Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C

Codrus

@ Codrus @lemmy.world

Posts
0
Comments
66
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • Check this out, Tolstoy's Personal, Social, and Divine Conceptions to life: "The whole historic existence of mankind is nothing else than the gradual transition from the personal, animal conception of life (the savage recognizes life only in himself alone; the highest happiness for him is the fullest satisfaction of his desires), to the social conception of life (recognizing life not in himself alone, but in societies of men—in the tribe, the clan, the family, the kingdom, the government—and sacrifices his personal good for these societies), and from the social conception of life to the divine conception of life (recognizing life not in his own individuality, and not in societies of individualities, but in the eternal undying source of life—in God; and to fulfill the will of God he is ready to sacrifice his own individuality and family and social welfare). The whole history of the ancient peoples, lasting through thousands of years and ending with the history of Rome, is the history of the transition from the animal, personal view of life to the social view of life. The whole history from the time of the Roman Empire and the appearance of Christianity is the history of the transition, through which we are still passing now, from the social view to life to the divine view of life." - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God Is Within You

    "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherent the Earth." - Jesus, Matt 5:5

    Not the traditional Christianity; Revelation, Corinthians this or supernatural, spirtual that. One that consists of a more philosophical interpretation of The Gospels that's hiding underneath all the dogma ever since Paul. One that emphasizes The Sermon On the Mount, debately, the most publicized point of his time spent suffering to teach the value of selflessness and virtue, thus, the most accurate in my opinion. Tolstoy learned ancient Greek and translated The Gospels himself as: The Gospel In Brief, if you're interested. This translation I've found to be the best:

    https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Brief-Harper-Perennial-Thought/dp/006199345X/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=3D3DFNAHJZ0HW&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.PDu_uq6qxVnvpJz0KIG-b3A_2LHIOiMZVR0RKKtF83S6AFUEgh9WpJkMXm4L9m8wgaDpLwiy9wO3DcM6mWe8437xrZ3VoRRh78Xrvbtsok_AvOSV4XHBkbDXhJLt0i0oZki2XoDQ4FrSTXKpK29x_EJzw2574ecE-w-WAqvm_uxLyQkWJQl2nN__-z-W8ndodRZXs0hMU2WgkkyncC7pSg.f9O0rDg6mxe0FRxZXY5PIdYhSUieBDWJ45gCAINx75k&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+gospel+in+brief&qid=1734199112&sprefix=the+gospel+in+brief%2Caps%2C158&sr=8-1

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • Check this out, Tolstoy's Personal, Social, and Divine Conceptions to life:

    "The whole historic existence of mankind is nothing else than the gradual transition from the personal, animal conception of life (the savage recognizes life only in himself alone; the highest happiness for him is the fullest satisfaction of his desires), to the social conception of life (recognizing life not in himself alone, but in societies of men—in the tribe, the clan, the family, the kingdom, the government—and sacrifices his personal good for these societies), and from the social conception of life to the divine conception of life (recognizing life not in his own individuality, and not in societies of individualities, but in the eternal undying source of life—in God; and to fulfill the will of God he is ready to sacrifice his own individuality and family and social welfare). The whole history of the ancient peoples, lasting through thousands of years and ending with the history of Rome, is the history of the transition from the animal, personal view of life to the social view of life. The whole history from the time of the Roman Empire and the appearance of Christianity is the history of the transition, through which we are still passing now, from the social view to life to the divine view of life." - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God Is Within You

    "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherent the Earth." - Jesus, Matt 5:5

    Not the traditional Christianity; Revelation, Corinthians this or supernatural, spiritual that. One that consists of a more philosophical interpretation of The Gospels that's hiding underneath all the dogma ever since Paul. One that emphasizes The Sermon On the Mount, debately, the most publicized point of his time spent suffering to teach the value of selflessness and virtue, thus, the most accurate in my opinion. Tolstoy learned ancient Greek and translated The Gospels himself as: The Gospel In Brief, if you're interested. This translation I've found to be the best:

    https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Brief-Harper-Perennial-Thought/dp/006199345X/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=3D3DFNAHJZ0HW&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.PDu_uq6qxVnvpJz0KIG-b3A_2LHIOiMZVR0RKKtF83S6AFUEgh9WpJkMXm4L9m8wgaDpLwiy9wO3DcM6mWe8437xrZ3VoRRh78Xrvbtsok_AvOSV4XHBkbDXhJLt0i0oZki2XoDQ4FrSTXKpK29x_EJzw2574ecE-w-WAqvm_uxLyQkWJQl2nN__-z-W8ndodRZXs0hMU2WgkkyncC7pSg.f9O0rDg6mxe0FRxZXY5PIdYhSUieBDWJ45gCAINx75k&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+gospel+in+brief&qid=1734199112&sprefix=the+gospel+in+brief%2Caps%2C158&sr=8-1

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • How does this answer my question? I'm not following.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • My apologies, please forgive me. Good day to you and happy new year my friend.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • This is regarding a circumstance in the midst of your point view, of how we would typically respond to evil inherently—in the midst of battle, etc.

    I'm referring to going about it in a more organized, collective manner; especially one that makes it very clear who the bad guys really are, and why were doing it especially. A way that quite frankly, I'm wildly ignorant to, because of not only how little this idea has been practiced throughout the centuries due to our inherency to the opposite—and I'll admit it's ability to hold up nowadays with nuclear bombs and still so much oath taking going on and how little the relevance of selflessness is from becoming common knowledge; it makes it all very doubtful. But honestly, I'd rather die giving up my life for a cause with the most amount of potential for peace behind it, opposed to the one thats lead the to the need for anyones life needing to be taken in the first place, that would otherwise lead God awful amounts of men to be forced into dying in my stead, or to be yet another amoungst the cattle bring butchered in war myself.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • Resisting what an attacker expects back is far from doing nothing. The trickle of love or hate in the world begins and ends with the individual. I'm not saying stand by and watch as the world burns, I'm saying resist what would otherwise lead its inevitable destruction anyway, and what lead to it beginning to burn in the first place, in any circumstance, now and forever.

    To hate back is to only fan this flame, and accelerate this process, and decelerate any potential for the opposite; of peace.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • Please consider reading Leo Tolstoy's non-fiction regarding this matter, specifically The Kingdom Of God Is Within you. You're rebukes are the same he address in a more clearer and detailed way. I can't tell you how niave it is of you to say the things your saying in its regard, when you've clearly never even considered it in its entirety for yourself.

    India's independence wasn't gained through violence. Neither were the Jim Crow Law abolished via violence, not to mention the sacrifice of King Codrus that influenced Greek men throughout the centuries afterward: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codrus, and all the other examples I'm ignorant to, not to mention how obviously effective it is on a smaller level—arguments, the bully at school, the tailgater; you're calling a universally renowned way of reacting to things you hate more maturely as naive, my friend.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • The men that made up the Nazi regime were men, dooped into believing beyond any shadow of a doubt the Jews weren't. No amount of equal parts hate and evil will ever truly eliminate it. Only our knowledge of love as a species has that ability—of virtue and selflessness. The knowledge of never taking tha oaths we take to ourselves and to other men that lead to any war at all in the first place needs to be gained. And you can't wake up someone (especially a group of people) who's been convinced beyond questioning that they need to eliminate you by trying to do the same back. Only the opposite truly has that ability, ultimately.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • From my point of view, it wasn't. World War 2 was nothing but violence tumbleweeding into more and more. Who can say how many less lives would have been forced into losing if we would've been appealing to the people of Germany and the men that make up its army—that have been dooped by Hitlers propaganda for years regarding Jews. Nothing but incessant of the opposite of what the Nazi's had to offer would have woken them up from all their "oath-taking" so to speak, to stop it from continuing as long as it did.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • I've been doing nothing but try and shed light on the fact that murder, regardless of how its seen, never should be championed, but shouldn't be hated though at the same time, to the point where we think murdering the murderer is justified therefore.

    You're the one trying to apply inapplicable ethical questions to it, in attempt to justify it. When I'm not arguing it's justification, no amount of murder is just to any degree in my opinion. I've been arguing that your hate is no different from anyone others, including and especially, anyone your hate is intended for.

    We shouldn't be championing a murderer the way they're championing a rapist.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • My problem isn't thinking it can, it's knowing it absolutely can, by it doing exactly that in very memorable moments of even recent history. Of course the more barbaric the more incapable of teaching it the error of its ways though love, that's why it's a knowledge that needs to be gained, taught, transfered throughout the centuries. By responding to the barbarian with yet more hate is to only poke at its instinctive need to retaliate, but to at least do nothing at all, and avoid it—using our knowledge to find ways around it. Is it the pets fault the pet peed in the house, or the only one of the two that's even able to know any better? Selfishness, hate—doesn't know any better, love does. Therefore it's loves responsibility to respond to it the most reasonably, even if it's at its own expense, because again it would be wrong to throw the blind man in contempt for making blind like mistakes. It literally doesn't know they just walked into the wrong bathroom etc.

    Just because something is to barbaric or "sociopathic" doesn't make it impossible to respond to it without retaliation in some way, or irrelevant to do so, it just makes it an obstacle for those surrounding it that are presently lucky enough to know better to find a way around the problem so to speak, to cater to it even; to toss away what our barbaric instinct would demand of us in the moment and replace it with the logic and reason that a selfless state of mind brings otherwise.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • The original question was specifically: people championing a rapist (Trump), people championing a murderer (Luigi)—what's the difference? Both are championing a great act of terrible violence, both sides just as convinced as the other of its justification; murder is murder, it doesn't matter if it's Hitler or yet another CEO to be replaced. Rape is rape, murder is murder, bad is bad—no matter the extent we take oaths to how justified it is for doing so.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • The problem is however, amongst these two levers in particular, only one—ultimately, holds the potential of not only the least amount of lives lost, but the least amount of potential violence and the most potential for truly—again ultimately, reaching the day where at the very least violence is considered obsolete, and no longer necessary.

    The other only offers more of the same; it isn't anything new but more of what history teaches only creates even more of: hate. The only true remedy to what you or anyone considers as hate—in any given point in time—is love, even to the point of self-sacrifice. It's being abscent the true woes of violence that lead most to so easily conclude responding to it with love as nonsense.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • I don't think you're catching on, lets try it like this: people championing a rapist, and people championing a murderer—what's the difference? Either way both sides are championing a terrible thing, regardless of how justified either side convinces themselves that it's not.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • And again I ask you: what's the difference between your reasoning that leads you to consider murder as justified, and the reasoning of even the very man you're accusing? Even if it's Hitler for God's sake; by making the claim you're stating that your justifications to what you consider as justified murder aren't any different from if they came from Trumps reasoning. Murder is murder, even if it's seen as something that's being done for good. Because on the other side of things their convinced of the same thing.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • My original question was: Rape in trumps regard, and murder in this one—what's the difference?

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • Appreciate this comment well said my friend, refreshing to hear.

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • So who you rape matters? So if Trump raped what he considers as the worst of the world or someone he considers that deserves it and that it's unquestionably justified for doing so, that makes it okay?

  • Locked

    Bernie was our compromise

    Jump

  • So who you rape matters? So if Trump raped what he considers as the worst of the world or someone he considers that deserves it and that it's unquestionably justified for doing so, that makes it okay?