this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2025
435 points (96.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

7461 readers
2905 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bosht@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sure, it's great, but humans have proven time and again that religion causes more abuses over time than not. Yes, tax the rich. Using a religious text to justify it is weird. I do actually appreciate the info as I didn't know this about Islam, but in the same vein it's still religion which inherently leads to systems of abuse and shitting on people in the name of a deity. Not that humans aren't good enough at doing that without religion, but I feel religion just gives them more of a reason when believing they're serving some higher power.

[–] sunflowercowboy@feddit.org 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Religion has proven time and time again, man hates happiness of others more than themselves.

Organized religion proves to decay by wantingly creating a structure that can be exploited rather than simply derivative. Islam is an abrahamic religion but it really should just be Christian, and honestly more orthodox than western christians. They love the virgin Mary. So tithing isn't a surprise, as that is a jewish tradition.

Religion should be used because that believing that you serve a higher power is important. However, often times folks believe the higher power is foreign. Rather than within, you are capable, you are lord, you can enact your will. It is only truly religion that explains that this power must be limited, tempered, and weathered to be revealed. It is there for when death grasp's your heart, strangling it until you weep your soul into every action.

Humans are just selfish and forget that if they are sent by god, so were they. That we no longer live in untamed wilds, but manufactured instability. Privileged kids grow up experiencing little death, and live their life time with eyes closed. Yet they think they see with eyes unclouded, but their hearts so empty of meaning.

Sharingan in Naruto is inspired by this very fact.

Good men have no mortal bindings and so they can ascend to serve God's will truly. God's will? Protect the weak, the exploitable, and indefensible. The system is built around moving the lower classes for profit, for labor, or just as polifical pawns in a chess game. That is the only right act man can do, anything else will blur the lines.

As an atheist, I have written god as dead. However I believe we carry fragmentary hopes, and together we can form a god. Sadly, through exclusion, division, and persecution - god cannot exist truly, but incomplete and corrupted. Not everyone is voicing their version of god, gods, etc. Except anime because Japan is massively ahead in the urban hellscape of progress. (And a lot of east asia, Kowloon is an extreme example, sadly it's gone.)

FMA literally was a reforming of the bible's beliefs with antifascist ideology, with reverence for islamic continuation of belief. Attack on Titan is mainly these parasocial fears in a post-nuclear world as collectively cities grow but social development wanes. Isekais literally romanticizes death because life is leaving these natural wonders behind.

I took this journey when my brother was murdered. I believed in no god, and yet I have found a lot of reflections in each manuscript I process, each literature I discover. By his phantom, I became enlightened. I wish I could just have him instead, but all I can be is thankful I am alive.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Our sister company is Zakat approved and runs water trucks in Gaza using the funds that people donate

[–] cevn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What company is that?? Sounds amazing.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Dont want the name out here, but PMd it to you.

[–] fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 105 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

Despite all our faults in Islam, Zakat is such a good/common sense idea.

Anyways, despite living in an Islamic country i doubt our billionaires pay zakat anyway. If they're fine with butchering, prostitution drinking and drugs i think they're going to sleep just fine at night not paying their tax.

[–] SattaRIP@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 5 days ago (10 children)

Don't worry, zakat is another Islamic concept the clergy (I think that's the right English word) abuse and twist to line their pockets. Zakat and khons are both about donating to the needy, but both ideas have been twisted so many times. Khons details are different but the word is related to the number 5. The first version I remember being told is that you pay one fifth of your yearly earnings' leftovers.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (12 children)

We would be better off disallowing organized religion in public and forcefully redistributing all excess wealth perpetually.

[–] laserm@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No, we should built impenetrable wall between the state and religion, but right to believe and exercise religion is a very fundamental and basic human right.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

redistributing all excess wealth perpetually.

what would keep it from re-flowing into the hands of a few?

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The perpetual part.

We should also add a clause where anyone trying to unbalance wealth again dies.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 58 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This must be why the UAE is such an egalitarian country... 😅

[–] carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 71 points 5 days ago (4 children)

i mean, leaders of theocracies blatantly ignoring the parts of their religion that they don’t like is nothing new lol

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

The individual must realize that he is no more than the steward of this property, which is fundamentally the possession of society; this must make him accept the restrictions that the system lays upon his liberty, and the bounds that limit his rights of disposal. On the other side, society must realize its fundamental right to such property and must thus become bolder in prescribing the regulations and in laying down the laws which concern it. Thus only may we arrive at principles that will ensure complete social justice in the profitable use of property, which cannot be an end in itself nor a subject of actual ownership. The clearest instance of this is the matter of the tenure of land; thought cannot conceive that any man should be the owner of the land itself; all that he can possess is its irrigation and its crops, which means that the matter is one of the profitable use of a possession rather than one of actual ownership.

Sayyid Qutb spends much of this chapter in Social Justice in Islam insisting that it’s not full on socialism, but it’s definitely not free market capitalism.

In part, he has to write a lot about how not socialist he is because of the popularity of Islamic socialist movements. They were huge players in Egypt and Iran.

One can debate how those inspired by Qutb have kept to his ideas, but the society he describes is very much focused on ensuring everyone has enough to eat. (It’s also a society where I end up stoned to death in a public square, so you win some you lose some.)

Islam at least also forbids interest. There’s a complicated banking system, and I’m pretty sure there still are ways to fuck people over, but getting broke people trapped on the payday loan cycle at least isn’t one.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Elmo give 2.5% of his wealth?

Fuck that shit.

At best people like him should get to KEEP 2.5 % of their wealth. More reasonable, likely, will be TJ jail them as few billionaires can claim to gave gotten there without stepping on the back of someone. Elmo personally should be jailed for life.

Also, we don't need religions for tax. Just tax the rich fucking bastards

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Elmo give 2.5% of his wealth?

You seem to be misreading.

Give 2.5% of their wealth, each year, not just give 2.5% of their income. There's a huge difference.

Wealth gets taxed every year, unlike income which gets taxed only once. So in 20 years, the wealth tax is roughly 20*2.5% which is 50%. And in 30 years it's closer to 75%.

[–] Tomassci@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But it is not 0.025*50. It is 0.975^20.

is roughly the same

the first results in 0.5, the second one in ~0.6.

but you're right, from an analysis point of view.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That is exactly what I'm saying.

2.5% of his wealth is nothing, he quite easily gains or loses ten times that in a year

Set a maximum amount of wealth per person each year. Anything you earn over that automatically goes into a 100% bracket.

There literally is no reason why one person should be allowed to have a billion dollars in wealth, whilst another person is homeless and needs to waddle into crime to be able to feed themselves

10 million total wealth. That sounds like a reasonably sane maximum anyone should ever have the power over. Anything above that, taxes.

10 million total wealth

sounds reasonable IMO

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation pledge means keeping only 7% of annual income and it's still too much.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

Anything over 10 million should be automatically 100% tax

[–] huppakee@lemm.ee 17 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Back in the day Christians took care for the sick and the homeless, they built orphanages and hospitals for the mentally ill. The amount of Christians didn't decrease but the way these vulnerable people were cared for changed greatly. The more we have a society were we pay the government to solve these issues, the less we need charity.

I don't know if Zakat-evasion is a problem in islamic countries, but I guess if we change the rules to get the billionaires to pay the ones evading taxes now will just change their tactics and continue to give a shit about the rest of society.

[–] PlaidBaron@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

I mean, they did but abuse was also rampant in those orphanages and mental hospitals.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 days ago

Zekat is often seen as giving money to others, but it's just any act of love towards another person.

It's become muddled with money too much in these modern times.

That being said, yes please, tax the rich.

load more comments
view more: next ›