LOL
>Mazdak was an ancient Iranian Philosopher, who believed the scriptures (Zoroastrianism scriptures, this was pre-Islam) dictated radical social equality. He thought all property should belong to everyone, and wealth shared equally. He was so convincing that he even convinced the king to go along with it, and was able to successfully implement many of his social reforms. He also believed in getting rid of clerics, because they held religious authority over the population, which he thought was illegitimate. Eventually other rich and powerful Zoroastrian and Christian kings got wind of it, and challenged Mazdak to "debate" their clerics. These other kings were the judges, so naturally their guys won, and they brutally executed Mazdak and thousands of his followers. If Mazdak was a prototype for socialism, or even communism, I suppose you could say their reaction to it was a prototype for how to defeat socialism in the good old "marketplace of ideas". As with most ages and societies, those with huge amounts of power and property have never been too keen on philosophers that want to take it away.
4 posts omitted.He was a wrecker for a project developing the productive forces.
>>776244Reformism moment.
I bet he didn't even read Marx.
>>776248>anachronismsyou're not seriously arguing that it took Marx 1300 years later to figure out "hey maybe hoarding property is le bad"
you know socialists already existed for centuries before Marx right
>getting killed for being a nuisance to the kings was, in the long term, his only objective and achievementthat's like saying the only objective and achievement of the USSR was collapsing
dumb dumb dumb
>>780309It took Marx 1300 years later to lay out the theory of scientific socialism.