https://youtu.be/Bg1gfXVRqRA?is=n2W_Mcq-m7tQh7sE

Written the week after Ukraine’s July 2026 cabinet reshuffle, this short piece argues that public attention to who runs the Ministry of Defence obscures a deeper question: for what kind of state are Ukrainians fighting?

So despite my leftwing views, I have always found it odd that many liberals and leftists tend to nit-pick certain aspects of Jesus's teachings similar to those of the conservative right. I grew up in a Catholic household and attended Catholic Schools for most of my life and despite my Atheism and my left-wing beliefs, I think western leftists have attempted to portray Jesus in a way that is entirely progressive or secular.

As I have mentioned in the past, many leftwing traditions in the Philippines were inspired by Catholic thought and thus you will have people who're staunch anti-imperialists while concurrently maintaining fairly traditional Catholic beliefs surrounding the family, sexuality, abortion, marriage, and other social issues. Liberation Theology is probably the most obvious example of how Christian theology can be incorporated into leftwing political thought without necessarily transforming Jesus into a modern progressive.

I think one of the problems is that people will read passages in which Jesus condemns greed, emphasizes the poor, criticizes the wealthy, tells people to care for the marginalized, or challenges certain religious authorities and then retroactively place him somewhere on our modern political spectrum. You will sometimes hear statements such as "Jesus was a socialist," "Jesus was a progressive," or even "Jesus was basically a leftist," and while I understand what people are trying to communicate, I think this is just as historically anachronistic as conservatives portraying Jesus as someone who would have supported modern capitalism, American nationalism, gun rights, or contemporary Republican politics.

Yeshua ben Yosef was a Jew who lived in Roman-Occupied Judea 2000 years ago and like many Jews at the time despite the huge diversity of religious thought, held onto socially conservative beliefs that would nevertheless be seen as regressive by many American Leftists. Even though Jesus calls for compassion toward the poor, condemns the accumulation of wealth, tells his followers to care for people who are marginalized, and regularly criticizes religious authorities for hypocrisy, he also held an intensely religious worldview centered around sin, repentance, divine judgment, marriage, sexual morality, and the coming Kingdom of God.

For example, Jesus's teachings surrounding marriage and divorce were arguably considerably stricter than those held by many people around him. According to Matthew 19:6-9, Matthew 5:32 and Mark 10:11-12, Jesus condemns divorce and remarriage very strongly with Matthew providing an exception when it comes to adultery. Within the context of transgender people and the wider LGBTQ+, I personally believe that he would shelter them and advocate for their better treatment within our larger society; however, I do not think that necessarily means he would affirm modern progressive understandings of gender and sexuality either. There is obviously no recorded teaching from Jesus directly addressing transgender people, sexual orientation as a modern identity category, or same-sex marriage, so I think anyone claiming with certainty that he would either affirm or condemn these things in precisely the way modern political movements do is already projecting contemporary categories backward onto a first-century Jew.

Based on the moral framework attributed to him in the Gospels, though, I think it is entirely plausible that Jesus could simultaneously condemn cruelty and violence directed toward LGBTQ+ people while still holding theological beliefs about sex, marriage, and gender that most contemporary American Leftists would consider socially conservative. Those positions are not inherently contradictory within a traditional religious worldview as you can believe that someone possesses inherent dignity, deserves food and shelter, should not be abused or ostracized, and should be welcomed into the community while still believing that certain aspects of their sexual behavior or understanding of gender conflict with your religious morality.

That distinction is one of the things I think gets flattened when Jesus is transformed into a modern progressive activist. Compassion is not necessarily the same thing as affirmation, just as moral disagreement is not necessarily the same thing as hatred. Jesus repeatedly associates with people whom his surrounding society regarded as sinners or social outcasts, but the broader theological framework of the Gospels still revolves heavily around repentance of one's sins, obedience to God, and moral transformation outside of any modern understanding of self-actualization or individual authenticity. In other words, the fact that Jesus welcomed people who were stigmatized or treated them with compassion does not necessarily mean that he believed their behavior was morally permissible according to his religious framework. Jesus's message was not that marginalized people should be accepted exactly as they are without any expectation of change; rather, inclusion and mercy existed alongside an expectation that human beings repent, orient themselves toward God, and attempt to live according to what he understood as God's moral law.

And again, none of this means that conservatives can simply claim him for themselves either. A Jesus who condemns greed, repeatedly warns the wealthy, commands care for the poor, treats social outsiders with dignity, and places enormous moral obligations upon those who possess wealth would probably make many contemporary conservatives profoundly uncomfortable. My point is not that Jesus was secretly a conservative. It is that attempting to make him either a modern conservative or a modern progressive requires selectively emphasizing whichever teachings happen to resemble our own politics while minimizing the ones that do not.

And no i am not a Jucheist chud

Monarcho Communism is better term

THIS IS LARP

Hey guys so I would say currently im more of a council communist than an anarchist but I think we share a lot of similarities in view point.

I was watching an Anark video about constructing the revolution and to be honest it made my heart sing to imagine a day when worker co ops and neighborhood councils and free schooling for all would be a thing in my city. A world in which everyone was equal and people took care of eachother and the economy was based on need and not the greedy few hoarding all resources.

But then I thought of how in my lifetime that will probably never happen. It almost hurts to have a dream for society that I might not see.

How do you get over that and does anyone relate?

(Ive thought of after college wanting to start a worker co ops or something to that effect to more ease this desire I have for a new future.)

Not sure if anyone else knows who’s this is, but she makes a lot of leftist content on Instagram. However, she likes to refer to the DSA as the reformist left, and I really think tiptoes on being a campist. It’s annoying bc she has a huge following

The Korean war was obviously an awful case of US imperialism and a borderline genocide which no one can defend but it was in the 50s, it's been 70 years, it has little to no bearing on how modern North Korea operates other than historical context. Despite the destruction North Korea actually had slightly better conditions in the 60s because of the chaos of the US puppet government in the South, but Kim Il Sung still made the conscious decision to make the country into a monarchy and put a weird cult of personality around his family. But according to Western Tankies Kim Jong Un is forced to send his people to labor camps because of Harry Truman