Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I respect the Amish and the Hutterites. Their societies are ready-made for socialism. Both societies are chronicled in books by John Hostetler, himself a man born into the Amish community. Socialism will respect these people and leave them in peace.
Bulk orders for millions of books, to be destroyed.
The scene that supporters of an “angry early Christianity” love is that of Jesus overthrowing the table in the temple. Anyone would think it was a church hall jumblesale!
The tables were enormous and the antechambers to the temple colossal. The space was unbelievable and choc a bloc full of people, and soldiers policing them. Not only would Jesus be unable to overthrow the table, he would have been seized on the spot.I agree. It is a tragedy.
In Switzerland a friend saved what books he could from a spent bonfire where the university library had been burning old hardback books of classic literature.
Quite so, but that’s quite different from dumping books and knowledge/literacy of the past as “bourgeois” endeavours. That is Maoist.
I’m not a slum landlord because I read Cicero. And I’m not for doing away with his writings. Are people not to learn about him and his society? I never spoke of lionizing anyone either.
However, Cicero published Lucretius’ materialist work, On Nature, even though Cicero was a theist and idealist and strongly disagreed with it. Pseudo-Marxists, like Mao, are for destroying what they don’t agree with, not making it available.
I’ve heard once or twice this Maoist attitude from party members:
“Grammar is not important. It is bourgeois, and so is classical literature. So developments like ‘I could of’, ‘I would of’, etc. are perfectly logical as all things change, including speech and writing. So bourgeois rules will have no place in socialism, and the classics too were the voice of the ruling class, as were rules of grammar.”
So classical literature and philology too can be left to die.
And so I ask, how will anyone learn Latin and classical Greek without grammar? And I will receive the reply,
“Who the heck in socialism would want to waste their time with dead languages? They were another bourgeois imposition of the past.”Sounds more like Trumpianism than Marxism to me. I guess historical research and archaeology, and the understanding of discovered writings can all be dumped. After all, as Henry Ford said, “History is bunk.” “Yes. We could of told you that!”
That’s good.
When acquaintances stayed with me they would urge me to put on one of my favourite classic films. They would say they can’t wait.
So we would sit down, I’d put the film on, and immediately out would come their phones. They played silly zombie-hunt games on them until the end credits of the film came up. Then they’d say, “Oh crap! We missed it!”Some people live in the same house, and even sit in the same room, in silence, texting each other.
Christians were the biggest outright liars I have come across in history.
This included not only interpolating and inventing text, but in maligning with blatant falsehoods those whose ideas they loathed.
400 years after his natural death, Lucretius was said by St. Jerome to have killed himself through insanity. Why? Because Lucretius was a materialist thinker, and therefore must have been insane.“Thou shalt not bear false witness” indeed!
https://tass.com/politics/2170761
France blames wild fires on Russia.
It’s the same case with the Roman persecution, for which also there is no evidence. Christianity continues to exert the acceptance, without evidence, of historical fictions, including over the minds of non-Christians.
Not to say there was no Jesus, only that there is no evidence of such a person at all. He thus stands in the same relation to Santa Claus, or Conan the Barbarian. I’m sure there were barbarians with the name Conan.
If scientific evidence for God came to light, we would have to accept it. Doesn’t history deserve the same consideration?
