The New Testament may not support Marxism as some say.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nanny1935 said:
How does it relate to what I wrote? It is offensive to frame my answers, which were carefully addressing each issue posted to me as woke. Being accurate and objective, means not going into an inflammatory cold war ranting against the Soviet Union. Read over my responses, I did not endorse all aspects of Soviet education, I talked about literacy rate (which is basic reading), social net coverage of basic services, because it fitted into the conversation of "working for the poor". At all times, I expressed reservations about the regime (saying that perhaps Pope Francis had been somewhat naive in phrasing the statement as sharing a mission with Marxism, while instead we can share the preoccupation for the poor and marginalized). Why on earth would you go into the minefield of wokeness, and briefly at that, when it is the most complex and divisive, misunderstood and misused issue? Your comment had the effect of sabotaging my input- distracting from what I rightly said by distracting to the most explosive issue at hand. I really mind the treatment.
Click to expand...
I was treating "wokeness" independently of the Soviet milieu. They were not "woke" (according to the vernacular contemporary definition of the term) except insofar as they needed, as an apologetical framework for their ideology, to posit that there are huge masses of men, the majority of mankind, who are oppressed by a small coterie of capitalists and bourgeoisie, and that it is time for these masses to rise up and seize the entire productive capacity of the world. Even if it is not an exact parallel, it is a variation on the common theme of "the have-nots rising up against the haves" and disrupting the established order of the latter.

I did not intend in any way to cast shade upon, or misdirect, your very good and academically sound proposals, and I regret the impression given.
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
I was treating "wokeness" independently of the Soviet milieu. They were not "woke" (according to the vernacular contemporary definition of the term) except insofar as they needed, as an apologetical framework for their ideology, to posit that there are huge masses of men, the majority of mankind, who are oppressed by a small coterie of capitalists and bourgeoisie, and that it is time for these masses to rise up and seize the entire productive capacity of the world. Even if it is not an exact parallel, it is a variation on the common theme of "the have-nots rising up against the haves" and disrupting the established order of the latter.

I did not intend in any way to cast shade upon, or misdirect, your very good and academically sound proposals, and I regret the impression given.
Click to expand...
The Soviet Union was way more complex than STEM- actually humanities and arts were highly regarded and had privileges assigned. Marxist philosophers had careers as local officials or plant managers (which could explain the low productivity in agriculture and consumer goods, especially in contrast to defense and space), while artist had even more privileges. Poetry, literature, theater, film, ballet (the ambassador of the cold war) even the circus, were exceptional.
There is no parallel with the deterioration of income distribution since the 1960 in the US. The reason it is partly due to a structural shift towards service economies, another part is imbalances in trade which has the US exporting dollars, and another one is the excessive share of financial services, with salaries that do not reflect true productivity. The best industrial policy will not bring manufacturing back as an income driver. In a rich economy, like the US, the driver is services- and there is a lot of services to be done- the potential growth of employment and wages in that sector is huge- the issue is that we require more government spending for the transition. It has been estimated, that collecting owed taxes from the top 1% would bring $175 billion per year- that is not increasing the marginal tax rate on the top 1%, but simply collecting the tax evasion of the group using special tools like off shore accounts and pass-through business, which are available to the rich. There is no point in attempting to explain in such little space- there is a book- Good Economics for Hard Times which talks about it and discusses solutions.
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
Where are you finding this statistic about literacy in cold war era USSR?

You do realize that the Soviet Union was known for propaganda and misinformation in an effort to support their failing system of government...right?
Click to expand...
USSR and Chinese CCP false propaganda are legendary. It requires committing the sin of credulity to believe a single word. Communism is failing so we must teach it in American colleges and universities.
 
Nanny1935 said:
The Soviet Union was way more complex than STEM- actually humanities and arts were highly regarded and had privileges assigned. Marxist philosophers had careers as local officials or plant managers (which could explain the low productivity in agriculture and consumer goods, especially in contrast to defense and space), while artist had even more privileges. Poetry, literature, theater, film, ballet (the ambassador of the cold war) even the circus, were exceptional.
Click to expand...
Yes, but were philosophers allowed to come to any conclusions except for Marxist ones? Conclusions that challenge Marxism?

Where the arts were non-ideological, I don't doubt that the Soviet system excelled. But would any artistic expression have been allowed that challenged Marxist dogma? Remember that Doctor Zhivago was banned in the USSR until 1987. And look at what happened to Solzhenitsyn when he wrote The Gulag Archipelago.

To use a more homely example, if you will look at the popular Western television shows that were allowed to be broadcast in the Soviet bloc, such as The Flintstones, Space: 1999, Bonanza, and The Rifleman (a favorite of Leonid Brezhnev), one common theme emerges. None of these shows depicted contemporary Western life. They all hearkened back either to the past (in the case of The Flintstones, one played to comic effect) or suggested the future. There's a pattern here.
 
Last edited:
po18guy said:
USSR and Chinese CCP false propaganda are legendary. It requires committing the sin of credulity to believe a single word.
Click to expand...
True.
But the source listed is outside of the propaganda system that was in place.

Of course, one still has to wonder how they got these statistics from outside of the soviet systems that were in place.
Nanny1935 said:
Be aware that after the fall of the soviet union and using documents released after Glasnost, there has been projects, in western economies as well as in the former soviet union to construct reliable data bases.
Click to expand...
Generally, an official lying in a report is not going to leave the truth lying around to be discovered later.

Not that I have actual knowledge of how the soviets ran their particular style of communism, but logic tells me that they didn't have two sets of numbers...one that they kept private and was the truth and the other they tell everyone else.

Instead, I think their literacy rate probably more reflected the number of people that could identify and obey a stop sign rather then people actually reading a book.
 
vz71 said:
True.
But the source listed is outside of the propaganda system that was in place.

Of course, one still has to wonder how they got these statistics from outside of the soviet systems that were in place.

Generally, an official lying in a report is not going to leave the truth lying around to be discovered later.

Not that I have actual knowledge of how the soviets ran their particular style of communism, but logic tells me that they didn't have two sets of numbers...one that they kept private and was the truth and the other they tell everyone else.

Instead, I think their literacy rate probably more reflected the number of people that could identify and obey a stop sign rather then people actually reading a book.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, stop signs in Russia simply say... "STOP". In much of the world, the English-language sign is used as a matter of international convention. And the red octagon is similarly one with near-universal international usage. Strictly speaking, as long as one is taught what a red octagonal sign at an intersection means, knowing any one particular language isn't necessary, nor does one need to know how to read at all.

There are exceptions. In Quebec, stop signs say "arrêt", means the same thing, but even then, the red octagon is used.
 
vz71 said:
I would believe this as well, but they did NOT round other statistics in the page.
Click to expand...
There are two other sources, one being the CIA, which put literacy rate over 99%. Encyclopedia Britannica is considered top. I do not see your point on insisting. Do you want to spur debate with me or use the space to rant against the Soviet Union with no interest of learning anything new? In either case, I am out.
 
vz71 said:
True.
But the source listed is outside of the propaganda system that was in place.

Of course, one still has to wonder how they got these statistics from outside of the soviet systems that were in place.

Generally, an official lying in a report is not going to leave the truth lying around to be discovered later.

Not that I have actual knowledge of how the soviets ran their particular style of communism, but logic tells me that they didn't have two sets of numbers...one that they kept private and was the truth and the other they tell everyone else.

Instead, I think their literacy rate probably more reflected the number of people that could identify and obey a stop sign rather then people actually reading a book.
Click to expand...
1. "Generally, an official lying in a report is not going to leave the truth lying around to be discovered later."
Statisticians and economist are not stupid, and they spend time thinking about the issues; often there might be indicators the allow you to estimate a quantity that is not directly observable. There is a lot more I can say, but there is no proper respect here, you do not ask questions that matter to discover what really happened. Your message feels like you care to say how smart you are and right you are, rather than discovering what you are missing.
vz71 said:
Instead, I think their literacy rate probably more reflected the number of people that could identify and obey a stop sign rather then people actually reading a book.
Click to expand...
You would be surprised how cultured Soviets were and how much they liked good literature.
No authoritarian regime, neither the Tzar's , nor Soviet, could take the love for culture away from them.
An even facing persecution, many kept their religious faith. I think they deserve your respect, rather than your mockery.
It is a shame that you write this way, all it shows is an abundance of ignorance.
I have been very patient sharing information, some of it comes from direct observations that are not that easy to obtain. Enough is enough.
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
Yes, but were philosophers allowed to come to any conclusions except for Marxist ones? Conclusions that challenge Marxism?

Where the arts were non-ideological, I don't doubt that the Soviet system excelled. But would any artistic expression have been allowed that challenged Marxist dogma? Remember that Doctor Zhivago was banned in the USSR until 1987. And look at what happened to Solzhenitsyn when he wrote The Gulag Archipelago.

To use a more homely example, if you will look at the popular Western television shows that were allowed to be broadcast in the Soviet bloc, such as The Flintstones, Space: 1999, Bonanza, and The Rifleman (a favorite of Leonid Brezhnev), one common theme emerges. None of these shows depicted contemporary Western life. They all hearkened back either to the past (in the case of The Flintstones, one played to comic effect) or suggested the future. There's a pattern here.
Click to expand...
Exactly- my answer not only considers the role of ideology in education but also hints at its detrimental effect on productivity.
Please take the time to read responses and take into account the information provided before shooting answers.
Everybody gets the pattern. So did all the Soviet, and they got it to. There was a black market for censored literature,
I already said the Soviet were skeptic of the official line.
In fact, people in the Soviet Union READ Dr Zhivago clandestinely in "samizdat" copies, the same way they read Bugalkov's Master and Margarita.
Why do you keep repeating the same used up slogans of the 60s without incorporating the wealth of information that we got after glasnost?

The Revolutionaries recommended their children read Dickens instead of Lenin or Marx. Did you know?
Did you read Gorssman's 'Life and Fate"? Or Svetlana Alexievich (Nobel 2015) "Secondhand Time"?
What do you know about the relationship of Mikhail Sholokhov (author of "And Quiet flows the Don" and Stalin?
I really do not get why you keep putting down information instead of expanding your knowledge-
I write accurately, and frankly, i am a couple of steps ahead of you.

At most, you can say what Churchill said- that Russian's inscrutability is "a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma"
On the other hand, I can say, I get it.
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
True.
But the source listed is outside of the propaganda system that was in place.

Of course, one still has to wonder how they got these statistics from outside of the soviet systems that were in place.

Generally, an official lying in a report is not going to leave the truth lying around to be discovered later.

Not that I have actual knowledge of how the soviets ran their particular style of communism, but logic tells me that they didn't have two sets of numbers...one that they kept private and was the truth and the other they tell everyone else.

Instead, I think their literacy rate probably more reflected the number of people that could identify and obey a stop sign rather then people actually reading a book.
Click to expand...
Even sources outside of the USSR were sympathetic to that system. I am a skeptic/cynic. It has its downside, but can be an excellent survival tool.
 
vz71 said:
Lists the literacy rate at 100%.

I am skeptical.
Click to expand...
They may have achieved a literacy rate close to 100% but Christians ought to question how.

"Saved" used to mean getting back your soul. The Soviets suppressed and regulated religion and encouraged various sinful behaviors like state-sponsored alcohol and institutionalized covetousness. They may also have forced the A-students to date the illiterates and D-students with the threat of psychiatric institutionalization for being "antisocial."

Can it be the goal was to cut back salvation until students could cheat off one another?

According to HomeschoolDad,
They were not "woke" (according to the vernacular contemporary definition of the term) except insofar as they needed, as an apologetical framework for their ideology, to posit that there are huge masses of men, the majority of mankind, who are oppressed by a small coterie of capitalists and bourgeoisie, and that it is time for these masses to rise up and seize the entire productive capacity of the world.
Click to expand...

Can it be they considered the minds of the "small coterie" part of the "means of production?" Can it be that they built some sort of cheating spiritual rapport by suppressing genuine religion?

It is said the Soviet Constitution guaranteed freedom of religion but it is also said the practice of Christianity would cause a person to lose almost any chance of upward mobility.
 
vz71 said:
I am not the one that made the claims.

That your sources prove problematic for your argument is no reason to get snippy.
Click to expand...
I quoted two well recognized sources- Encyclopedia Britannica and the CIA Factbook- they are NOT problematic, rather they are recognized as top. I also checked other sources (world bank says 99.9 in 2021 for adults, that would cover people born before the fall of the Soviet Union). I can say that I did not find ONE source that would estimate the literary rate statistically differently than those estimates.

You have come back again and again, without providing a justification for the disagreement.
I have no will to get into arguments with you, yet I see no reason to acquiesce, even if you degrade the exchange to personal attacks ("no reason to get snippy")
I have the right to call on your aggression and request that you stay civil.
 
Last edited:
Dissenter said:
They may have achieved a literacy rate close to 100% but Christians ought to question how.

"Saved" used to mean getting back your soul. The Soviets suppressed and regulated religion and encouraged various sinful behaviors like state-sponsored alcohol and institutionalized covetousness. They may also have forced the A-students to date the illiterates and D-students with the threat of psychiatric institutionalization for being "antisocial."

Can it be the goal was to cut back salvation until students could cheat off one another?

According to HomeschoolDad,


Can it be they considered the minds of the "small coterie" part of the "means of production?" Can it be that they built some sort of cheating spiritual rapport by suppressing genuine religion?

It is said the Soviet Constitution guaranteed freedom of religion but it is also said the practice of Christianity would cause a person to lose almost any chance of upward mobility.
Click to expand...
I was lucky to visit Russia in 2000 in a study delegation from my graduate school. It was expertly planned by Professors (one of them a Nobel Prize winner in Development). The student lead was a class mate that had worked at the US Embassy in Moscow for several years as an assistant to the cultural attache. His experience and contacts in Russia provided us with local guides and tours that were not commonly offered to foreigners. One of the subjects we were instructed in was religion during the Soviet era. We visited a monastery in the outskirts of Moscow, the monks gave a tour and talked abotu their experiences. While it was early April, it was still pretty cold, so we stayed very briefly in the big Church (no heating) and moved to a smaller room, used for mass. It was completely empty- Russian Orthodox Christians are extremely devout and they belief that sitting during Mass is not respectful. There was an icon in the front, but no altar, the blessed sacrament was not in the room. Therefore, and feeling weak with symptoms of a (Russian) cold, new to me, I sat on the window sill. Instantly, a small, frail old woman that was sweeping the floor with a broomstick made of tree branches came running to me, most distressed she addressed me in Russian, which I did not understand, and since i did not move, she proceeded to hit my feet with the broom, with an energy that was surprising in such frail woman.
That view spoke volumes to the resilience of their faith- here was a woman, educated in the atheist soviet system, survivor of Stalinist purges, defending her beliefs with the might of Goliath. There is no question in my mind that Divine love was with the Russian people always limiting the ideology and keeping their spirits.
It is time to stop thinking of the Soviet Union as the evil empire, and start looking at the people that lived there with compassion and understanding. Their intellectual, moral and spiritual lives were very complex and rich. In the aftermath of purges, and the suffering and loss of thousands, many survivors looked at the pressures of the system and forgave victimizers (there are many individual accounts of survivors of the camps). (I think I read them in Svetlana Alexeivich book, although I am not completely sure. But there is a lot written on this.) If they, the injured, did a thorough evaluation and moved on, so should people that lived privileged lives miles away from them. Luke 9:62
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top