PDA

View Full Version : Can non Muslims support the Islamic Economic System because I think it sounds better



truthseeker63
02-18-2011, 02:21 PM
Can non Muslims support the Islamic Economic System because I think it sounds better than Socialism which I used to believe it also it is better than Western Capitalism while Im trying to fingle out what I believe as far as religion goes I still like Islam's views on Economics.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
ardianto
02-20-2011, 10:46 AM
Salam, Truthseeker,

Non-Muslims can support Islamic economic system, of course. But before I go further with an explanation, at first I want to know how is Islamic economic system that you know and why you think it is better than economic system in capitalism and socialism. :)
Reply

truthseeker63
02-20-2011, 11:03 AM
I believe in private property I have read Animal Farm the book which explains why Communism does not work it is man made for one and because Capitalism is based on greed and the exploitation of workers like Communism which causes class warfare Socialism claims to be for the poor and the workers but is not and I started a thread on Islam's views on Slavery I like the Quran's views better than the Bible on that issue. Under Socialism all property is owned by the state or the government I disagree with it and the Marxists are are Atheists and do promote Atheism for everyone. Im not anti Jewish but Communism was started by Zionists and funded and promoted by them. I be honest I am very anti Communist Im not a right winger or a left winger but I hate that Commnism wants to create a Godless society. I admire and respect the Muslims who fight and speak out against both Communism/Socialism and Capitalism. I know this is not a politics board but I just thought I would share my views on politics I would like to ask is there anywhere on this board where people talk about politics ? I do agree that there needs to be some state ownership like oil I read Islam calls for this I agree we need to stop oil pollution by the oil companies to be honest I first got into left wing politics because I have had family members in trade unions and I saw Capitalism as harming the workers but I would like a system where there would be no need for trade unions worker strikes class conflick or class warfare in my opinion trade unions are needed in a Capitalist/Socialist Communist society because these are man made and based on exploitation of workers under Islam under God's laws there would be no need for class conflick because Islam would unite rich and poor I know I written a lot but my story is long. Since Marxists are Materialists I disagree with them I believe that human beings have spiritual needs. I also disagree with usury America's and England's Banking System is usury I agree with Islamic Banking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_banking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury

http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Jews-n...ism/communism/


ISLAM VERSUS COMMUNISM
BY Professor Dr. Mahmoud Youssef Shawarbi
Islam is a universal religion which is embraced by one quarter of the population of the world. In fact the followers of Islam are spread all over the world from the Far East to the Far West. Many thinkers in the world who studied Islam carefully believe that Islam is a natural barrier against communism.
In this essay we shall try to discuss this fact and show how Islam really stands as a concrete barrier against communism.
At the outset we should like to mention the main principles on which communism is founded. They can be summarized in the following
1. — The Denial of the existence of God.
2. — Life is absolutely materialistic and has no spiritual background.
3. — Abolition of private ownership.
4. — Nationalization of all resources and its control by the State.
5. — Replacing the inland trade by rationing cards.
6. — The adoption of Linin’s theory of wages which says "Form everyone according to his ability to everyone according to his needs."
It is thus clearly shown that the idea of communism is based on a purely materialistic basis. According to communism the whole universe has no supreme power behind it. It has no God who created it. The denial of the existence of God is a common belief Lo all communists. All the Russian pioneers to the space denied the existence of God. Karl Marx as one of the founders of communism.

http://www.jews-for-allah.org/islam/verses-Communism/

http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Jews-not-for-Judaism/

http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/reviews/...imal-farm.html

http://bookreviews.nabou.com/reviews/animalfarm.html
Reply

Trumble
02-20-2011, 11:41 AM
Originally Posted by truthseeker63
Can non Muslims support the Islamic Economic System because I think it sounds better than Socialism which I used to believe it also it is better than Western Capitalism while Im trying to fingle out what I believe as far as religion goes I still like Islam's views on Economics.
Just about anything is better than 'pure' laissez-faire capitalism IMHO. The trouble, though, is that all of the alternatives have a vast range outside of their 'pure' form. You can have capitalist economies with some element of state control and welfare provision. You can socialist economies that include capitalist elements and do not exclude or discourage religion in any way. Just because Marx, Lenin and Stalin were atheists does not mean all socialists or even communists are, nor that such a regime should attempt to eliminate religion in the way Soviet Russia did. Not to mention the huge variation between those atheists; Lenin and Stalin's 'communism' had very little resemblance to that advocated by Marx and Engels.

Just to clear up one misconception; it is not correct that "under Socialism all property is owned by the state or the government". It is the means of production (factories, raw materials etc) and the goods produced that must be owned by the people, represented by the state. There is nothing preventing subsequent sale of those goods to private individuals, as the proceeds from doing so benefit the people as a whole, not factory owners and company shareholders - i.e. the owners of the means of production in a capitalist system.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
truthseeker63
02-20-2011, 11:48 AM
Im not saying America is good I think the whole Cold War was about power Capitalism vs Communism but at the sametime America which has a secular Constitution man made laws like the entire Western World does is just as bad in my book. America is a Secular nation not a Christian nation.

Myth: The Founders intended the U.S. to be a Christian republic.

Fact: If the Founders had wanted a Christian republic, they would have made one.


Summary

If the Founders had intended this to be a Christian Republic, they would not have separated Church and State in the constitution. Besides, many of the founders were Deists or atheists, not Christians; it would have been impossible for them to intend a Christian Republic.

Argument

The First Amendment states:
  • "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…"
Article VI, Section 3 of the constitution also states:
  • "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States, and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
By now virtually everyone knows the argument that making the United States a Christian republic would violate the First Amendment rights of Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, atheists, agnostics, etc. But fewer people realize that it would also violate the First Amendment rights of Christians as well. Which of the 2,500 Christian denominations would we choose as the Christian orthodoxy upon which to base the republic? Seventh-day Adventists and Catholics are complete opposites to each other, and, in fact, are sworn enemies. Thus, a Christian Republic would certainly involve a small minority forcing its views on the majority.

Be that as it may, did the Founders actually intend for Christianity to play a greater role in our society than it has? Prior to the constitution, 11 of 13 states had religious qualifications for public office. These were limited to Christians only, and sometimes even Protestants only. However, the Constitutional Convention voted down such qualifications, creating the separation of church and state that we find in the First Amendment today. If this is not proof of the Founders intentions, then what is?

One should remember that the Founders lived in the 18th century, just as the horrors of the Inquisition were winding down. Anyone who overly opposed the Roman Catholic Church was arrested by the Inquisition as a heretic. They were tortured until they confessed their guilt, then handed over to the state for execution. The state, in full partnership with the church, would then prove its loyalty by carrying out the execution. Those Founders who were Christians were Protestants, and had they lived in Europe they would have been persecuted by the Inquisition. It was this identification with "heretics" that compelled them to build "a wall of separation between Church and State."

This famous phrase was coined by Thomas Jefferson in his letter to the Danbury Baptists:
  • "Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." -- Thomas Jefferson to Danbury Baptists, 1802.
Some Christians have tried to argue that this wall is "one-way," that the state may not interfere with religion, but religion may interfere with the state. However, this is an impossibility, since by definition any control that a denomination achieves over the state will automatically become state infringement on the religious rights of others.

Besides, many of the Founders were hardly Christians. There were several Deists, most prominent among them Thomas Jefferson. Deism rejected formal or organized religion, including Christianity; it taught that people should depend on human reasoning, not revealed truths, to discern what is true in the world. Deism rejected the divinity of Jesus and ascribed his miracles and resurrection to "mysticisms, fancies and falsehoods" (Jefferson's words).

Another standout is Benjamin Franklin. The body of his work strongly suggests that he was an atheist. Like most atheist politicians since, Franklin was not so impolitic as to broadcast this fact. He sometimes evoked Providence or God in his speeches, ever mindful of his Christian audiences. But anyone familiar with Franklin's writings knows of his true philosophy towards religion.

Thus, the fact that not all the Founders were Christians, and that they actually removed a widespread Christian qualification for office in the U.S. constitution, proves that the Founders did not intend this to be a Christian republic.


http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-christianrepublic.htm
Reply

truthseeker63
02-20-2011, 12:38 PM
I think that Socialism and Capitalism do not work.
Reply

ardianto
02-20-2011, 06:26 PM
Sorry for the late response, but I still have a problem in brief explanation on Islamic economic system. :D
There are many points on this. Give me time.
Reply

truthseeker63
02-21-2011, 03:47 PM
There may be some good things about Socialism just like there are some good things about Cpitalism.
Reply

Mike3449
02-21-2011, 11:15 PM
Originally Posted by truthseeker63
Can non Muslims support the Islamic Economic System because I think it sounds better than Socialism which I used to believe it also it is better than Western Capitalism while Im trying to fingle out what I believe as far as religion goes I still like Islam's views on Economics.

Of course Non-Muslims can support the Islamic Economic System... silly.

But, you gave up on Socialism? What happened?

Please do tell...
Reply

truthseeker63
02-21-2011, 11:29 PM
I gave up on Socialism because I read a book called Animal Farm by George Orwell. Sorry for posting all these links but Im just trying to prove that Socialism can't work Islam is the answer. Also Im not saying that I like Capitalism but Socialism is not the answer. Socialism promotes Atheism Socialists are Atheists this is one reason to dislike Socialism also Socialism/Socialists are againist Private Property and Private Property rights. My understanding of Islam is that there is still Private Property under Islam.

Animal Farm
George Orwell

Power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely-and this is vividly and eloquently proved in Orwell's short novel. "Animal Farm" is a simple fable of great symbolic value, and as Orwell himself explained: "it is the history of a revolution that went wrong". The novel can be seen as the historical analysis of the causes of the failure of communism, or as a mere fairy-tale; in any case it tells a good story that aims to prove that human nature and diversity prevent people from being equal and happy ,or at least equally happy.

"Animal Farm" tells the simple and tragic story of what happens when the oppressed farm animals rebel, drive out Mr. Jones, the farmer, and attempt to rule the farm themselves, on an equal basis. What the animals seem to have aimed at was a utopian sort of communism, where each would work according to his capacity, respecting the needs of others. The venture failed, and "Animal Farm" ended up being a dictatorship of pigs, who were the brightest, and most idle of the animals.

Orwell's mastery lies in his presentation of the horrors of totalitarian regimes, and his analysis of communism put to practice, through satire and simple story-telling. The structure of the novel is skillfully organized, and the careful reader may, for example, detect the causes of the unworkability of communism even from the first chapter. This is deduced from Orwell's description of the various animals as they enter the barn and take their seats to listen to the revolutionary preaching of Old Major, father of communism in Animal Farm. Each animal has different features and attitude; the pigs, for example, "settled down in the straw immediately in front of the platform", which is a hint on their future role, whereas Clover, the affectionate horse" made a sort of wall" with her foreleg to protect some ducklings.

So, it appears that the revolution was doomed from the beginning, even though it began in idealistic optimism as expressed by the motto" no animal must ever tyrannize over his own kind. Weak or strong, clever or simple, we are all brothers. "When the animals drive out Mr. Jones, they create their "Seven Commandments" which ensure equality and prosperity for all the animals. The pigs ,however, being the natural leaders, managed to reverse the commandments, and through terror and propaganda establish the rule of an elite of pigs, under the leadership of Napoleon, the most revered and sinister pig.

"Animal Farm" successfully presents how the mechanism of propaganda and brainwashing works in totalitarian regimes, by showing how the pigs could make the other animals believe practically anything. Responsible for the propaganda was Squealer, a pig that "could turn black into white". Squealer managed to change the rule from "all animals are equal" to" all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". He managed to convince the other animals that it was for their sake that the pigs ate most of the apples and drank most of the milk, that leadership was "heavy responsibility" and therefore the animals should be thankful to Napoleon, that what they saw may have been something they "dreamed", and when everything else failed he would use the threat of " Jones returning" to silence the animals. In this simple but effective way, Orwell presents the tragedy and confusion of thought control to the extent that one seems better off simply believing that" Napoleon is always right".

Orwell's criticism of the role of the Church is also very effective. In Animal Farm, the Church is represented by Moses, a tame raven, who talks of "Sugarcandy Mountain", a happy country in the sky "where we poor animals shall rest forever from our labors". It is interesting to observe that when Old Major was first preaching revolutionary communism, Moses was sleeping in the barn, which satirizes the Church being caught asleep by communism. It is also important to note that the pig-dictators allowed and indirectly encouraged Moses; it seems that it suited the pigs to have the animals dreaming of a better life after death so that they wouldn't attempt to have a better life while still alive...

In "Animal Farm", Orwell describes how power turned the pigs from simple "comrades" to ruthless dictators who managed to walk on two legs, and carry whips. The story maybe seen as an analysis of the Soviet regime, or as a warning against political power games of an absolute nature and totalitarianism in general. For this reason, the story ends with a hair-raising warning to all humankind:" The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which".

http://bookreviews.nabou.com/reviews/animalfarm.html

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels
Manifesto
of the Communist Party

1848

II -- PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class; if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.
In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/cl...manifesto.html

Does the Bible support Communism?

Question: "Does the Bible support Communism?"

Answer: Communism, a branch of socialism, is an experimental social system based on a set of ideals that, at first glance, seem to agree with some biblical principles. On a closer look, however, little evidence can be seen that the Bible truly supports or endorses communism. There is a difference between communism in theory and communism in practice, and the Bible verses that seem to comply with communist ideals are in fact contradicted by the practices of a communist government.

There is a surprising sentence in a description of the church in Acts 2 that has led many people to wonder whether the Bible supports communism, and has led some people to defend strongly the idea that communism is actually biblical. The passage reads, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). This statement seems to imply that communism (which has, at its heart, a desire to eliminate poverty by “spreading the wealth around”) is found here in the earliest of Christian churches. However, there is a crucial difference between the church in Acts 2 and a communist society that must be understood.

In the Acts 2 church, the people were giving to each other out of their own good will to those who had a need, and they were giving freely, without regulation of how much they were to give. In other words, they shared what they had out of a shared love for one another and a common goal—living for Christ and glorifying God. In a communist society, people give because a system of government forces them to give. They don’t have a choice in the matter as to how much they give or to whom they give. This, therefore, does not reflect on who they are; it says nothing about their identity or character. Under communism, the cheerful, generous giver and the stingy man are both required to give exactly the same amount – namely, everything they earn.

The issue is one of cheerful giving (which the Bible supports) vs. forced giving. Second Corinthians 9:7 says, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” After all, the Bible contains a great number of references to helping the poor, being generous with what we have, and looking out for those who are less fortunate. When we obey in this area with cheerful hearts with the proper motivation, our giving is pleasing to God. What is not pleasing to God is giving out of compulsion, because forced giving is not giving out of love and therefore profits nothing in the spiritual sense. Paul tells the Corinthians, “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:3). But that is the inevitable result of communism.

Capitalism is actually a better system, when it comes to giving, because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase. Communism has proven to simply make all its citizens poor, except the very few in power who decide where the wealth goes. But even capitalism won’t work, by itself, as a system for aiding the poor. It depends on its citizens to be diligent (Proverbs 10:4) and generous with the fruits of their labor (1 Timothy 6:18), and to give out of love for God and their neighbor. Thus, we see that God has designed for the physical and financial needs of the poor to be met by Christian individuals, rather than by any system of government.

Recommended Resource: Bible Answers for Almost All Your Questions by Elmer Towns.


http://www.gotquestions.org/communism-Bible.html

Animal Farm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the novel by George Orwell. For other uses, see Animal Farm (disambiguation).

Animal Farm is a dystopian allegorical novella by George Orwell. Published in England on 17 August 1945, the book reflects events leading up to and during the Stalin era before World War II. Orwell, a democratic socialist,[1] was a critic of Joseph Stalin and hostile to Moscow-directed Stalinism, especially after his experiences with the NKVD, and what he saw of the results of the influence of Communist policy ("ceaseless arrests, censored newspapers, prowling hordes of armed police" - "Communism is now a counter-revolutionary force"),[2] during the Spanish Civil War. In a letter to Yvonne Davet, Orwell described Animal Farm as his novel "contre Stalin".[3]
The original title was Animal Farm: A Fairy Story, but the subtitle was dropped by the US publishers for its 1946 publication and subsequently all but one of the translations during Orwell's lifetime omitted the addition. Other variations in the title include: A Satire and A Contemporary Satire.[3] Orwell suggested for the French translation the title Union des républiques socialistes animales, recalling the French name of the Soviet Union, Union des républiques socialistes soviétiques, and which abbreviates URSA, which is the Latin for "bear", a symbol of Russia.[3]
Time magazine chose the book as one of the 100 best English-language novels (1923 to 2005);[4] it also places at number 31 on the Modern Library List of Best 20th-Century Novels. It won a Retrospective Hugo Award in 1996 and is also included in the Great Books of the Western World.
The novel addresses not only the corruption of the revolution by its leaders but also how wickedness, indifference, ignorance, greed and myopia destroy any possibility of a Utopia. While this novel portrays corrupt leadership as the flaw in revolution (and not the act of revolution itself), it also shows how potential ignorance and indifference to problems within a revolution could allow horrors to happen if smooth transition to a people's government is not satisfied.

Plot summary

Old Major, the old boar on the Manor Farm, calls the animals on the farm for a meeting, where he compares the humans to parasites and teaches the animals a revolutionary song, "Beasts of England".
When Major dies three days later, two young pigs, Snowball and Napoleon, assume command and turn his dream into a philosophy. The animals revolt and drive the drunken and irresponsible Mr. Jones from the farm, renaming it "Animal Farm".
The Seven Commandments of Animalism are written on the wall of a barn. The most important is the seventh, "All animals are equal." All the animals work, but the workhorse, Boxer, does more than others and adopts the maxim — "I will work harder."
Snowball attempts to teach the animals reading and writing; food is plentiful; and the farm runs smoothly. The pigs elevate themselves to positions of leadership and set aside special food items ostensibly for their personal health. Napoleon takes the pups from the farm dogs and trains them privately. When Mr. Jones tries retaking the farm, the animals defeat him at what they call the "Battle of the Cowshed." Napoleon and Snowball struggle for leadership. When Snowball announces his idea for a windmill, Napoleon opposes it. Snowball makes a speech in favour of the windmill, whereupon Napoleon has his dogs chase Snowball away. In Snowball's absence, Napoleon declares himself leader and makes changes. Meetings will no longer be held and instead a committee of pigs will run the farm.
Using a young pig named Squealer as a mouthpiece, Napoleon announces that Snowball stole the idea for the windmill from him. The animals work harder with the promise of easier lives with the windmill. After a violent storm, the animals find the windmill annihilated. Napoleon and Squealer convince the animals that Snowball destroyed the windmill, although the scorn of the neighbouring farmers suggests the windmill's walls were too thin. Once Snowball becomes a scapegoat, Napoleon begins purging the farm, killing animals he accuses of consorting with Snowball. Meanwhile, Boxer takes up a second maxim: "Napoleon is always right."
Napoleon abuses his powers, making life harder for the animals; the pigs impose more control while reserving privileges for themselves. The pigs rewrite history, villainizing Snowball and glorifying Napoleon. Squealer justifies every statement Napoleon makes, even the pigs' alteration of the Seven Commandments of Animalism. "No animal shall sleep in beds" is changed to "No animal shall sleep in beds with sheets" when the pigs are discovered to have been sleeping in the old farmhouse. "No animal shall drink alcohol" is changed to "No animal shall drink alcohol to excess" when the pigs discover the farmer's whisky. "Beasts of England" is banned as inappropriate, as according to Napoleon the dream of Animal Farm has been realized. It is replaced by an anthem glorifying Napoleon, who appears to be adopting the lifestyle of a man. The animals, though cold, starving, and overworked, remain convinced through psychological conditioning that they are better off than they were when ruled by Mr. Jones. Squealer abuses the animals' poor memories and invents numbers to show their improvement.
Mr. Frederick, one of the neighbouring farmers, swindles Napoleon by buying old wood with forged money, and then attacks the farm, using blasting powder to blow up the restored windmill. Though the animals win the battle, they do so at great cost, as many, including Boxer, are wounded. Boxer continues working harder and harder, until he collapses while working on the windmill. Napoleon sends for a van to take Boxer to the veterinarian, explaining that better care can be given there. Benjamin the donkey, who "could read as well as any pig",[5] notices that the van belongs to "Alfred Simmonds, Horse Slaughterer and Glue Boiler", and attempts to mount a rescue; but the animals' attempts are futile. Squealer reports that the van was purchased by the hospital and the writing from the previous owner had not been repainted. He recounts a tale of Boxer's death in the hands of the best medical care. Shortly after Boxer's death, it is revealed that the pigs have purchased more whisky.
Years pass, and the pigs learn to walk upright, carry whips, and wear clothes. The Seven Commandments are reduced to a single phrase: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." Napoleon holds a dinner party for the pigs and the humans of the area, who congratulate Napoleon on having the hardest-working animals in the country on the least feed. Napoleon announces an alliance with the humans, against the labouring classes of both "worlds". He abolishes practices and traditions related to the Revolution, and reverts the name of the farm to "Manor Farm".
The animals, overhearing the conversation, notice that the faces of the pigs have begun changing. During a poker match, an argument breaks out between Napoleon and Mr. Pilkington when they both play the Ace of Spades, and the animals realize that the faces of the pigs look like the faces of humans and no one can tell the difference between them.

Animalism

Animalism is an allegorical mirror of the Soviet Union, particularly between the 1910s and the 1940s, as well as the evolution of the view of the Russian revolutionaries and government of how to practice it.[clarification needed] It is invented by the highly respected pig Old Major. The pigs Snowball, Napoleon, and Squealer adapt Old Major's ideas into an actual philosophy, which they formally name Animalism. Soon after, Napoleon and Squealer indulge in the vices of humans (drinking alcohol, sleeping in beds, trading). Squealer is employed to alter the Seven Commandments to account for his humanization, which represents the Soviet government's tweaking of communist theory to make it more a reformation of capitalism than a replacement.
The Seven Commandments are laws that were supposed to keep order and ensure elementary Animalism within Animal Farm. The Seven Commandments were designed to unite the animals together against the humans and prevent animals from following the humans' evil habits. Since not all of the animals can remember them, they are boiled down into one basic statement: "Four legs good, two legs bad!" (with wings counting as legs for this purpose, Snowball arguing that wings count as legs as they are objects of propulsion rather than manipulation), which the sheep constantly repeat, distracting the crowd from the lies of the pigs. The original commandments were:
  1. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
  2. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
  3. No animal shall wear clothes.
  4. No animal shall sleep in a bed.
  5. No animal shall drink alcohol.
  6. No animal shall kill any other animal.
  7. All animals are equal.

Later, Napoleon and his pigs are corrupted by the absolute power they hold over the farm. To maintain their popularity with the other animals, Squealer secretly paints additions to some commandments to benefit the pigs while keeping them free of accusations of breaking the laws (such as "No animal shall drink alcohol" having "to excess" appended to it and "No animal shall sleep in a bed" with "with sheets" added to it). The changed commandments are as follows, with the changes bolded:
  1. No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets.
  2. No animal shall drink alcohol to excess.
  3. No animal shall kill any other animal without cause.
Eventually the laws are replaced with "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others", and "Four legs good, two legs better!" as the pigs become more human.

Characters

Pigs

Old MajorAn aged prize Middle White boar is the inspiration that fuels the Rebellion in the book. He is an allegory of Karl Marx and Lenin, the founders of Communism, in that he draws up the principles of the revolution. His skull being put on revered public display also resembles Lenin, whose embalmed body was put on display.[6][7]Napoleon"A large, rather fierce-looking Berkshire boar, the only Berkshire on the farm, not much of a talker, but with a reputation for getting his own way",[8] An allegory of Joseph Stalin,[6] Napoleon is the main villain of Animal Farm. He begins to gradually build up his power, using the dogs Jessie and Bluebell, whom he he took from their parents as puppies and raised to be vicious dogs, as his secret police. After driving Snowball off the farm, Napoleon usurps full power, using false propaganda from Squealer and threats and intimidation from the dogs to keep the other animals in line. Among other things, he gradually changes the Commandments for his benefit. By the end of the book, Napoleon and his fellow pigs have learned to walk upright and started to behave similarly to the humans against whom they originally revolted.In the first French version of Animal Farm, Napoleon is called César, the French form of Caesar,[3] although another translation has him as Napoléon.[9]SnowballNapoleon's rival and original head of the farm after Jones' overthrow. He is mainly based on Trotsky,[6] but also combines elements from Lenin.[7] He wins over most animals and gains their trust by leading a very successful first harvest, but is driven out of the farm by Napoleon. Snowball genuinely works for the good of the farm and the animals and devises plans to help the animals achieve their vision of an egalitarian utopia, but Napoleon and his dogs chase him from the farm, and Napoleon spreads rumours to make him seem evil and corrupt and that he had secretly sabotaged the animals' efforts to improve the farm.SquealerA small white fat porker who serves as Napoleon's right hand pig and minister of propaganda, holding a position similar to that of Molotov.[6] Squealer manipulates the language to excuse, justify, and extol all of Napoleon's actions. Squealer limits debate by complicating it and he confuses and disorients, making claims that the pigs need the extra luxury they are taking in order to function properly, for example. However, when questions persist, he usually uses the threat of the return of Mr Jones, the former owner of the farm, to justify the pigs' privileges. Squealer uses statistics to convince the animals that life is getting better and better. Most of the animals have only dim memories of life before the revolution; therefore, they are convinced. In the end, he is the first pig to walk on his hind legs.MinimusA poetic pig who writes the second and third national anthems of Animal Farm after the singing of "Beasts of England" is banned.The PigletsHinted to be the children of Napoleon (albeit not truly noted in the novel) and are the first generation of animals actually subjugated to his idea of animal inequality.The young pigsFour pigs who complain about Napoleon's takeover of the farm but are quickly silenced and later executed.PinkeyeA minor pig who is mentioned only once; he is the pig that tastes Napoleon's food to make sure it is not poisoned, in response to rumours about an assassination attempt on Napoleon.Humans

Mr. JonesThe former owner of the farm, Jones is a very heavy drinker and the animals revolt against him after he drinks so much that he does not feed or take care of them. The attempt by Jones and his farmhands to recapture the farm is foiled in the Battle of the Cowshed.FrederickThe tough owner of Pinchfield, a well-kept neighbouring farm. He buys wood from the animals for forged money and later attacks them, destroying the windmill but being finally beaten in the resulting Battle of the Windmill. There are stories of him mistreating his own animals, such as throwing dogs into a furnace. Pinchfield is noted as being smaller than Pilkington's Foxwood farm but more efficiently run, and Frederick briefly enters into an "alliance" with Napoleon by offering to buy wood from him but then betrays the deal and mounts a bloody invasion of Animal Farm.Mr. PilkingtonThe easy-going but crafty owner of Foxwood, a neighbouring farm overgrown with weeds, as described in the book. At the end of the game, both Napoleon and Pilkington draw the Ace of Spades and then begin fighting loudly. Foxwood is described as being much larger than Pinchfield, but not as efficiently run.Mr. WhymperA man hired by Napoleon for the public relations of Animal Farm to human society. Whymper is used as a go-between to trade with human society for things the animals can't produce on their own: at first this is a legitimate need because the animals can't manufacture their own windmill components, but eventually Whymper is used to procure luxuries like alcohol for the pigs.Equines

BoxerBoxer is a loyal, kind, dedicated, and respectable horse. He is physically the strongest animal on the farm, but impressionable (a major theme in the book), which leaves him stating "I will work harder" and "Napoleon is always right" despite the corruption.CloverClover, a mare, is Boxer's companion, constantly caring for him; she also acts as a matriarch of sorts for the other horses and the other animals in general (such as the ducklings she shelters with her forelegs and hooves during Old Major's speech).MollieMollie is a self-centred, self-indulgent and vain young white mare whose sole enjoyments are wearing ribbons in her mane, eating sugar cubes, and being pampered and groomed by humans. She quickly leaves for another farm and is only once mentioned again.BenjaminBenjamin, a donkey, is one of the longest-lived animals. He has the worst temper, but is also one of the wisest animals on the farm, and is one of the few who can actually read. He is able to "read as well as any pig."[10] Benjamin is a very dedicated friend to Boxer, and does nothing to warn the other animals of the pigs' corruption, which he secretly realizes is steadily unfolding. When asked if he was happier after the revolution than before it, Benjamin remarks, "Donkeys live a long time. None of you has ever seen a dead donkey." He is skeptical and pessimistic, his most-often-made statement being "Life will go on as it has always gone on — that is, badly."[10]Other animals

MurielA wise old goat who is friends with all of the animals on the farm. She, like Benjamin and Snowball, is one of the few animals on the farm who can read (with some difficulty as she has to spell the words out first) and helps Clover discover that the Seven Commandments have been continually changed.The PuppiesOffspring of Jessie and Bluebell, taken away from them by Napoleon at birth and reared by Napoleon to be his security force. These dogs are trained to be vicious, going so far as to rip many of the animals to shreds including the four young pigs, a sheep and various hens. They attempt to do the same to Boxer, who halts one of the puppies under his hoof. The puppy begs for mercy and through Napoleon's orders, Boxer sets the puppy free.Moses the RavenAn old crow who occasionally visits the farm, regaling its denizens with tales of a wondrous place beyond the clouds called Sugarcandy Mountain, where he avers that all animals go when they die—but only if they work hard. He is interpreted as symbolising the Russian Orthodox Church, with Sugarcandy Mountain an allusion to Heaven for the animals.[11] He spends his time turning the animals' minds to thoughts of Sugarcandy Mountain (rather than their work) and yet does no work himself. He feels unequal in comparison to the other animals, so he leaves after the rebellion, for all animals were supposed to be equal. However, much later in the novel he returns to the farm and continues to proclaim the existence of Sugarcandy Mountain. The other animals are confused by the pigs' attitude towards Moses; they denounce his claims as nonsense, but allow him to remain on the farm. The pigs do this to keep any doubting animals in line with the hope of a happy afterlife, keeping their minds on Sugarcandy Mountain and not on possible uprisings. In the end, Moses is one of the few animals to remember The Rebellion, along with Clover, Benjamin, and the pigs.The SheepThey show limited understanding of the situations but nonetheless blindly support Napoleon's ideals. They are regularly shown repeating the phrase "four legs good, two legs bad". At the end of the novel, one of the Seven Commandments is changed after the pigs learn to walk on two legs and their shout changes to "four legs good, two legs better". They can be relied on by the pigs to shout down any dissent from the others.The HensThe hens are among the first to rebel against Napoleon: in response to their being forced to give more eggs, they destroy their eggs instead of handing them to the higher powers (the pigs), who want to sell them to humans. Napoleon then uses fear and starves them until the pigs get what they want.The CowsTheir milk is stolen by the pigs, who learn to milk them, and is stirred into the pigs' mash every day while the other animals are not given any such luxuries.The CatNever seen to carry out any work, the cat is absent for long periods, and is forgiven because her excuses are so convincing and she "purred so affectionately that is was impossible not to believe in her good intentions".[12] She has no interest in the politics of the farm, and the only time she is recorded as having participated in an election she was found to have actually "voted on both sides".[12]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm

The Pig In Animal Farm

The pigs in Animal Farm represent the heads of the Communist Party during the

Cold War Era. The pigs rise to power mirrors the rise of the Communist Party. Throughout the course of the novel, the pigs grow from being equal with the other animals to become overbearing, oppressive, sadistical tyrants.

As the novel begins, the pig Old Major shares with all the other animals on the Manor Farm his dreams of the perfect animal society and of someday being free of the chains of slavery. After Old Major dies, his dream of an animal rebellion against man becomes a reality. Three pigs Napoleon, Snowball, and Squealer gather all of Old Major's ideas and create Animalism. The pigs take the lead control at first due to the fact the Major was a pig and that "pigs, were manifestly cleverer than the other animals...”(62) and “ should decide all questions of farm policy...”(62) Is seems as though if not for the pigs taking control perhaps that Animal Farm would remain a dream. The pigs start off with good intentions, but always stand apart and have more power than the other animals.

The first year or so after the rebellion, the pigs follow the teachings of Animalism

and Animal Farm prospers, while the animals are fe

Through the years, Napoleon mirrors the head of the communist party Joseph Stalin. He has anyone who does not agree with him killed, changes the laws so they will only benefit himself instead of having them benefit the other animals, and makes the others work hard and takes the fruits of their toils for himself. George Orwell uses the pigs and the farm to show the audience what can happen to some societies even when they start off with the best intentions. By the end of the novel, the pigs become so corrupt that they even begin walking on two legs and carrying whips. The pigs have strayed so far from the original philosophy that there is no turning back. The pigs have become man, the enemy, everything that they were against they are now. The animals in the beginning of the novel had so many ideals, so many hopes for the future, but by the end these ideals are crushed along with the animals bodies. The animals may have escaped man, but now they have a new master, the PIG.

this time Napoleon is plotting a takeover. When Napoleon takes the litter of puppies the

re fed well, treated well, not overworked,

http://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/97610.html




Animal Farm is also a Movie that I watched in School my point is that the Socialism is man made and secular and won't work.
Reply

Mike3449
02-21-2011, 11:31 PM
Originally Posted by truthseeker63
I gave up on Socialism because I read a book called Animal Farm by George Orwell. Sorry for posting all these links but Im just trying to proove that Socialism can't work Islam is the answer.

Animal Farm
George Orwell

Power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely-and this is vividly and eloquently proved in Orwell's short novel. "Animal Farm" is a simple fable of great symbolic value, and as Orwell himself explained: "it is the history of a revolution that went wrong". The novel can be seen as the historical analysis of the causes of the failure of communism, or as a mere fairy-tale; in any case it tells a good story that aims to prove that human nature and diversity prevent people from being equal and happy ,or at least equally happy.

"Animal Farm" tells the simple and tragic story of what happens when the oppressed farm animals rebel, drive out Mr. Jones, the farmer, and attempt to rule the farm themselves, on an equal basis. What the animals seem to have aimed at was a utopian sort of communism, where each would work according to his capacity, respecting the needs of others. The venture failed, and "Animal Farm" ended up being a dictatorship of pigs, who were the brightest, and most idle of the animals.

Orwell's mastery lies in his presentation of the horrors of totalitarian regimes, and his analysis of communism put to practice, through satire and simple story-telling. The structure of the novel is skillfully organized, and the careful reader may, for example, detect the causes of the unworkability of communism even from the first chapter. This is deduced from Orwell's description of the various animals as they enter the barn and take their seats to listen to the revolutionary preaching of Old Major, father of communism in Animal Farm. Each animal has different features and attitude; the pigs, for example, "settled down in the straw immediately in front of the platform", which is a hint on their future role, whereas Clover, the affectionate horse" made a sort of wall" with her foreleg to protect some ducklings.

So, it appears that the revolution was doomed from the beginning, even though it began in idealistic optimism as expressed by the motto" no animal must ever tyrannize over his own kind. Weak or strong, clever or simple, we are all brothers. "When the animals drive out Mr. Jones, they create their "Seven Commandments" which ensure equality and prosperity for all the animals. The pigs ,however, being the natural leaders, managed to reverse the commandments, and through terror and propaganda establish the rule of an elite of pigs, under the leadership of Napoleon, the most revered and sinister pig.

"Animal Farm" successfully presents how the mechanism of propaganda and brainwashing works in totalitarian regimes, by showing how the pigs could make the other animals believe practically anything. Responsible for the propaganda was Squealer, a pig that "could turn black into white". Squealer managed to change the rule from "all animals are equal" to" all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". He managed to convince the other animals that it was for their sake that the pigs ate most of the apples and drank most of the milk, that leadership was "heavy responsibility" and therefore the animals should be thankful to Napoleon, that what they saw may have been something they "dreamed", and when everything else failed he would use the threat of " Jones returning" to silence the animals. In this simple but effective way, Orwell presents the tragedy and confusion of thought control to the extent that one seems better off simply believing that" Napoleon is always right".

Orwell's criticism of the role of the Church is also very effective. In Animal Farm, the Church is represented by Moses, a tame raven, who talks of "Sugarcandy Mountain", a happy country in the sky "where we poor animals shall rest forever from our labors". It is interesting to observe that when Old Major was first preaching revolutionary communism, Moses was sleeping in the barn, which satirizes the Church being caught asleep by communism. It is also important to note that the pig-dictators allowed and indirectly encouraged Moses; it seems that it suited the pigs to have the animals dreaming of a better life after death so that they wouldn't attempt to have a better life while still alive...

In "Animal Farm", Orwell describes how power turned the pigs from simple "comrades" to ruthless dictators who managed to walk on two legs, and carry whips. The story maybe seen as an analysis of the Soviet regime, or as a warning against political power games of an absolute nature and totalitarianism in general. For this reason, the story ends with a hair-raising warning to all humankind:" The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which".

http://bookreviews.nabou.com/reviews/animalfarm.html

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels
Manifesto
of the Communist Party

1848

II -- PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class; if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.
In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/cl...manifesto.html

Does the Bible support Communism?

Question: "Does the Bible support Communism?"

Answer: Communism, a branch of socialism, is an experimental social system based on a set of ideals that, at first glance, seem to agree with some biblical principles. On a closer look, however, little evidence can be seen that the Bible truly supports or endorses communism. There is a difference between communism in theory and communism in practice, and the Bible verses that seem to comply with communist ideals are in fact contradicted by the practices of a communist government.

There is a surprising sentence in a description of the church in Acts 2 that has led many people to wonder whether the Bible supports communism, and has led some people to defend strongly the idea that communism is actually biblical. The passage reads, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). This statement seems to imply that communism (which has, at its heart, a desire to eliminate poverty by “spreading the wealth around”) is found here in the earliest of Christian churches. However, there is a crucial difference between the church in Acts 2 and a communist society that must be understood.

In the Acts 2 church, the people were giving to each other out of their own good will to those who had a need, and they were giving freely, without regulation of how much they were to give. In other words, they shared what they had out of a shared love for one another and a common goal—living for Christ and glorifying God. In a communist society, people give because a system of government forces them to give. They don’t have a choice in the matter as to how much they give or to whom they give. This, therefore, does not reflect on who they are; it says nothing about their identity or character. Under communism, the cheerful, generous giver and the stingy man are both required to give exactly the same amount – namely, everything they earn.

The issue is one of cheerful giving (which the Bible supports) vs. forced giving. Second Corinthians 9:7 says, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” After all, the Bible contains a great number of references to helping the poor, being generous with what we have, and looking out for those who are less fortunate. When we obey in this area with cheerful hearts with the proper motivation, our giving is pleasing to God. What is not pleasing to God is giving out of compulsion, because forced giving is not giving out of love and therefore profits nothing in the spiritual sense. Paul tells the Corinthians, “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:3). But that is the inevitable result of communism.

Capitalism is actually a better system, when it comes to giving, because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase. Communism has proven to simply make all its citizens poor, except the very few in power who decide where the wealth goes. But even capitalism won’t work, by itself, as a system for aiding the poor. It depends on its citizens to be diligent (Proverbs 10:4) and generous with the fruits of their labor (1 Timothy 6:18), and to give out of love for God and their neighbor. Thus, we see that God has designed for the physical and financial needs of the poor to be met by Christian individuals, rather than by any system of government.



http://www.gotquestions.org/communism-Bible.html


That sounds pretty lame to me...
Reply

truthseeker63
02-21-2011, 11:48 PM
Are you saying that you like the idea of Sociaiism Mike3449 ?
Reply

ardianto
02-22-2011, 05:55 PM
Actually there is no standard definition on Islamic economic system, everyone has his/her own definition. But in my definition this is economic system that based on Islamic values and under the rule of Islamic law (sharia).

Islamic economic system is better than socialism because it gives freedom to the people to establish their own business without unnecessary restriction. Also it is better than capitalism because sharia can be used to prevent or punish business people that use their capital power to do something wrong.
Reply

truthseeker63
02-22-2011, 06:08 PM
Islamic economic system is better than socialism I agree.
Reply

Mike3449
03-05-2011, 01:08 AM
Originally Posted by truthseeker63
Are you saying that you like the idea of Sociaiism Mike3449 ?

No.

I prefer Freedom.
Reply

جوري
03-05-2011, 01:53 AM
Originally Posted by Mike3449
No. I prefer Freedom.

You're certainly free to run ponzi schemes, experiment with drugs, alcohol, prostitution but even in the 'civilized' west, it will land you in jail where you're free to be the pet squeeze for bubbah, cletus and cooter..

good luck with that!
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!