blackbird

"socialism, System of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control; also, the political movements aimed at putting that system into practice. Because “social control” may be interpreted in widely diverging ways, socialism ranges from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal. The term was first used to describe the doctrines of Charles Fourier, Henri de Saint-Simon, and Robert Owen, who emphasized noncoercive communities of people working noncompetitively for the spiritual and physical well-being of all (see utopian socialism). Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, seeing socialism as a transition state between capitalism and communism, appropriated what they found useful in socialist movements to develop their “scientific socialism.” In the 20th century the Soviet Union was the principal model of strictly centralized socialism, while Sweden and Denmark were well known for their noncommunist socialism. See also collectivism; communitarianism; social democracy." socialism summary | Britannica There are different shades and kinds of Socialism. You can also have Socialism in different areas of life in a country. In Canada, we have Socialism in the education system. This is based on the humanist ideology that government knows what is best for everyone's kids. Government believes that the nuclear family is not the foundation of society, but that government is now the basis of society. It is based on the belief that government knows more than the parents about matters that the government has no business in. Government also uses the education system to brainwash kids into believing that government knows best about everything and that it is best to regard the government as a god. The education system in Canada is basically a pagan or heathen system.

We're not talking about taxes for essential services. The topic is about Socialism and Communism.

You have to read that verse in context with verse 29. It is not talking about government taking money from anyone. Neither is it talking about a person taking money from someone else. That would be stealing which is condemned in the Bible. Did you bother reading the commentaries and thinking about them? You replied so fast I don't think you really read much and considered it. You said " it doesn't really change anything if the government run the money or individuals." I don't think you really understand anything I've said. Nobody, government or individuals, has the right to take money by force from an individual. That would be theft. That is what Communism or Socialism does. It takes wealth by force from people. That is very simple and basic. Do you get it?

Jesus never taught to take away wealth or money from someone to give to others. You are badly deceived. The verses you quoted have nothing to do with Communism or Socialism or wealth redistribution. . Is is not talking about government taking anything from anyone. It is talking about providence or possibly God taking wealth or spiritual gifts or grace away those who waste or don't use it properly. There is nothing there about government seizing someone's money or property to give to to others for wealth redistribution. " The Christian's spiritual forces are developed by being properly directed; Providence puts in his way added opportunities, and as he uses these he is more and more strengthened and replenished." Read verse 29. It says take a talent from someone and give to him that has ten talents. That would be contrary to Communism. In Communism or Socialism, everyone is supposed to be equal. The idea in Communism is to redistribute the wealth to make everyone equal, not take from a poor person and give it to the rich. That is the opposite of Communism. You ideas do not agree with the Bible which respects private property and says thou shalt not steal. The following Bible commentary explains those verses in Matthew 25:28, 29. quote Pulpit Commentary Verse 29. - Unto every one that hath... abundance (Matthew 13:12). So we have seen in the first part of the parable. The proverb says, "Money makes money;" a man who has capital finds various means of increasing it; it grows as it is judiciously employed. Thus the grace of God, duly stirred up and exercised, receives continual accession, "grace for grace" (John 1:16). The Christian's spiritual forces are developed by being properly directed; Providence puts in his way added opportunities, and as he uses these he is more and more strengthened and replenished. From him that hath not (ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ μὴ ἔχοντος). So the Received Text, probably from Luke 19:26; the best manuscripts and editions read, τοῦ δὲ μὴ ἔχοντος, but as to him that hath nat; this, followed by ἀπ αὐτοῦ at the end of the verse, is less tautological than the other reading. To "have not," in accordance with the context, signifies to possess nothing of any consequence, to be comparatively destitute, in the world's estimate of riches. Shall be taken away even that which he hath; even that which he hath shall be taken away from him. The Vulgate, following some few manuscripts, has, Et quod videtur habere auferetur ab eo, from Luke 8:18. The poor unpractical man shall lose even the little which he possessed. So the spiritually unprofitable shall be punished by utter deprivation of the grace which was given for his advancement in holiness. If applied to the special circumstances of the time and of the persons to whom it was addressed, the parable would teach that the disciples who recognized and duly employed the riches of the doctrine and powers delivered unto them would receive further revelations; but that the people who spurned the offered salvation and neglected the gracious opportunity would forfeit the blessing, and be condemned. Matthew 25:29 This could be referring to material wealth or spiritual wealth, abilities, knowledge, and saying the unwise or unpractical man shall lose even the little he has if he does not use it properly. This has nothing to do with government ordained Communism. Another Bible commentary (Barnes commentary) says: "For unto every one that hath shall be given - See the notes at Matthew 13:12. This seems to be a proverbial expression. It means, whosoever rightly improves what is committed to him shall receive more, or shall be rewarded; but he that misimproves what is committed to him shall not be rewarded. In pecuniary matters in the literal sense of this parable they who improve their money by industry or merchandise increase it. They who do not who are indolent or vicious lose what they did possess, and it goes into the hands of the faithful and industrious. In the spiritual sense of the parable it means that they who are faithful shall be rewarded - not, however, that anything shall be taken from the unfaithful and given to them; and it means also that the unfaithful and indolent shall be taken away from their privileges and punished."

If anyone is familiar with what goes on in China, they will know that there are pictures of Chairman Mao everywhere. He is a kind of god. This is how the Communist Party forces the people to accept the Communist ideology and give it their highest allegiance. While China has permitted private companies, these companies are still all under the watchful eye and control of the Communist Party. It is clear the Liberal government in Canada believes similarly that they must control everything that companies do in Canada. We see that control extending deeply into the energy sector under the pretext of fighting climate change.

You totally misinterpret the Bible. You never read the information I posted which explains it. The charity that Jesus taught was speaking about individual charity, that is, giving to the poor voluntarily. It never endorsed Communism which is totalitarian government taking people's property or money by force and redistributing it. That is not what Jesus was talking about. Do a little search on the internet. Put Communism or Socialism and the Bible in a search window and read some of the articles. Your interpretation comes from Karl Marx, not Jesus or the Bible. Therefore what you are saying is complete heresy You clearly have no idea what the Bible teaches. You condone government stealing from those that have to give to others is Satanic and heretical. You talked about a rich man and Lazarus. That was about two people only. Nothing about a Communist government or Socialist government taking by force from the rich to give to the poor. Jesus never supported Communism. Communism is an evil system that denies everyone's freedom. There is no charity when people are robbed at gunpoint, which you support.

You are living in an alternate reality. You have no clue what the Bible teaches or even what Communism is. " The New Testament also condemns theft, which implies the right to private property: Ephesians 4:28 Let him who stole steal no longer, but rather let him labor, working with his hands what is good, that he may have something to give him who has need. 2. Jesus would oppose Communism because the Bible – which carries the message of Jesus – tells us that the family is the main economic unit for society, not the state." Scroll back up and read the information about what the Bible teaches. You obviously never read it. Why waste our time on here if you don't read anything and just keep parroting the same old nonsense.

You obviously did not read the articles I posted. The verses you mentioned have absolutely nothing to do with Communism. Loving your neighbour is an individual teaching on how you are to treat other people. It has nothing to do with a government confiscating everyone's property to give to other people. The commandment against stealing and other related verses should tell you that state-ordained stealing is wrong, i.e. Communism or Socialism.

Sorry, but you are completely wrong. quote WAS JESUS A COMMUNIST? What Is Communism? Four quick points… No private ownership of property; everything is held collectively by the people. The state, the government, holds, plans, spends, distributes builds in the name of the collective, the people. Every person works according to their ability, every person receives according to their need. Workers aren’t exploited by owners who only care about profits. Comparing this understanding of Communism, Jesus was not a communist. 1. Jesus would oppose Communism because He affirmed the Old Testament, which clearly affirms the right of private property, especially in the command to not steal (Exodus 20:15). Matthew 5:17–19 Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. The New Testament also condemns theft, which implies the right to private property: Ephesians 4:28 Let him who stole steal no longer, but rather let him labor, working with his hands what is good, that he may have something to give him who has need. 2. Jesus would oppose Communism because the Bible – which carries the message of Jesus – tells us that the family is the main economic unit for society, not the state. The whole law of Moses distributed land according to family and was held in trust by the family – not the state. 1 Timothy 5:8 is a remarkably strong statement, part of the instructions for the support of widows where Paul stated that widows should not receive the financial support of the church if they had family that could support them. 1 Timothy 5:8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his own household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. 3. Jesus would oppose Communism because the message of the Bible is of radical generosity and sharing among believers – but voluntary, free-will giving. There’s a big difference between koinonia (community, sharing) and Communism, and one of the differences is coercion. 4. Jesus would oppose Communism because the amount of state power and coercion and force necessary for a planned economy goes against the Biblical principle of freedom, of liberty. The proclamation of liberty is a huge idea in the scriptures. It’s for freedom that Christ set us free. There’s a legitimate debate to have among Christians about the balance between freedom and security or freedom and equality – but the totalitarian state required to make Communism work is, in my opinion, far out of bounds in this debate. There’s a reason why Communist states have been atheistic and have been violent, persistent persecutors of Christianity (and other religions). unquote Was Jesus a Communist? – LIVE Q&A with David Guzik – January 26, 2023 - Enduring Word You said: "Everything that comes from the Old Testament is not Christian but Jewish. Christianity refers to the teaching of Jesus Christ, not Moses." Here again you are incorrect. I don't know where you got that idea. "1. Jesus Recognized the Entire Old Testament as Authoritative Jesus’ view of the Old Testament can be seen by the way He used the Old Testament Scripture. He recognized the entire Old Testament as Scripture, He accepted the two main divisions of the Old Testament, the Law and the Prophets, and He quoted from fourteen individual books of the Old Testament." What Was Jesus’ View of the Old Testament? by Don Stewart (blueletterbible.org) From start to finish, the New Testament contains quotations, references, allusions, and paraphrases of the Old Testament. Sometimes, the New Testament follows the Hebrew text, in other cases, it more closely follows the translation into Greek of the Old Testament called the Septuagint. In my traditional Jewish upbringing in Brooklyn, New York, our family comfortably referred to “the Old Testament”, although many other Jewish people prefer to call it the “Hebrew Bible” or the “Tanakh”. Yeshua (Jesus) demonstrated intimate familiarity with the Tanakh when he spoke, taught, and served—often drawing surprising insights from the Scriptures." Jesus’ References to Old Testament Scriptures - Jews for Jesus

10 reasons why socialism, Marxism are antithetical to biblical Christianity " Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote The Communist Manifesto in 1848, relating it to what they called “scientific socialism.” The 20th century and beyond are fraught with examples of the embarrassing failures of both communism and socialism (i.e., The former Soviet Union, Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba, Soviet-era Eastern Germany, to name a few). Despite this dubious history, we currently have high-profile political leaders, like congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez promoting a form of Marxism called “democratic socialism.” 1. Socialism is against the biblical view of the nuclear family. Marxists argue that “the nuclear family performs ideological functions for Capitalism — the family acts as a unit of consumption and teaches passive acceptance of hierarchy. It is also the institution through which the wealthy pass down their private property to their children, thus reproducing class inequality.” Hence, socialism is against the biblical principle of parental rights related to their children and the prominence of the nuclear family (Genesis 1:28-29, Proverbs 22:6, Ephesians 5:22-6:4). 2. Socialists claim education belongs solely to the state Marxist education aims at producing faithful citizens. Therefore, it is primarily an ideological tool to program children to be loyal to the state. In communist and socialist nations, education and the curriculum are controlled by the state and are not considered the responsibility of the parents. Models like homeschooling children would be illegal. This contradicts the biblical framework regarding parents being responsible for educating their children the way they choose (Proverbs 22:6; Deuteronomy 6:6-9). 3. Socialists claim the state deserves the highest allegiance In many communist nations like the former Soviet Union and modern-day countries like North Korea and China, Bibles are confiscated, church buildings are burned, and evangelism is illegal. This is because they see Christianity as a rival religion to the authority of the humanistic secular state. This goes against the biblical command to put first God’s Kingdom and worship and serve Jesus as the only true Lord (Matthew 6:33; 1 Timothy 6:15). 4. Socialists believe in the abolition of private property in land and the application of all rents of land to public purposes This is antithetical to the biblical premise of the individual right to own private property and the command for believers to create wealth to promote God’s covenant (Exodus 20:15; Deuteronomy 8:18; 1 Kings 20:6, Isaiah 65:21-22; Mark 10:39-21). 5. Socialism advocates a progressive income tax In a socialist system, people are taxed based on their income. This is called a progressive tax structure. As an example of the influence of socialism in the United States, “The top 1% (taxpayers with AGI of $546,434 and above) earned 20.1% of total AGI in 2019 and paid 38.8% of all federal income taxes. 6. Socialism opposes the rights of a family inheritance In a contemporary Marxist and socialist framework, either leaving an inheritance to children is not allowed, or the state confiscates much of the family inheritance through double taxation. This goes against the biblical principle of leaving an inheritance to children (Proverbs 13:22). 7. In socialism, the state attempts to control all communication “In socialistic countries, centralization of the means of communication and transport is in the hands of the State.” In communist nations, people are not allowed to have freedom of speech. Violations can be severely punished. 8. In socialism, a utopia comes from a revolutionary change from the outside in “Marx’s utopianism lay in the aim of abolishing the distinction between state and civil society, and in the harmony he assumed would emerge.” This goes against the biblical principle that systemic change doesn’t start from the outside. Instead, it starts from the inside when people are born again in their hearts from above (John 3:3-8). 9. Socialism categorizes people as either the oppressed or the oppressors The Marxist revolutions were started by inciting the so-called proletariat to overthrow the social systems of the so-called bourgeoisie, thus pitting poor and rich citizens against each other. This violates the biblical principles of justice and impartiality in which God commands us not to show favoritism to either the rich or the poor (Leviticus 19:15). 10. Socialists believe the Government is responsible for all social care In socialist and communist countries, the state is responsible for caring for the poor and providing all goods and services necessary for citizens. They would conceptually view families, churches, and nonprofits as competition to the state if they attempted to do the same. unquote For the complete article go to: 10 reasons why socialism is antithetical to biblical Christianity | Voice (christianpost.com) Socialism basically is a system which controls every aspect of everyone's life. The question now is to what degree has Canada become Socialist? I know from experience the first question someone, usually a liberal or leftist, will ask is are you against the public health care system or all the services that government provides. The answer is that is purely a hypothetical question and cannot be answered. The reason is because we have no choice. We now have the system we have and do not have the opportunity to try a non-Socialist system. There is no alternative which makes the question hypothetical or meaningless.

You hit the nail on the head Army Guy. Many Canadians expect it all but don't understand somebody has to pay for it. The Liberals and NDP have capitalized on this perverse thinking. The problem is when the debt gets high, the interest for the debt takes over control and take the countries finances. Interest does not provide any services but because the government has to pay the interest on the debt, that takes away from the finances available for services. Yet, as you say, the left is constantly demanding more services. The consequence of this is the services we have are being deprived of the resources they require to continue to function properly. We are seeing this with the failing health care system, the failing Canadian Armed Forces. While vital existing services are being negatively affected, the Liberals are still going around throwing out billions of dollars. The latest things include twenty something billion for subsidizing EV battery plants. They are also this very day trying to kill the energy industry with new regulations about forcing the cap on emissions. These regulations are being imposed without a clue how such a thing could be done without seriously undermining or killing the energy industry. The energy industry is a major source of national and provincial revenue for Canada that provides all the services such as health care, etc. Meanwhile Canada has buried itself itself in red tape and regulations at all levels of government so that it is nearly impossible to get things done such as building housing, open new mines, and develop natural resources and ship them. The ideology of the government is also impeding services to the public and paralyzing Canadian initiative and self improvement. If young people can't afford to pay the outrageous rents to go to university or the tuitions, how will new professionals ever be trained. Where will the nurses, doctors, and others come from? It can't be solved by simply bringing in third world immigrants because a lot of them can hardly speak a word of English. Believe me I know it from personal experience. The system is putting people who are unable to speak English in high professional positions now.

Sorry, I didn't notice CdnFox already posted this.

Pierre Poilievre explains what the problem is causing the housing crisis and how the Conservatives would deal with it. Quite an informative video. Reportedly approaching 4 million views already. To view, scroll down the screen to the X Video showing Trudeau on a red background and click on that screen. HOUSING HELL: Poilievre lays blame on Trudeau for housing crisis in short doc (msn.com)

The truth is the Palestinian children and young people are taught to hate Israel and the Jews from day one. That is just the way they grow up. There are some Palestinians that work in Israel and have realized that hate is a fruitless path but they do not control the majority living in the West Bank, Gaza, and elsewhere in the middle east. Since there is nothing that anyone can do to change that, things will just continue the way they are indefinitely.

Melanie Joly, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, was on the news this morning again touting a "two-state" solution for Israel and the Palestinians. It is clear she has no idea of what the causes of the conflict are. A so-called two-state solution would not work for several reasons. 1. The Arabs (or many of them) have absolutely no inclination to give up their belief that Israel has no right to exist and their desire to destroy Israel. This struggle has been going on for centuries and is not going to disappear by simply carving up Israel and giving the Palestinians half of the land. 2. Cutting out half of the land of Israel would seriously threaten its security and ability to defend itself. So as far as Israel is concerned they will never allow it to happen. They are in the best position to see how determined Iran and the terrorist organizations are determined to eliminate them. So it is a waste of breath for the Minister of Foreign Affairs to keep harping on that line. We know it obviously sounds good to simpletons and therefore plays well to the base. But it is totally unrealistic.

I can tell you the DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) ideology and policies are having a devastating effect on many Canadians. These policies are resulting in people who are unable to speak English being put into positions that seriously and negatively affect Canadians. Yet they are there trying to provide services to the public. I ran into two of them lately. One was in a critical position in the health care system. One of them phoned me to discuss serious health care issues. Unfortunately for me I could barely understand a word that was said. The second serious incident happened today when I phoned the Walmart support number to find out why I had been double-billed for a load of groceries. I could barely understand a single word. It was very frustrating and we both struggled for quite a while to finally get to the answer. In both cases their accents were strongly east Indian or from that area of the world. These people are being put in key positions regardless of their lack of ability to communicate with the population of Canada. It appears the ability to communicate with the people they are supposed to be serving is a very low priority. What is important is giving the appearance of implementing DEI. Of course in Jagmeet Singh's case, the problem is not lack of ability to speak English. The problem is his ideology is completely alien and screwed up. There is nothing rational about someone who rejects free enterprise in the west and embraces Socialist authoritarian types of government.

Your comments make little sense. Did you read it over before you posted it? The first paragraph makes absolutely no sense and seems to have nothing whatsoever to do with my comment. Not sure what you're trying to say there. Don't know what natives have to do with blasphemy. In the second paragraph, are you complaining about authoritarianism? Not sure where in my post authoritarianism comes into it. Don't think banning blasphemy is authoritarian or unreasonable. What is unreasonable is course loud mouth reprobates that go around cursing and blaspheming and spitting on the street. These people should be in a mental institution. Obviously they were never taught anything. You know in the Old Testament blasphemy was considered a serious crime. "To blaspheme is to speak with contempt about God or to be defiantly irreverent. Blasphemy is verbal or written reproach of God’s name, character, work, or attributes. Blasphemy was a serious crime in the law God gave to Moses. The Israelites were to worship and obey God. In Leviticus 24:10–16, a man blasphemed the name of God. To the Hebrews, a name wasn’t just a convenient label. It was a symbolic representation of a person’s character. The man in Leviticus who blasphemed God’s name was stoned to death." What is blasphemy? What does it mean to blaspheme? | GotQuestions.org "The “supremacy of God” is a section in the Constitution of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedom. The phrase in the charter states, “Canada is grounded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God”. Therefore blasphemy is an insult to God and country since the country is theoretically governed by the Constitution and the Charter which specifically state that the said Charter recognizes the supremacy of God. There it is in black and white. Contrary to what multiculturalists and ecumenical people of various religions say, the God mentioned in the Charter can only be referring to the God of Christianity and the Bible because there is no other God. No politician or judge has the power to change the fact that there is only one God, the God who inspired the Bible, in English, the King James Bible of 1611.

The so-called rebate for carbon tax paid is not actually a rebate because it does not compensate fully those who paid the carbon tax. Carbon taxes are charged to those who use natural gas for heating and run private or commercial motor vehicles. The rebate has nothing to do with how much anyone paid in carbon taxes. The rebates go to those in the lowest income brackets whether they paid any carbon taxes or not. It is not related to how much carbon taxes they paid. So it is a redistribution of income scheme. It also doesn't matter how much one receives for income. One could be on a pension and still pay relatively high carbon taxes if he has a natural gas heating system which requires a lot of natural gas and if he is living in a remote place and is required to drive great distances. Also, if one drives a truck and it uses a lot of fuel in a business such as transport, he will pay a lot of carbon taxes in the fuel. I am not aware of anything in the rebate system that considers when a person uses a vehicle for business and is required to use a lot of fuel. The only thing that might compensate for that slightly is the reduction in taxable income for business expenses. But that is not going to compensate much for the high cost of carbon taxes.

Depends whether you believe in any kind of morality or moral compass, including some respect for your fellow man.

Why should Canadians be subject to Marxist intervention and control of everything in society, what we read, what we see on television, what we are taught, what we hear on media? We need to dump the politicians that promote and support interventionist, Marxist, control.

We need to defend real freedoms. That includes freedom of speech that is rational. Opposition to government overreach is rational speech for example. We live in a time where Marxism and Romanism and progressive ideology are a threat to our freedom. "In our twentieth century America few among us seem to realize what a priceless heritage we possess in the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly that is an integral part of our everyday life. Nor are many aware of the bitter and prolonged struggles our forefathers went through at the time of the Reformation and later to secure these freedoms. Instead it is quite the common thing to take these for granted and to assume that they are the natural rights of all men. " from the book Roman Catholicism Roman Catholicism : Loraine Boettner : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive In your opposition to Judeo-Christian civilization and culture you should consider the alternatives are likely Communism and/or Romanism or a mixture. Don't forget especially that it was the believers in the Bible that brought the Reformation 500 years ago that resulted in your fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech and beliefs. The population of Europe went through a hundred years of wars to win you the freedoms you have today and a large portion of the population in Europe died for that.

No. Blasphemy is a different category. It is offensive to millions of people. It has no place in public places where children and adults with some sense of decency go. Blasphemy should not be considered as ordinary speech or opinion for the same reason threats should not be considered as acceptable speech.

Marxist-leaning politicians do it because they can. Canada is becoming more interventionist and authoritarian every day. What religion do you think Trudeau etc. are most connected with besides Karl Marx's religion. Loraine Boettner warned about this in his book Roman Catholicism over sixty years ago. Roman Catholicism : Loraine Boettner : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive One would think after a thousand years of tyrannical rule by Rome over the population until the Reformation around the 1500s, that people would wake up. Apparently not. We are going backward.

Criminalizing speech is a part of Communist and Romanist ideology. Careful what you say in China or other Communist countries. Seems that Canada is moving in that direction. Loraine Boettner wrote over sixty years ago: "Our American freedoms are being threatened today by two totalitarian systems, Communism and Roman Catholicism. And of the two in our country Romanism is growing faster than is Communism and is the more dangerous since it covers its real nature with a cloak of religion. " Roman Catholicism : Loraine Boettner : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

"Our American freedoms are being threatened today by two totalitarian systems, Communism and Roman Catholicism. And of the two in our country Romanism is growing faster than is Communism and is the more dangerous since it covers its real nature with a cloak of religion. " From the book Roman Catholicism by Loraine Boettner (copyright 1962). May read online at: Roman Catholicism : Loraine Boettner : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive