this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
29 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
22766 readers
421 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
in my opinion the gnostics were a set of disparate groups in early christianity. at best gnosis (knowledge) meant an explicit rejection of the roman imperial system, slavery, debt, gender, property, and the ideological superstructure that went along with it (the illusions created by the demiurge), in favor of a quasi-materialist search for truth and meaning in the manifestations of god in the world around us. at worst it seems to have meant a complete rejection of the material world, with gnosis meaning that knowledge derived from hallucinations.
either way, they were disorganized. their rejection of roman imperialism did little to end roman imperialism. the bishop system (from biscop, from episkopos, literally "overseer") was able to fit within the roman system, so as that spread and cemented itself as the official religion of the empire over the 3rd and 4th centuries, the gnostics were labelled as heretics and squashed. if they really wanted to defeat the demiurge they should have formed a vanguard party.
so to develop on @CascadeOfLight's idea, it's marxism-leninism-maoism that's the only path to reach sophia and defeat the demiurge
:michael-laugh:
I'm upset that I'll never be able to quote this in real life because no one I know exists at the intersection that is Maoist Gnosticism (Gnostic Maoism?)