Not sure that is the historical timeline for Collectivisation in USSR and definitely no China. Collectivisation and Land Reform was a primary goal in itself in China from the 1950s. Communist Liberation was 1949 so right from the onset.
"state gradually withers away as a communist society is built" is 19th century Marx. I think 20thc Leninism, in practice, had a less sanguine view of the evolution of the state. The NEP was a tactical move.
You could argue that Mao was always suspicious of state and party machinery which inherently had reactionary and counter revolutionary tendencies. However even when he was Mobilising the Masses, it was not restore to "autonomy" to the people but to clear the deck for further revolution. In Mao Zedong thought, "autonomy" is a very bourgeoisie.
Don't forget the encyclical with the German ("Mit brennender Sorge") rather than Latin (Ardens curarum?) title written by Pius XII and promulgated by Pius XI.
Is that really the position of the Catholic Church or what is a caricature of what people think it believes? The nice thing about the Catholic Church is that required beliefs have a formal spec. For something has important as this, there would be a clear and unambiguous references. Catholic Catechism / church council / papal encyclical. Do you have a quotable reference?
What I can find is only Aquinas that all living things have souls (anima).
Humans have rational human souls. Animals have animal souls...
Descartes believed that only humans have souls. But that definitely represents a clear alternative to traditional Catholic beliefs. Many modern philosophers might argue that only humans have "consciousness" in a way that implies animals do not have souls.
In which case the "crimson carpet" appears to be the loose invention of the translator. The original just says "brocade" or I guess, "quilt", implying some sort of silk bed cover?
Agree 10,000 fold.
English and Japanese are so different and have such different standards of aesthetics and literary form that good translations are like independent creations inspired by the original.
I would like to know that the original form was.
Even a word by word ungrammatical transliteration would be helpful. But not to have the Japanese available means I cannot even look it up...
The use of the "font" spelling variant rather than "fount" is any case a clearer indication of etymology.
After all, a "fount" of types refers not to its role as a fountain of printing (fons fontis L -> fontaine OF -> fountain) but the pouring out, melting and casting of lead (fundo fundere fudu fusum [fused!] L -> fondre / fonte F).
I am not sure that Tolkien was a supporter of "Deontology" (ethical systems like Kant's). He was more probably a fan of virtue ethics of Aristotle and Aquinas. There is a large gulf between them. Wikipedia does a decent job of summarising the differences. We can not lump together into one category everyone who disagrees for many different reasons why we can sum up future consequences almost mathematically to come up with an "optimal" ethical choice. I am not sure that Tolkien is particularly interested in "greatness" either.
"state gradually withers away as a communist society is built" is 19th century Marx. I think 20thc Leninism, in practice, had a less sanguine view of the evolution of the state. The NEP was a tactical move. You could argue that Mao was always suspicious of state and party machinery which inherently had reactionary and counter revolutionary tendencies. However even when he was Mobilising the Masses, it was not restore to "autonomy" to the people but to clear the deck for further revolution. In Mao Zedong thought, "autonomy" is a very bourgeoisie.