this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2026
715 points (97.2% liked)
Comic Strips
23020 readers
2692 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Limit of two posts per person per day.
- Bots aren't allowed.
- Banned users will have their posts removed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And coincidentally it occured right after casting the moneychangers out of the temple.
Like, I bet he and his closest confidants had a huddle after that and were like "Yeah, they're gonna kill you for that tomorrow..."
Its almost like the rich and powerful have always used their power to silence opposition to their wealth.
Jesus used to be my socialist idol, but other socialists didn't like it whenever I mentioned that...
It's like they didn't realize how powerful it would be to subvert the dominant messaging about Jesus being a white trash, racist, jingo-nationalist, homophobic redneck who loves capitalism and america...
I'll guess it has something to do with leftists not liking religion. Probably because the whole idea of a supreme ruler demanding obedience and tribute in exchange for nebulous promises instead of using his power to improve our conditions in the here and now (for the almighty, fixing disease and poverty would definitionally be possible) just doesn't quite gel with the lip service to solidarity.
Jesus may have been socialist in his speeches, but Christianity as a religion sure isn't. To wrap it in a biblical metaphor, you're sowing that word where the soil is infertile and it cannot take root. If you wanna preach, turn Christians into socialists, but don't expect socialists to be fans of Christianity.
It doesn't have to be religious though. A secular reading can still result in the conclusion that jesus was a socialist. I grew up reading the gospel, and it always appeared to me that jesus went around calling out religious hypocrites, preaching love over hate, telling people to sell their things and give their wealth to the poor, even share everything in common, take care of each other, take care of the poor, sick, disabled, and imprisoned. And ultimately he was executed by the religious establishment for being too radical in their view.
What was call "christianity" today has evolved quite a bit since the times when they were hiding in caves in the desert, practicing in secrecy, because any open support for this radical group of what were essentially communists was enough to be publicly executed. It didn't start getting co-opted and corrupted until a roman emperor converted and started turning it into a new means of wielding control. Before that, the early christian martyrs were often killed by the entrenched powers-that-be for refusing to disavow what they believed in. If socialists can't take inspiration from that, then what are we doing?
I'm not saying socialists should be "fans of christianity," but there's a difference between christianity as we know it today, and the teachings of christ as laid out in the gospel. I don't even like christianity anymore, because it's clear the hypocrites have won the battle for messaging and are the ones controlling the narrative. I don't believe in god anymore, besides. But that doesn't stop me from recognizing a socialist jesus when I read the book of matthew.
You're approaching this from an angle where you seem to think it needs to be religious. It doesn't.
To preface this: I'm also an apostate that used to be quite fervent and zealous. I agree with most of your points.
The difficulty I see is that you're cherry-picking which parts of the gospel to apply.
He also taught people to pray for god's mercy and forgiveness, "thy kingdom come, thy will be done", and according to him, the highest of commandments is to love God with all your heart and soul. It's hard to put this in a secular light that doesn't boil down to obeying a single highest authority. Yes, loving your neighbour is second, but it's only second.
If we remove the religious parts, picking out merely his secular points, maybe reframe references to heaven as symbolic for "good people", I agree with you. I'd even add the passage in Revelation about "When I was sick, you cared for me; when I was in prison, you visited me" and so on. It is an unmistakable message saying "Unconditional solidarity is divine."
"What you did to the lowest of my brothers" is a very clear bar to set: Deporting immigrants is a sin against God so grave that piety alone can't wash it clean. I'd read as a parallel to "If you want to know the worth of a society, see how it treats its poor."
My contention is just that I don't think it's possible to cleanly separate his character from his religious nature, nor from what that religion has become. Early Christianity may have had much in common with leftists, but saying "some of his convictions were clearly socialist in nature" isn't the same as saying "he is a socialist".
Also, there are probably many leftists that don't deeply engage with the topic. At a surface level, you see what religion does today, and whatever it may have been or whatever subtext it may have:
And that narrative is awful. That alone will be enough to make the sentiment unpopular. Again, I agree with you in many points, and the rest are probably more academic in nature than relevant to the values we want to uphold. But being right (whether partially, mostly or entirely) alone doesn't always mean you'll be popular. The figure comes with a baggage that I don't think can easily be removed.
Hence: To socialists, the fact that Jesus also held some socialist views doesn't have much weight, because the figure itself has no more value than the views we already hold. It's the Christians, to whom the figure does have weight, that could use some convincing about those values.
Modern christians cherry-pick the bible, and they don't even do it well or honestly. Pretty sure if we were to quantify it, most of the gospel would be socialistic in nature; also it would be the most relevant and essential parts.
I also focus mainly on the book of matthew because he's the only one who was there, a member of the "inner circle." "To you it is given to know, and understand, but to [the public] it is given to hear and not understand." (Paraphrasing).
The others had other motives. A historian, and evangelist, and an apologist. Easier to write them off, but matthew was a disciple. His goal was to record the teachings as faithfully as he could.
If you're interpreting "god" as some personified/anthropomorphic/humanoid being, then sure that tracks. But if you interpret it rather as some panentheistic or panpsychic collective consciousness, the essence of the universe or the primordial first cause, the thing that triggered the big bang, the singularity that existed before, and the all-encompassing entirety of everything that has been since or will ever be, from the quantum level to general relativity and beyond, if there is a beyond; then suddenly "god's kingdom" doesn't seem like a stuffy catholic dystopia, but rather a socialistic utopia, "god's will" isn't that everyone becomes catholic and obeys the pope but rather has universal respect for human rights, and animal rights too for that matter, and nature and the rights of ecosystems, and that the world's institutions ensure not only this baseline of respect but also that everyone's needs are met and they're allowed to flourish. "Loving god" isn't "obeying the highest authority," but maintaining consistent and regular contact with that essence of unconditional love within yourself, your connection to the collective consciousness which unifies all, and allowing that love to inform all of your decisions.
Granted, I'm not that optimistic anymore. I'm far more cynical now. I've gone from the "love everybody unconditionally" jesus to the "toss the hypocrites and the elites into the lake of fire" jesus, and even lost faith that either of those are real or ever coming to deliver cosmic justice. But that's the angle I was approaching faith from, for quite some time before finally giving up on it.
Yeah, I pretty much agree with that.
All the more reason to subvert that narrative, in my opinion. Especially when you see how much sway it holds, in the US for instance. Even religious black and hispanic people votes for the racist xenophobe because he was using a veneer of their religion to manipulate them. Why not point out to those people that the actual guy their religion is based on was really a leftist, as demonstrated by his words and deeds?
I'm not saying that socialists should become christian or adopt christian values. But reading the new testament (not just Matthew, but Acts as well) through a leftist lens and reinterpreting it might prove more effective at changing the narrative than simply burning bibles (figuratively or literally). I'm not expecting a bunch of brainwashed christians to do that scholarship; if I tried convincing them to, they would just find new reasons to reaffirm their own biases. Everything would backfire when they simply reinterpret "gods enemies" as whoever they hate, rather than the powerul, hateful people that they themselves are...
Instead of telling religious people that their entire lives have been based on a lie and that they need to abandon their beliefs (which it's been ingrained in them that they'll be tempted to do by the devil as a test of their faith, and will really only make them dig their heels in), it could be more effective to help them examine their beliefs from a different angle so that they see that jesus wasn't telling them to persecute the marginalized and the oppressed, but to help them, and to even go so far as to give up their own privileges and suffer with the disenfranchised. Is that not the meaning of "bear your cross and follow me"?
Also, the early church can be an interesting case study. If you limit your study of communism to the nineteenth century forward, you'll be hard-pressed to find examples of successful communes. But study some of the earliest monasteries, and you'll find examples that have withstood the tests of time. The best part is, that many of these monastic communities have avoided the politics that are more common among the church leadership structures in population centers. Monastic tradition tends to focus more on the "love, forgiveness, community, and mutual aid" parts of their religion rather than the "power, obedience, conversion, and hierarchy" parts.
Those are just some of my thoughts. I'm not trying to say socialists should become christians, but they're leaving an entire theater of messaging on the table for other people to sweep up, and I do believe it can be wielded far more effectively than by simply trying to bury it.
Since it's so powerful, you should unleash it at the other Christians who ought to be more socialist, not the other socialists who ought to be more Christian.
As if it's a directional beam. No, I bring it up anywhere, I get flamed from all sides. Happy?
Yes. Aim the Egalitarian Jesus beam directly at the threat!
I've got them lined up in my calvary crosshairs!
i also like how according to modern science Jesus must be trans if you accept the narratives but reject divinity.
If you remove the divinity then you're just left with Mary having a flimsy excuse for being knocked up.
Thinking Jesus was the only known case of complete human parthenogenesis is like thinking there's zebras when you hear hoof beats.
And female at birth!
This is one of those "the circle goes in the square hole" things
True!
It's that damn first-century capitalism.