2007-03-22 19:01:37 · 11 answers · asked by Joey's Back 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The purest form of communal living was in convents and monasteries--where no individual "owned" anything, but each worked according to their ability, and each had an equal share in the benefits of that work. Communism?? You bet your @ss!
2007-03-22 19:38:57 · update #1
Marxism generally refers to a social theory based on the work of Karl Marx. Communism was sometimes seen as the end result of Marx theory although he never really described its particulars. Its broad goals were to establish a classless society with common ownership of the means of production. In reality these economic goals were forsaken as ruthless politicians gathered unto themselves dictatorial powers. In many cases these regimes were among the most brutal of the 20th century.
Communism is viewed as a branch of the broader socialist movement. Socialism, however, evolved -- particularly in Europe -- into a nonviolent movement aimed at reforming capitalism rather than overthrowing it.
Marxism, despite its secular nature, is rooted in European Christianity. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs," was lifted from 17th century Christian communism. Its basis is the New Testament, particularly the Acts of the Apostles where Luke taught that the believers held possessions in common and distributed them as needed.
.
2007-03-22 19:54:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, Christianity is one of the biggest historical sources of socialism. By the actual definition of that term.
Socialism is an economic model that relies on community (or govt) ownership of production resources and manufacturing. In medieval times, that meant owning the farmland, which the Christian church commonly did.
Socialism also includes providing large-scale social programs, in the form of mandatory charity. The Christian church for centuries had an enforced tithe, which was used to provide benefits for the poor and the sick.
In modern times, the Church has stopped doing most of these things. And socialism became linked with fascist governments, as opposed to its actual meaning as an economic model. I won't get into a comparison of Christianity and fascism, since that's a no-win debate.
2007-03-23 02:12:20 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
What do you mean by Christianity? The Christianity of Bush, Falwell, and Dobson? Then no, socialism is not in the picture.
On the other hand, if you mean the Christianity of what Jesus supposedly talked about as appears in the New Testament, then yes, socialism is preached.
There is a strong argument made by prophets and others in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament for a world of economic and social equality.
2007-03-23 02:06:01 · answer #3 · answered by Underground Man 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Socialism is the most Christian form of economy. Where everyone works for the common good. If people would do what they could and only take what they need no one would starve or suffer, and we would all be living great lives. It is the devils capitalistic greed that causes all economic strife.
2007-03-24 04:31:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think they are opposed at all...
I can't think of anything in the direct teachings of either that would contradict each other?
Communism in the 1900s often was "anti-religion"... but just because that's how it was done in several countries then, doesn't mean it's not compatible...
in fact, many of Jesus' ideas seem VERY socialistic in nature...
2007-03-23 02:26:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
To be completely honest. Christianity, when it was first formed, was socialism.
Socialism, in theory, makes a lot of sense. It is in the practical application that the main theory gets lost. Maybe that is because man, with all of his flaws, tries to implement it, then it becomes corrupted.
2007-03-23 02:35:42 · answer #6 · answered by mamadixie 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Lol, I saw the same response and I was perplexed. I was thinking of asking the same question...you beat me to it :o). If anything Jesus was a socialist, definetly not a capitalist. Cora already answered the question well, so no need to double answer...but kudos for seeing that too!
2007-03-23 02:20:40 · answer #7 · answered by ♥austingirl♥ 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
They are.
Most theocractical goverments of the past have been fascist.
Communism and fascism are essentially direct opposites.
2007-03-23 02:08:06 · answer #8 · answered by trevor22in 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Anybody who says that has not read the Sermon on the Mount
2007-03-23 02:36:23 · answer #9 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Gads, but I would like to read the answers to this absurd question.....so here goes.
2007-03-23 02:05:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋