you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

I volunteered for a farmer co-op and I have to say small local communitarianism/utilitarianism has many socialsit parallels. However, I don't believe a corrupt state should control the means of production and your labor. But I believe that is socialism def. wrongly.

Public lands are a very interesting concept. Now everything is privatised and bought off. Land use to be a right under allodial title and God's Law, now it is based on financialization and privitisation.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Yes, socialism does NOT mean "the state taking ownership of the means of production". That's communism. Now it's true, some socialist countries such as Canada have the government owning utilities for example, such as multi-billion-dollar hydroelectric dams and their humongous distribution network. But such industries are few and far between, such as roads too for example.

Overall, socialism basically means tilting the economic balance BACK from over-exploitation and profiteering towards society somewhat. The extent of that "somewhat" is of course extremely variable. But without socialism, capitalism is utter savagery.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Though, let's be honest. It's effect can lead to such a system. Belloc's Distributionalism seems like a far better option.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

It can, but that's political: when the political system is hijacked by a deep state and foreign interests, how are the people to expect anything decent from it?

In the end only truly direct democracy is democratic. It is not the best system, for the best system is that of Aristotle: putting a superior being on the throne of dictator of the world. Works great in theory, but the practice is made difficult, especially in our era of mediocracy, by the fact that superior beings are the object of supreme hatred by their inferiors.

Generally speaking, the populace hates excellence and would never accept such a being as their ruler. Sort of a bad situation to be in.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

I think starting with the monetary system is a good bet. First, rid of usury, i.e., interest bearing loans as money.

superior beings are the object of supreme hatred by their inferiors.

There's no such thing as a superior being, except for Yeshua. That's why I think a decentralized individualist approach based on communitarianism is the only real answer. Maybe distribuism could also be imposed.

This is why I love real Christianity. Yeshua was the light of this world and the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, particularly modern Catholicism slowly bastardised his teachings, and the reformation did much of the same by making usury great again through Calvinism and the creation of usury capitalism without any moral code.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

But if he came back, and stayed for long, it would be appropriate that he took the position of Emperor of Earth or the equivalent, correct?

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

He wouldn't need to because all would follow Him and do good who remained the elect. But yes, even the elect can be mistaken, so he would need to take the position of ruler and kick satan off the thrown.

But today, we can live HIS will and open up the Kingdom of God within ourselves.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Your understanding of the interactions between planes of existence and the organization of spheres in the universe is sorely lacking.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Is this comment for me? God created the universe, all of it.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Yes it is for you. There is no "God". It is simply a word for primitive minds to latch onto as a placeholder for the Absolute forces of Person, Intelligence, Love, and Will. Understanding the nature of these forces in their Absolute aspect is the equivalent of understanding that there is no such thing as "God". It is time for humans to grow up and out of this underling mentality. The place of Man, the true Man, the Übermencsh, is as a peer to these forces. Not "equal to God" because there is no such thing, but as a peer to the Elders of the Universe. The Book of Urantia, while not wholly useful or trustworthy, sheds some light on these matters.

There is no "God". Yet His son came to Earth and performed a great sacrifice on behalf of Man and all that he stands for, in his light, bright, and beautiful aspect.