[kahljorn]

your doctrines are contradictory ;\

anyway, if making sacrifices is the ultimate form of morality, then everybody should just kill themselves in order to be the most good. The most good.

In a very real sense, Communism represents the most moral system, ideally, as it entails that all members of the community forsake luxury for the benefit of everyone.

Communism is becoming a slave to the community. It also isn't a moral system, it's a political system. Also, it's not for the benefit of everybody, but for the benefit of the weak. "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need."

People often wonder why war is glorified but the answer is quite simple: it is the ultimate sacrifice for the society and community as a whole.

People don't go to war to make sacrifices. They go to war to survive, to conquer, to enforce their values on others, and to sack.

Capitalism is an amoral idea in its essence and to some extent it is the government surrendering its role in the moral systems of the people and rather enabling the people to make their own choices.

That isn't what capitalism is, but whatever. Is it better to enforce a poor or weak system of morality than to allow people the freedom to be strong?
You said that morality can't exist without the freedom to make your own choices, but you are saying that capitalism is immoral because it lets people make their own choices instead of forcing people to make pre-approved choices?

are you sure you aren't a character?

However, it is also important to note that as in the animal Kingdom there are plenty of humans who are fundamentally weaker and more cowardly than others; these people essentially make no sacrifice in the bargain, and if they are merely avoiding doing these things because they feel it will doom them they are basically not moral people. The only moral people within the society are the people capable of exploitation of others yet sacrifice their ability to do so because of the fact that they honor the bond within the community.

Excellent kantian argument. The problem is, those who are "Weak" are usually capable of being strong. Even some of the weakest men can pick up a gun and shoot their enemies, or keep their money instead of giving it to a charity. Remember in the bible when the poor woman donates money, even though its almost everything she has, its considered strength because of how weak she actually is. She is sacrificing more of her strength than a rich man. What is this.. uhhh utility.. exchange... ill remember the name.. marginal utility exchange.

by a similar principle weak people have the most to gain by picking up a gun, but they don't. Thus, a bigger sacrifice.
shrugamcshrug

The highest form of existence is mindful sacrifice in the name of those who are deserving.

If people only sacrifice to be higher than other people, then they are just being vain.