domain:natesilver.net
Sure, "Science" has been the calling card for many a scientismist for quite a long time, core to their being as atheists. One question is whether this is truly "Christian heresy", but all these atheists have, indeed, been around for a long time. Plenty stretching back to antiquity and in non-Christian societies.
I'm not sure why we'd assume a continuity of ancient atheism and modern atheism. Atheism is a rejection of God(s). How we see gods influences it.
Consider New Atheism: their moral critique of Christianity was that it was a) unnecessary and b) insufficiently universalist because non-Christians are excluded from full communion. The latter is not a critique that ancient atheists would necessarily have cared about. Many groups bought into a universalist frame because of religions like Christianity. Same with individualism. Ethics doesn't actually obligate you to be a universalist. I've never understood Sam Harris' jump from the idea that we should avoid the worst possible misery for everyone (talk about reinventing religion...) to universalist utilitarianism. It's perfectly consistent to want to avoid it for my tribe alone. (And no, it doesn't actually follow that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice anywhere. This is a religious claim)
Criticisms of the morality of the Old Testament God are born of the same impulse that gave us an actual, clear Christian heresy like gnosticism: the god of the Hebrew Bible, at first blush, fails by the standards of the New Testament/NT-inspired modern morality. This is a problem caused by ending polytheism.
The other claim is that science can fill the role religion plays as an arbiter of truth, a moral authority and a source of meaning and the sense of the numinous. I see no reason for these to be basic atheistic assumptions. A lot of our debates are about principles, not factual. And truth doesn't have to be numinous.
Truth outside of Christianity is not actually synonymous with freedom, salvation or happiness. There are awful truths. There are useless truths. There is a real question of just how valuable the pursuit of Truth is. (Here we expect even more divergence from ancient atheists given we have proof of the power of science)
The idea that the pursuit of truth elevates one psychologically seems like something you believe if you inherit the view that learning about the mechanisms behind the world is learning about God's creation. Absent some beneficent creator, being made of stardust is nothing more than an admission of being crude matter.
KingOfTheBailey
17m ago
Dr. Jill Biden, 46th POTUS.
zeke5123a
23m ago
A lot of seems to be a joke. For example, the gas chamber comment was in reference to republicans that didn’t vote for him or even republicans that did but weren’t full throated supports. It seems obvious that he doesn’t and would never actually want to gas them. It’s a clear joke. Maybe the sin is it isn’t that funny but it is a joke.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
26m ago
Which of these communist agitators have been talking about violently seizing the means of production?
Tanista
36m ago
Americans, like empires before them, have failed to bring an end to this issue. Maybe the best move would be to cut their losses.
As they have with plenty of other conflicts where people just turn a blind eye.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
52m ago
Notably, Czechs and Slovaks retain the right of return, or just free travel, through each other's countries.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
55m ago
Marxist-Leninist line always was that feudal and capitalist culture is great and belongs to working class, what was wrong with it was that the oppressors kept it only for themselves.
Not always. The 20's and early 30's (aka the years of peak Marxism) were all about new culture and everything old was derided. I think [Alexander Nevsky (1938)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Nevsky_(film)) was the first instance when a historical figure, a "great man" was shown in a positive context. Before that, everything associated with the "great men" of old was held in contempt, as nobles and clerics and merchants of any kind, native of foreign, were viewed as the natural enemies of the "common men".
ControlsFreak
56m ago
If I could, I'd like to take a rain check on this. I have an effort post in the works, and I think it's going to include this (at this moment, there is a minor chance that a narrow component of this will get edited out of that one and pushed further, so please remind me if it does).
In the meantime, here are a few comments/chains which contain some elements.
OliveTapenade
1hr ago
Well, if we go up-thread, I have been reading this whole conversation as being about whether it makes sense to describe feminism as downstream of Marxism, a species of Marxism, cultural Marxism, etc.
In that context I made the point that feminism is a much broader stream than Marxism, and much less ideologically coherent - Marxism has a clear central thinker, Marx, canonical texts, and so on, while those are more up-for-grabs in feminism. I then noticed that the most prominent or influential feminist texts of the 20th century that I can think of don't seem particularly Marxist.
ThisIsSin replied by saying "Feminism is redistributionist at its core, though", which I took in context as disagreeing with me. I don't think ThisIsSin was saying "feminism, like all political and social movements, is redistributionist" - I think he was saying, "actually, Olive, I think this is a significant similarity between feminism and Marxism".
In that context I think it was reasonable to ask what kind of redistribution he was talking about, and then to suggest that redistribution alone is not enough to constitute a significant similarity to Marxism.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
1hr ago
My feel (can't of course fully tell the atmosphere as a non-American) is that this sort of a thing would have got a bigger reaction and more fallout in literally any preceeding era than the current one. At this point basically anyone in politics under 45, left or right, has probably factored in the idea that young right-wingers are going to make rape and Holocaust jokes in private groupchats, but it's still evidently a wild concept to those over 45. (Since the olds are also likely the ones who hold the purse strings in orgs like this, of course the organizational leadership also has to react.)
2D3D
1hr ago
The terms nazi or hitler has no common meaning anymore, but it must be emphasized that the public generally understands the intent of meaning based on who the speaker is. A right winger calling himself a nazi is appropriating the maximalistically offensive affect to piss off liberals since a 13-52 Noticer is equivalent to a nazi anyways. A left winger levelling the accusation is trying to reputationally damage the other party by association, not actually sincerely believing that the right winger wants to implement dirigisme economics or cease supporting israel. Even right wing conspiraticism about Israel is AIPAC Noticing and old school WASP contempt for an uppity ingerior. not left wing desires for Israeli disarmanent and Palestinian rightmaxxing so the jews can be sacrificed on the multicultural altar. @cjet79 is absolutely correct that the leak of this groupchat is lame pointscoring at its worst and in fact reinforces the notion that leftists are hypocritical scolds (we can celebrate charlie kirk getting capped but nono words are proof of the Bad Nazi!)
If there was another group that was categorically evil and widely understood as such the left would totally use that label on their enemies. The problem for the left is that the term has been so devalued thanks to overuse that the right can just yeschad the accusation, and the shifting of the overon window has made previously verboten issues like black underachievement fit for discussing now.
Primaprimaprima
Aliquid stat pro aliquo
1hr ago
I was gonna say that if this all blew over with nothing happening then I would finally admit that the pendulum is swinging and woke is on the downturn. But I see that a few people have already stepped down, so, yeah. Anyone trying to say that “the era of woke is over” is coping.
fluid_pride
1hr ago
MAGA is also characterized by a denial of objective truth and widespread kleptocracy
This is also very obviously true of the Democrat party (see, eg, Burisma, 50 years of NGO graft, and various officials claiming to have seen Joe Biden doing cartwheels). As such, it doesn't tell us anything in particular about MAGA, except that you don't like it.
MadMonzer
Epstein Files must have done something really awful for so many libs to want him released.
1hr ago
True, but building up a cadre willing and able to implement that plan requires significant preparation, and during that preparation the naïve will claim the ideology is all about peace and love, the brotherhood of man, and gradual, incremental, painless reform.
Lenin and Mao did not do that while building up their movements. Both were always clear that their goals required a violent seizure of power, followed by a violent purge of society.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1hr ago
Joke's on you, most of this applies to modern liberals as well.
MadMonzer
Epstein Files must have done something really awful for so many libs to want him released.
1hr ago
Not quite. There's a sub-set of the right that's very, very much into hating Russia.
Yes - but that is the pro-establishment right, who have been totally pwned in intra-right politics by the anti-establishment right.
There isn't a right-wing faction that are influential in the Trump administration or the MAGA movement more broadly that are "very much into hating Russia"
MadMonzer
Epstein Files must have done something really awful for so many libs to want him released.
1hr ago
Yeschad.jpg
If you look at the nature of the thing and not the political rhetoric, fascism and communism are more similar than different. If they were materially different, it would be obvious which Orwell's Oceania is. The whole point of Nineteen eighty-four is that it isn't.
MadMonzer
Epstein Files must have done something really awful for so many libs to want him released.
1hr ago
but it wasn't going to be captivated by communist agitators any time soon.
While I agree with you that the US is not actually in danger of imminent capture by communist agitators, a key part of the MAGA worldview is that the Democratic Party, Ivy League, mainstream media, FAANG middle management etc. already have been captured by communist agitators, and that the threat of said communist agitators consolidating power and imposing the Glorious Bugpod Future is an emergency that justifies tearing up the rulebook.
If "Drives support from small-c conservatives by exaggerating the threat of Communism" is a warning sign of fascism (and I think it is, though it is a long way from being pathognomic), then it is one of the warning signs that MAGA triggers.
SkoomaDentist
The Greater Finnish Empire
2hr ago
It should have been (and in some ways was!) the scandal of the century. All the more reason such mistake (giving a US president an entirely premature Nobel peace prize) shouldn't be repeated.
MadMonzer
Epstein Files must have done something really awful for so many libs to want him released.
2hr ago
The vast majority of political domestic terrorists in democracies are regionalist movements - normally full-on secessionists (like the IRA, ETA, and Tamil Tigers) but occasionally groups demanding a level of autonomy that would require the central government and its voter base to compromise their principles (like the first Klan and later the Redeemers in the former Confederacy).
Most such groups think that they have supermajority support among "their people" - they may even be right - but are aware that they don't have majority support or anything close to it in the country as a whole.
I think the same paradigm applies to the Black Panthers, Nation of Islam, and other radical Black groups in the US - the only reason that they aren't secessionist is the absence of a defined territory to secede in.
Avc87
2hr ago
If you truly believe you are living in a fascist country, or that fascism is a serious possibility in the near future, then you should obviously not take up arms. You should either keep your head down or flee.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
2hr ago
Such as JD Vance, whose only comment is to call it "pearl clutching"
He's got a good finger on the pulse. If you had the same access to 'Young Democrats' or whatever it is on a college campus, you could 'both sides' this pretty quickly. Edgy backroom shit-talking isn't the same as public mass incitement to violence.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2hr ago
Now I have to disagree with our vice president here, I don't think it is pearl clutching to oppose support of Hitler.
I probably should write something more elaborate, in the spirit of cjet's post, but I'm sorry I cant be arsed to take any of this seriously anymore. I believe all this is, in fact, pearl clutching, that there is no actual moral outrage expressed by people trying to make a mountain of this particular molehill, and it's just a cynical attempt to make the outgroup jump through the ingroup hoops.
I refuse, and I will need material evidence that anyone is actually bothered by any if this, before addressing it seriously.
They haven't - I think MAGA are wrong about the American establishment being full of communists - even with a small "c". But the whole point of the "cultural Marxist" meme as used by the right is to allow you to call people communists even if they are talking about racial equality and not violently seizing the means of production. Similarly "Bio-Leninism", which is a favourite of MAGA-friendly Motteposters.
But the question "Are left-wing authoritarian wokists communist?" is fundamentally irrelevant - it is an argument about the definition of a defeated ideology. It is no more useful than the question "Are right-wing authoritarian MAGA supporters fascist?" If you abstract out the meaning of controversial words and try to answer questions about the real world, the key questions are "Was there ever a real threat of a left-wing authoritarian woke takeover that would justify a right-wing authoritarian response?" (MAGA think the answer to this one is "Yes", and appear to do so sincerely) and "Is there a real threat of a right-wing authoritarian takeover under the Trump-Miller administration?" (The fact that Trump, Miller, and their supporters in the country all think that the answer to the first question is "Yes" is a large part of why the answer to the second question is "Yes")
More options
Context Copy link