Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

24
The Jews committed genocide against the Romans
posted 132 days ago by towards8 132 days ago by towards8 +26 / -2
39 comments share
39 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (39)
sorted by:
▲ 3 ▼
– Graphenium 3 points 132 days ago +3 / -0

Mo Zi (aka Mo Tzu, ala Lao Tzu or Sun Tzu) was a pre-Christian chinaman with quite a revolutionary philosophy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozi

Here’s the wiki overview:

Mozi's moral teachings emphasized introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity, rather than obedience to rituals. He observed that people often learned about the world through adversity.[7] By reflecting on one's own successes and failures, one attains true self-knowledge rather than mere conformity to ritual.[8] Mozi exhorted people to lead a life of asceticism and self-restraint, renouncing both material and spiritual extravagance. Like Confucius, Mozi idealized the Xia dynasty and the ancients of Chinese mythology, but he also criticized the Confucian belief that modern life should be patterned on the ways of the ancients. Mozi argued that what is thought of as "ancient" was actually innovative in its time, and thus should not be used to hinder present-day innovation.[9] Though Mozi did not believe that history necessarily progresses, as did Han Fei Zi, he shared the latter's critique of fate (命, mìng). Mozi believed that people were capable of changing their circumstances and directing their own lives, which could be achieved by applying one's senses to observing the world, as well as judging objects and events by their causes, functions, and historical bases.[10] This was the "three-prong method" Mozi recommended for testing the truth or falsehood of statements. His students later expanded upon this theory to form the School of Names.

Mozi tried to replace what he considered to be the long-entrenched Chinese ideal of strong attachments to family and clan structures with the concept of "impartial caring" or "universal love" (兼愛, jiān ài). He argued directly against Confucians, who had philosophized that it was natural and correct for people to care about different people in different degrees. Mozi, in contrast, argued that people in principle should care for all people equally, a notion that philosophers in other schools found absurd, as they interpreted this notion as implying no special amount of care or duty towards one's parents and family.

Overlooked by those critics, however, was a passage in the chapter on "Self-Cultivation" which stated, "When people near-by are not befriended, there is no use endeavoring to attract those at a distance."[11] This point was also precisely articulated by a Mohist in a debate with Mencius (in the Mengzi), where the Mohist argued, in relation to carrying out universal love, that "we begin with what is near." Also, in the first chapter in the Mozi on the topic of universal love, Mozi argued that the best way of being filial to one's parents is to be filial to the parents of others. The foundational principle was therefore that benevolence, as well as malevolence, is requited, and that one would be treated by others as one treats others. Mozi quoted a popular passage from the Book of Odes to bring home this point: "When one throws to me a peach, I return to him a plum." One's parents will be treated by others as one treats the parents of others. Mozi also differentiated between "intention" and "actuality", thereby placing a central importance on the will to love, even though in practice it might very well be impossible to bring benefit to everyone. In addition, Mozi argued that benevolence comes to human beings "as naturally as fire turns upward or water turns downward", provided that persons in positions of authority illustrate benevolence in their own lives. In differentiating between the ideas of "universal" (jian) and "differential" (bie), Mozi said that "universal" originated from righteousness while "differential" entailed human effort.

Mozi also held a belief in the power of ghosts and spirits, although he is often thought to have only worshipped them pragmatically. In fact, in his discussion on ghosts and spirits, he remarked that, even if they did not exist, communal gatherings for the sake of making sacrificial offering would play a role in strengthening social bonds. Furthermore, for Mozi the will of Heaven (天, tiān) was that people should love one another, and that mutual love by all would bring benefit to all. Therefore, it was in everyone's interest that they would love others "as they love themselves". According to Mozi, Heaven should be respected because failing to do so would subject one to punishment. For Mozi, Heaven was not the "amoral", mystical nature of the Daoists; rather, it was a benevolent, moral force that rewarded good and punished evil. Similar in some ways to the beliefs systems found in the Abrahamic religions, Mozi believed that all living things lived in a realm ruled by Heaven, and Heaven possessed a will which was independent from, and higher than, the will of people. Thus Mozi wrote that "Universal love is the Way of Heaven", since "Heaven nourishes and sustains all life without regard to status."[12] Mozi's ideal of government, which advocated a meritocracy based on talent rather than background, also followed his idea of Heaven.

Mozi opposed the Confucian idea of "Destiny",[13] promoting instead an idea of "anti-fatalism" (非命). Where the Confucian philosophy held that a person's life, death, wealth, poverty, and social status were entirely dependent upon destiny and therefore could not be changed, Mozi argued that hard work and virtuous acts could change one's position in life.

The crazy part? Mo Zi is credited as the founder of the Mo Pai school of Nei Gong (which I’ve posted about a fair bit, mostly over in c/HumanPotential - for anyone interested check the video stickied to the top of that page)

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 4 ▼
– WeedleTLiar 4 points 132 days ago +4 / -0

Mozi tried to replace what he considered to be the long-entrenched Chinese ideal of strong attachments to family and clan structures with the concept of "impartial caring" or "universal love" (兼愛, jiān ài). He argued directly against Confucians, who had philosophized that it was natural and correct for people to care about different people in different degrees.

Hard pass

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Graphenium 1 point 132 days ago +1 / -0

Overlooked by those critics, however, was a passage in the chapter on "Self-Cultivation" which stated, "When people near-by are not befriended, there is no use endeavoring to attract those at a distance."[11] This point was also precisely articulated by a Mohist in a debate with Mencius (in the Mengzi), where the Mohist argued, in relation to carrying out universal love, that "we begin with what is near." …. Mozi also differentiated between "intention" and "actuality", thereby placing a central importance on the will to love, even though in practice it might very well be impossible to bring benefit to everyone.

u/redkrab also (responding to both comments here)

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– redkrab 2 points 131 days ago +2 / -0

can you give me your interpretation of it?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Graphenium 1 point 131 days ago +1 / -0

Sure, fair enough, (even potentially well translated) 2000 year old Chinese definitely leaves room for interpretation. I’ll mix its words, (your words), and [my words] to show how I think your issues are already addressed, when these views are properly [imo obviously] understood - i don’t believe these views teach the “suicidal altruism” that some nefarious entities like to portray them as teaching, a delusion which many well-intentioned seekers can easily fall into, given the level of control that these nefarious entities have over the flow of information we [speaking generally] consume


"When people near-by (natural communities) are not befriended, there is no use [because you’ll end up with a “melting pot”] endeavoring to attract those at a distance ."

The nearest person is obviously yourself. If one truly loves themselves, that alone addresses a large part of the way the delusion of the melting pot is foisted upon us. The people in the west have been taught to loathe themselves for multiple generations now. [i.e. the endlessly regurgitated narratives of colonialism, slavery, racism, etc]. Like I say, addressing that alone addresses a large portion of the problem

The next nearest to ourselves is our immediate family and kin - obviously, or atleast “naturally”, homogenous with ourselves. When one truly loves their family and kin, again, I see that address another large portion of “the problem”. We know the statistical realities of inter-racial relationships, and we have known for centuries. It takes active effort to try to make us forget. However, free will is the central foundation, and as such, I don’t know if “just make it illegal” is the solution. I lean towards something like, “shut down promotion of it, educate on the realities of it, but don’t attempt to enforce tyranny. As the first paragraph of the wiki i quoted lays out:

Mozi's moral teachings emphasized introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity, rather than obedience to rituals. He observed that people often learned about the world through adversity.[7] By reflecting on one's own successes and failures, one attains true self-knowledge rather than mere conformity to ritual.

Which I think pretty much speaks for itself here, and what im trying to express above

Next we have the wider community, perhaps called “the nation” at one point in time but with centuries of dilution very few “natural” nations (as one here might define), exist anymore. But if one truly loves their people, their “nation”, I believe the rest of the problem is addressed. With this framework in mind, the core of the nation is always building and getting stronger, and the far fringes are where experimentation happens, as has been the case throughout all of human history it seems (aka what appears to be “natural”)

If any of that makes sense, you might find an earlier post of mine interesting, which I believe speaks more to this issue of suicidal empathy and how that differs from The Way (or in the words of the short story, “unreasonable grace”). Though it’s quite long so I’ll just link it instead of trying to fit it in this already becoming unwieldy reply:

https://communities.win/c/ChristianAnarchism/p/1AR0GimkmR/unreasonable-grace-and-the-dilem/c

Edit) un-autocorrected a couple autocorrects

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– WeedleTLiar 2 points 131 days ago +2 / -0

Yeah, I read that, so basically it isn't even internally self-consistent.

Clearly, the people nearby should be befriended first and if there is a conflict the people nearby take priority. There is a hierarchy of who to care about.

So how do you square that with the idea of loving everyone equally? You still slaughter them and despoil their lands but, what, feel bad about it later?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Graphenium 1 point 131 days ago +1 / -0

So how do you square that with the idea of loving everyone equally?

Did you read my response to krab’s similar followup?

https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/1ARK0Mea4A/the-jews-committed-genocide-agai/c/4eXtiGi58jQ

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– redkrab 3 points 132 days ago +3 / -0

very very cool.

i agree in parts. i see that his phylosophy would only work in a homogenous society for starters.

this universal love thing is almost impossible when we have meltings pots instead of natural communities

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 2 points 131 days ago +2 / -0

did not believe that history necessarily progresses

To believe implies storing what process necessitates...resisting the temptation to hold onto.

Others suggest "history" to tempt ones "belief" to hold onto it.

Mozi's moral teachings emphasized introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity, rather than obedience to rituals + Mo Zi is credited as the founder of...

Taking the credit/creed/belief of others to be a founder contradicts introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– Graphenium 2 points 131 days ago +2 / -0

Taking the credit/creed/belief of others to be a founder contradicts introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity.

True, and wise - to clarify my thoughts, I see Mo Zi and the school(s) he established as exemplars of the innate process(es) available to everyone (or, perhaps just every man, there is logic pointing in both directions). While these processes are available to every-one, rare are the ones who follow the path steadfastly. These are the Christs, the Buddhas, the Immortals (though a more accurate name is perhaps “those who choose the time of their death”), they have been known by as many names as there have been congregations of humans. In fact, a few years ago i came across a new name which I believe finds its source in this vein, a very interesting name indeed, u/free-will-of-choice

Often, and increasingly so as the congregation grows, people come to mistake the teacher for the lesson they came to teach. I think that’s one of the main impediments to our forward momentum vis a vis this subject

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– free-will-of-choice 2 points 131 days ago +2 / -0

innate process(es) available to everyone

Innate implies potential born (nasci) within (in) process, hence inception towards death procession giving potential life to "each" one.

One process for each potential within aka one cause for each effect within aka one action for each reaction within etc.

Others make pluralism available to distract one from singularity, and thereby self discernment aka "introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity".

there is logic pointing in both directions

Logic implies circular thinking aka two sides pointing at each other (conflict of reason). Direction aka directed by action implies linear progression.

Only within linear can circular be shaped...logic tempts one to hold onto the shape.

Here's a modern sleight of hand for it... https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/onedirection/onewayoranotherteenagekicks.html

"One way or another...I'm gonna get you". One way implies the natural way aka one direction (inception towards death) for each one (life) within. The other (circular logic) is where I'm (suggestion) gonna get ya (consent).

processes are available

Only within singularity can plurality be made available to each separated unit by few suggesting many to join together.

rare are the ones who follow the path

a) What's rarer than being one within all? Simultaneously...what's more common than being one among one another within all?

Self discernment implies rare; common consensus diminishes that rarity.

b) If there's only one path (inception towards death) for each one (life) within, then following it implies what? If others suggest plurality and one follows many different path within the confines of circular logic, then what does that imply?

Following the path like a hamster in a wheel...

those who choose the time of their death

Aka wasting potential (life) by taking measurements, while ignoring that only process gives (inception) and takes (death).

Taking implies giving self up...giving implies tempting others to take. The narrow path...letting go of what was given, while resisting the temptation to take.

congregations of humans

a) Human aka hue of man implies color aka spectrum of light separating each ray within from one another.

Only within animation (animal) can a hue of man (human) bring differences to each beings sight.

b) Con (together) gregare (to collect)...one can only artificially collect together what nature separates apart.

as the congregation grows

Procession (inception towards death) grows division of potential (life)...congregation grows indigestion within potential.

to mistake the teacher for the lesson

Taking implies missing given. Teaching implies responding to given while learning, and vice versa. Lesson/less/loss cannot be taken without giving up growth.

impediments to our forward momentum

Forward momentum (inception towards death) forwards matter (life)...impediment implies mentally ignoring physical momentum. "Our" implies collective consciousness tempting singular mind to take possession during a given process.

Impeding ones mind doesn't prevent ones body from being moved forwards.

one of the main

One (perception) of the main (perceivable)...any suggestion is minor to it. Ones consent to any suggestion impedes ones mind with the suggested into becoming one of the minor aka those who under-stand.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Graphenium 1 point 131 days ago +1 / -0

Just as you are forced to put your innate wisdom and your wisdom of the innate into words in order to help others grow (which seems a type of cosmic irony innate to physical existence), so too have all the others who have recognized this, just as it will continue to be for those who come to recognize this

The soil from which truth grows is this:

What others profess, I will also proclaim: “Forced principles will not be viable”, Let this be the heart and soul of the message.

Tao Te Ching verse 42

what is a good man but a bad man’s teacher? What is a bad man but a good man’s job?

Tao Te Ching verse 27

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No subversion.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
  • Perun
  • Thisisnotanexit
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026.02.01 - jmfxn (status)

Copyright © 2026.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy