One thin disk will give you a treasury of the Society's outdated speculations about the fast-approaching showdown between labor and capital (Russell, "The Battle of Armageddon," 1912) ,
Did not know. I guess calling DUBS commies was correct.
by 5go 8 Replies latest jw friends
One thin disk will give you a treasury of the Society's outdated speculations about the fast-approaching showdown between labor and capital (Russell, "The Battle of Armageddon," 1912) ,
Did not know. I guess calling DUBS commies was correct.
Just like you.
Warlock
I guess calling DUBS commies was correct.
Yep it was correct and my anarcho-communism really got started on my reading what jesus really taught from the bible. Of course know that I have found out buddha taught it 700 years before him. I lean more towards reading his stuff.
I can't see the connection if Russell talked about a coming conflict between workers and capitalists that doesn't necessarily mean he was a communist. Also the fact that he came from a wealthy high class family makes this unlikely.
I always thought a lot of their philosophy over how life was going to be like in paradise was very communist. My mother always said it would be brother so and so growing tomatoes to trade for sister such and such's carrots, etc.
I've always compared the JW mentality of "no outside info allowed" to communism. People in communist countries have to go to great lenghts and put themselves in danger to get unbiased outside info and news. Witnesses that want outside info and history on JW's have to find it secretively and risk being disfellowshipped if caught.
Russell had a Marxist concept of Armageddon but he was not politically a "Marxist" or "Communist" in the sense that he desired or expected labor to win the struggle. His belief, rather, was that neither side would prevail but that Jesus would intervene in the eventual chaos. Russell focused on labor-class struggles because that was a major, if not "the" major, source of strife in the pre-war period. If Russell had lived instead in the early 21st century, he would have talked instead about terrorism. Or if he lived in the 1950s, he would have talked about the Cold War preceding God's intervention at Armageddon. Or if he lived in the 1940s, it would have been the world war. By focusing on labor struggles, Russell was imho a product of his times...
Russell was imho a product of his times...
So true Leolaia! Same thing can be said for his fascination with pyramidology. It was all the rage back then.
Leolaia: I agree. I grew up in the Knorr era, which was all about rules and morality issues, but it was also a time of change for society in general (civil rights, sexual revolution, etc.), so he reacted to what he saw and lived (and we all know he had a stick up his butt as well). What is sad is that these past presidents could not see the forest for the trees, and that they tried to make their personal reactions and interpretations of world events sound like pronouncements from god's mouth.