialist order in religious terms. This is the exact role they played under all previous modes of production.
No.1818696
>>1818661But i want to kill everyone that i dont like! Are you saying that the "communist terror" were just capitalist propaganda to say communists were monsters??!!? Damm this communism thing is boeing and radlib then.
No.1818895
>>1818595So all of history was a lie? The clergy wasn't persecuted and killed during and after the civil war?
No.1818899
>>1818382>>1818653>reactionary, mystic retardation is good because the people who do it are brown socdems from the third worldno, religion is not good because the working class likes it. its *OPIUM*
and no, im no "western radlib". get better arguments instead of ad hominems. im a working class latin american and an atheist. seeing your friends, neighbours and relatives fall into a cult because they have no faith in this shithole is despairing
No.1819027
>>1818899>strawmanits also the heart of an heartless world. People believe plenty of stupid shit, I'd rather focus the fight on actually harmful behavior. Then again, i also understand you'd be more inclined to fight them in a society where its more pervasive and lead more often to justification of bad shit, here the religious people know they cant use it to justify something in the public political space.
Intellectually I have problem with religion as organized power structures consolidating reactionary shit, not as a spirituality people use to comfort themselves or to act humanely.
>fall into a cultyou mean they became religious rather than were born into it ? sad, but that kinda mean a failure to offer a compelling alternative
No.1819029
>>1818895They were not killed because they were religious, they were killed because they supported the white army, they fought against the soviets. Why would the soviet union bother to kill anyone that was religious?
Like, where is the evidence of the USSR killing people because of their religious beliefs? Of course they made atheist propaganda, but that is it. Prove me wrong
No.1819206
>>1818899>no, religion is not good because the working class likes it. its *OPIUM*During Marx's time OPIUM was considered a good medicine that was given to those who feel depressed and those in pain. It was even given to pregnant women and children.
Look it up.
The quote means something different than you think.
No.1819212
Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htmAs long as the people are oppressed, there will be the necessity of some form of religious belief
No.1819239
I really wish mark fisher finished acid communism and killed the hard-line atheism is a necessary component of Marxism meme once and for all
No.1819263
>>1819206>During Marx's time OPIUM was considered a good medicine that was given to those who feel depressed and those in painIt was also known as an addictive and damaging substance in the 1800s, it was not by any imagination thought to be just this good drug, people were not just next level retarded in the past this is childish thinking… Besides these are books being written at the time of the opium wars…
I swear to god you people just spend your time thinking things you want to be true and believing them… jfc it's like dealing with American toddlers..
No.1819270
>>1819263In fact Marx would have literally lived through a opium epidemic in London with regular stories in the daily newspapers he read voraciously of children regularly dieing to overdoses across the workers slums.. ffs..
No.1819278
Even if you want to be like "hurr durr opium's a medicine" it's the dose that makes the poison.
No.1819371
>>1819263He wrote it in 1843.
At that time it was given to people in a less concentrated state, and as syrups and tinctures. Those were the popular methods of intake.
The high addiction waves started later when the concentration increased and people started taking high strength opiates via needles.
The "shit, we need to stop this" was a reaction to the high opioid addictions especially after the US civil war.
>people were not just next level retarded in the past this is childish thinking…We thought asbestos was fine, and CFCs, and radiation water, and lead in gasoline, and so on and so on.
Do yourself a favor and read some history, you'll be surprised how much "next level retarded" things were very common simply because their negative side effects weren't known.
For Marx, Heine and others who compared religion to opium at the time it would have been a different context and the meaning is more or less:
Religion is good against the pain of the world, but you should not rely on it as you'll literally be unable to perceive the pain and it does not solve the source of the problem.
No.1819383
>>1819263Reminds me of people who think pedophilia was accepted not very long ago just because child marriages existed (and weren't even the norm, and were actually looked down upon).
No.1819386
>>1819206>erm communism is compatible with religion because marx actually liked religion because of my interpretation of some epic quoteNo actual analysis here.
No.1819387
>>1819270>>1819371p.s. Cause people always name Opium wars as some kind of evidence that the Chinese knew that it's evil:
It was outlawed by some hyper-reactionary moralist Yongzheng, who also outlawed prostitution and martial arts in the same period around 1730.
During the 18th century you still had big trade of opium in China and later the Portuguese were delivering Opium to China, having a sort of international trade monopoly that was tax revenue and influence for the emperor.
The opium war was not some "le evil poisoning, muh racism", it was simply a military act to destroy the emperor's protectionism and get access to that market.
No.1819388
>>1819386>because of my interpretation of some epic quoteHave you even read the paragraphs around that quote?
Come back when you have.
No.1819392
>>1819388None of it says religion is good dipshit.
No.1819396
>>1819206>>1819386>>1819388Even funnier that they think Marx was somehow pro-opium given that he wrote extensively on the opium trade and its consequences lol.
Opium, a drug to dull the senses, to block out the world. Yeah totally supports it!
No.1819397
>>1819392I have summarized what he said. Why do you even strawman my summary? Like seriously, wtf is this waste of time where you argue against something that nobody said. Are you like some very contrarian autist or what?
>>1819396>Even funnier that they think Marx was somehow pro-opiumWhere did I say that?
No.1819399
>>1819027Lots of PB teens online use religion to carve out some pathetic identity that makes them feel special. The PB in general tend to be the most religious, I suppose it makes sense. Less involved with bourgeois science and the spread of cold hard market relations than the bourgeoisie proper, but incapable of the same revolutionary disillusionment as the proletariat.
No.1819429
>>1819371100% ahistorical.
How did you even find this website?
No.1819476
>>1819387You are full of shit.
Opium War started as a result of the Chinese government destroying all the opium they could in 1839. They fully outlawed it and in fact did consider it poison
<Let us ask, where is your conscience? I have heard that the smoking of opium is very strictly forbidden by your country; that is because the harm caused by opium is clearly understood. Since it is not permitted to do harm to your own country, then even less should you let it be passed on to the harm of other countries—how much less to China!https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/news-wires-white-papers-and-books/letter-queen-victoria No.1819497
>>1819476He's from the feels school of history do not waste your time.
No.1819525
>>1819476I bet you believe all the "we reduce your rights, because we want to protect you" narratives.
Strange how all the crackdown and hardline positions are always followed by leniency and soon a new wave of legalization.
It's as if the people in power use their power to create an environment from which they profit more.
But, hey, I guess it's easier to swallow all the "We good, they bad. This wise emperor is totally well meaning and utterly benevolent." nonsense.
Go back to licking Bill Gates and Bezos assholes if you are so gullible regarding propaganda coming from power.
>>1819429>>1819497You are just wrong and your understanding of history is secondhand hearsay from 20-something students who make bullshit memes on reddit after they saw bullshit memes on twitter.
inb4 "muh Chinese emperor was soooo great, how can you ever question motives."
No.1819603
>>1819525<n-no you…Anon it's so painfully obvious you dint have even a clue what you're talking about why dig this whole of ignorance and lies, you goy caught out, why not just say; 'yea, I was making stuff up' and move on from this in a constructive manner instead of essentially douling down on being a self-made fantastical moron?This level of ignorance as self inflicted as it is can end at any time, it only takes a simple choice.
No.1819620
>>1819387 Emperor Yongzheng reigned from February 5, 1723, to October 8, 1735.
The Opium Wars occurred from June 1840 to August 1842.
There's a gap of a hundred years in between. It was Emperor Daoguang who dispatched Lin Zexu to ban opium.
Did you come across this text on the English Wikipedia? I couldn't find any mention of Yongzheng's relation to opium on the Chinese Wikipedia or Baidu Baike. However, I did find something similar on the English Wikipedia page for Yongzheng.
On the ”中国鸦片史“ Wikipedia page, there is indeed a mention of an opium prohibition in 1729, but most Chinese people rarely discuss the connection between Yongzheng and the Opium Wars, given the hundred-year gap between them.
I'd like to ask, what does 'Glownonymous' mean? Is it a person or something else?
雍正在位 1723年2月5日至1735年10月8日
鸦片战争 1840年6月～1842年8月
中间相差了一百年，派遣林则徐禁止鸦片的是道光帝
你是在英文维基上看到这段话的吗，中文维基与百度百科的雍正词条我都没有看到他和鸦片的关系，而在英文维基的雍正词条上我看到了类似的
在“中国鸦片史”的维基上确实有提到了1729年的鸦片禁令，但是中国人大部分很少探讨雍正和鸦片战争的联系，他们的年份相差了一百年
我想问问“Glownonymous”是什么，是一个人吗，还是其它的意思
No.1819634
>>1819620>'Glownonymous' mean?It's just users connected through tor.
Jannie faggotry, last days of leftypol, etc etc.
No.1819645
>>1819634 Really?" Glowing." seems to be a reference to law enforcement agencies, don't tease me, your social credit score will decrease because of this.
真的吗？”发光“似乎是一个代指执法机构的梗，别捉弄我，你的社会信用分数会因此降低。
No.1819649
>>1819645It’s just a bunch of petty cope by Pasquale. Basically he’s been spending the last six months or so banning ips and vpns for years at a time, which consequently forces people to use the tor node if they want to post. Thus the labeling of all tor users as “glow” so he can poison the well and dismiss the vast majority of the site as butthurt glowies rather than people he’s banned and censored for no reason who are rightfully pissed
No.1819660
>>1819649We haven't really spoke about it on the board as far as I see but it'd probably an early step on removing the .onion.
Interesting that it's pasquale, that weirdo insta band me on sight, last time I used a Normal IP he banned me for a month for 'spam' after one post.
Seriously something wrong with him, think it's all because he's still mad I called him out as a misogynist in /ISG/, which I mean, he is, but it's an absurdly pathetic thing to get twisted and hold grudges over people he doesn't even know having such an analysis.
No.1819664
>>1819649 Related to internal affairs, well, it might be a bit sensitive.
“Tor“ Alright, I recall it now, seems like it's a software. Let me try to get one.
涉及内政，好吧可能有点敏感
”tor“好吧我记起来了似乎是一个软件，等一下我试着搞一个
No.1819670
>>1819649"Glow" is just a joke and I honestly prefer it over naked IP. Not sure why you think using is is bad.
>>1819660Why would forcing more users to use Tor be a step in getting rid of the .onion?
No.1819671
>>1819660But the onion. Makes us strong
Solidarity forever!
No.1819681
>>1819664Safe travels over Tor, anon. If you have trouble connecting, it is possible your ISP is blocking you from connecting to the relay network. If so, consider using a bridge, which is available in the Tor Browser under the connections tab in preferences. Bridges are used to hide your connections from your ISP, by masking it as a separate program, and this usually allows you to connect.
No.1819687
>>1819664 Okay, I can't post anything on Tor. I won't delve too much into things outside this thread, but maybe I'll ask about what's going on with this particular software in another thread.
I'm going to bed. I have classes tomorrow.
好吧我没法在tor上发东西，我不过多探讨线程之外的东西，或许我会在其它线程问问这个特殊的软件出了什么事
我睡了，明天还有课
No.1819705
>>1819687Leftypol where I am isn't blocked by GFW.
Tor is blocked by the GFW because it's, among other things, an NSA-controlled network.
If you really want to VPN, use V2ray (has Chinese instructions) or Trojan (not secure, but has instructions on Github) and set up a VPS in a European country.
No.1819716
>>1819705>tor is NSA Knew this was the direction you lot would go as soon as anon asked the question.
Autistic freaks who live in a fantasy hell of your own making.
Burgoid.
No.1819846
>>1819603Your guys' evidence is what exactly?
Some letter by some Chinese imperial administrator who didn't even send it to the queen?
And that's your primary source for your historically revisionist narrative.
No.1819914
>>1819846>And that's your primary source for your historically revisionist narrative.A least we have a primary source to use as evidence. What do you have other than your opinion?
No.1820289
>>1820153I've never met somebody so in love with their own ignorance before.
No really, how did you find this website?
No.1820322
>>1820153>it's about power and money, like alwaysYou are right that "power" (i.e national sovereignty) and "money" (i.e. economic policy) played a part. No country wants foreign interests to invade and forcibly control their economy and China should have been able to choose for itself it's own government policies.
But moral reasoning also plays a part in human actions and laws including when it comes to the state allowing addictive substances. That's why they invoked moral reasoning to justified their destruction of the Opium trade. Because it's an important part of humanity.
Whether the Emperor actually believed it or secretly thought opium was fine is besides the point.
No.1820565
>>1818366On god I need to find me a wife like that.
No.1820586
>>1817748>When you become anti-revisionistuygha what the fuck does that have to do with it? Even socdems are aware of it.
No.1821010
>>1820289>No really, how did you find this website?You are the monarchist shilling for the Chinese emperors policy of outlawing shit to then legalize it incrementally to control the market while believing that the moralism is true because some bureaucrat didn't wrote a letter that nobody received.
No.1821013
>>1820322>That's why they invoked moral reasoning to justified their destruction of the Opium trade. Because it's an important part of humanity.Hundred years prior they did exactly that. And then allowed it again, receiving paybacks from those who were granted the privileges.
Think about it:
If your country had outlawed unions with a excuse then allowed it again under government control, and then some time later brought up the same excuse to outlaw unions again… Like do you see what's happening there?
Watch the over regulation then leniency then over regulation then leniency in e.g. vaping. Every repetition of the cycle increases the power of the state and the establishment. After all is said and done you will see the industry be controlled by the same-old-same-old conglomerates and proxies of billionaire investment firms.
No.1821536
>>1821010>the monarchist shilling for the Chinese emperors policy of outlawing shit to then legalize it incrementally to control the market By the same reasoning you are a monarchist shilling for the English Queen's policy of controlling Chinese opium markets.
The main issue was national sovereignty not the specific government type, policy decisions or moral justifications.
>>1821013>Hundred years prior they did exactly that.So what? At least it was the Chinese government deciding it's own policies for it's own people even if it wasn't perfect it's still better than the English empire deciding.
>Every repetition of the cycle increases the power of the state and the establishment.Ok, and? Maybe people should be limited in how they consume addictive and cancerous substances like tobacco or opium. I think it's perfectly reasonable to restrict minors from consuming alcohol and tobacco for example. Maybe we shouldn't let markets completely determine what people consume or why.
>After all is said and done you will see the industry be controlled by the same-old-same-old conglomerates and proxies of billionaire investment firms.The whole point of socialism is to let workers control industries and get rid of conglomerates and billionaires. One day the workers will be directly making those decisions and they will need to use moral reasoning and judgement
You are right that specific moral justifications are very often a ploy for different political actors. Taking the moral justifications at face value doesn't explain the complexity of historical wars.
However you can still agree with those moral justifications despite it not being to only factor at play.
>the industry be controlled by the same-old-same-old conglomerates and proxies of billionaire investment firms. No.1821576
>>1821536>By the same reasoning you are a monarchist shilling for the English Queen's policy of controlling Chinese opium markets.They wanted to make money and justified it by being a benevolent provider of an important medicine.
That's the same level of "we are so good" moralism as was the moralism Chinese emperor.
I'm not shilling either. This sub conversation started because I was simply explaining to some guy that opium wasn't regarding as an evil drug in 1840 in the zeitgeist.
>So what? At least it was the Chinese government deciding it's own policies for it's own people even if it wasn't perfect it's still better than the English empire deciding.How is that even an argument unless you think from a racist perspective instead of a global one.
From a pure Marxist view the British Empire was historically ahead of the Chinese empire (Capitalism, Constitutionalism and ProtoSocdem vs. Monarchy/Feudalism)
If you think that the various people should govern themselves despite being on a less progressive level in socio-historic terms, then you would de-legitimize the global socialist revolution.
>One day the workers will be directly making those decisions and they will need to use moral reasoning and judgement I prefer the workers be educated by a truthful ideology that came from a well informed vanguard party. It's sad how misinformed some people here are when it comes to history.
Unique IPs: 18