perhaps you'd like to accidentally quote the same lines in my posts multiple times like you did last time to demonstrate how calm and collected you are about the whole thing
Perhaps you'd like to get a job and come back when you actually have an argument.
The idea that there should be more black or native american babies born so as to revive the race, is as racist as believing that fewer should be born so as to diminish the race.
What's this bourgeois-pacifist-bhuddist crap?
mustang posted:
It's filling the word racism or its root racialism with actual content, rather than it being used as an epithet hurled against people who disagree with something a POC said.
mustang aren't you in high school
No. I'm in high school but I work for the CIA? Really?
It's filling the word racism or its root racialism with actual content, rather than it being used as an epithet hurled against people who disagree with something a POC said.
Nope, it's just regular liberal cultural-imperialism.
By the way read the Mao quote and call Mao a racist.
mustang posted:Not until rHizzone acknowledges its racism and anti-Marxism.
acknowledged, now leave
mustang posted:Nope, it's just regular liberal cultural-imperialism.
By the way read the Mao quote and call Mao a racist.
I don't think there is such a thing as cultural imperialism that isn't backed up with state power, which is to say actual imperialism. Is culture being forced by gunpoint on a population? Then it qualifies as cultural imperialism. The presence of lipstick and coca cola do not.
I think Mao was a nationalist ignoramus, so you'll get no argument about his motives from me. Originally the socialist argument against Malthus was against his belief that attempts to improve the lives of the poor were counterproductive. That doesn't mean that higher fertility was beneficial to the poor, but that fertility fluctuated to meet the needs of the economy, rather than the health of the economy being at the whim of fertility.
roseweird posted:malthus is probably wrong but is it okay to just want fewer people around, it just seems kind of fucking crowded already
maybe you should get out of new york
I don't agree with everything he says, but I also think the Soviets bent the branch a bit too far the other way when it came to opposing eugenics, the taint of association with Nazi Germany led to the rejection of good science in favor of Lysenkoist dogma (dialectical materialist mysticism also had a role to play).
Lykourgos posted:animedad posted:with all your exclusive elder knowledge ive never seen you write anything that is intriguing at all. the jig is up buddy boy
I say and write plenty of important things, but there's a time, a place, and an audience. Also, one should know one's limits and not blather on about every topic under the sun like some bloody yank.
*fist pound* im kidding gf, your my chicago homie
Lessons posted:you know, it's kinda suspicious that you've gone from "who cares about population control against black people, that's racist" to "maybe eugenics has a point" in less than a page
if you really think about it, not supporting forced sexual redistribution is itself, a form of eugenics
Lykourgos posted:The masses cannot form a revolutionary class, they aren't capable of it. There are only varying degrees of discontent. High ideals and grand plans are imposed by an orderly class of gentlemen. Without that latter class you have a chaotic mess waiting for leadership and vision. Sorry about your communisms; righteousness is in the party, in a closed and orderly society of sages, not the average peasant or some random internet baby.
alright liu shaoqi, calm down
Lessons posted:you know, it's kinda suspicious that you've gone from "who cares about population control against black people, that's racist" to "maybe eugenics has a point" in less than a page
My point is that the denial of choice over reproduction to a group of people on the belief that that group should procreate more is based in racialist beliefs, just the same as a policy that seeks their elimination. My argument is anti-nationalist, anti-racialist, whatever its origin.
Eugenics is about eliminating disease through control of reproduction, and I don't think that's necessarily a negative. When a fetus is aborted, when a woman decides she won't carry the baby to term, it's an individual choice that only concerns the woman. But when a baby is born alive, we recognize a duty to protect the life of the newborn when the family can't meet all their needs, be it medicine or whatever else. The decision to give birth imposes costs and eventual benefits on the community, and I don't think that the decision in this case should be the individual's alone; there should be some outside input. If, for example, a family with a history of congenital disability is giving birth to a child every year and a half who inherits this disease, and this disease prevents a child from advancing much beyond a second grade level of education, by the time the fifth or sixth child comes along, the community really should be stepping in and saying "hey, maybe that's enough."
swirlsofhistory posted:Lessons posted:you know, it's kinda suspicious that you've gone from "who cares about population control against black people, that's racist" to "maybe eugenics has a point" in less than a page
My point is that the denial of choice over reproduction to a group of people on the belief that that group should procreate more is based in racialist beliefs, just the same as a policy that seeks their elimination. My argument is anti-nationalist, anti-racialist, whatever its origin.
Eugenics is about eliminating disease through control of reproduction, and I don't think that's necessarily a negative. When a fetus is aborted, when a woman decides she won't carry the baby to term, it's an individual choice that only concerns the woman. But when a baby is born alive, we recognize a duty to protect the life of the newborn when the family can't meet all their needs, be it medicine or whatever else. The decision to give birth imposes costs and eventual benefits on the community, and I don't think that the decision in this case should be the individual's alone; there should be some outside input. If, for example, a family with a history of congenital disability is giving birth to a child every year and a half who inherits this disease, and this disease prevents a child from advancing much beyond a second grade level of education, by the time the fifth or sixth child comes along, the community really should be stepping in and saying "hey, maybe that's enough."
i will agree to anything that helps erase the sin of the world that is the Anglo-Saxon people
jools posted:mustang is just pushing africom policy constantly, i dont see why this wasnt noticed before
come on man. do you really think the US military cares all that much about birth control one way or another?
Lessons posted:jools posted:mustang is just pushing africom policy constantly, i dont see why this wasnt noticed before
come on man. do you really think the US military cares all that much about birth control one way or another?
i just mean that the US approach to africa is grounded in permanent instability in many ways, and a shitty approach to reproductive rights is a good way to promote that tbh
prikryl posted:Vilongo DAgreat well, im clear on that now, that theres no ultimate authority in marxism. Thanks and i mean that. I keep seeing the word zekzek thrown around, same goes with lucian. I'm wondering why these guys are important. and paul, can u stop.. im not trolling. I ask because i had it in my belief that Marx was the father of the left..that's all.
this is from that APT group right? fuck those guys lol. they had a chance to educate some guy and did nothing, because they're a bunch of fucks
jools posted:prikryl posted:Vilongo DAgreat well, im clear on that now, that theres no ultimate authority in marxism. Thanks and i mean that. I keep seeing the word zekzek thrown around, same goes with lucian. I'm wondering why these guys are important. and paul, can u stop.. im not trolling. I ask because i had it in my belief that Marx was the father of the left..that's all.
this is from that APT group right? fuck those guys lol. they had a chance to educate some guy and did nothing, because they're a bunch of fucks
whats this
jools posted:prikryl posted:Vilongo DAgreat well, im clear on that now, that theres no ultimate authority in marxism. Thanks and i mean that. I keep seeing the word zekzek thrown around, same goes with lucian. I'm wondering why these guys are important. and paul, can u stop.. im not trolling. I ask because i had it in my belief that Marx was the father of the left..that's all.
this is from that APT group right? fuck those guys lol. they had a chance to educate some guy and did nothing, because they're a bunch of fucks
yep and yep
APT group, as a whole, is Shit
cars posted:jools posted:prikryl posted:Vilongo DAgreat well, im clear on that now, that theres no ultimate authority in marxism. Thanks and i mean that. I keep seeing the word zekzek thrown around, same goes with lucian. I'm wondering why these guys are important. and paul, can u stop.. im not trolling. I ask because i had it in my belief that Marx was the father of the left..that's all.
this is from that APT group right? fuck those guys lol. they had a chance to educate some guy and did nothing, because they're a bunch of fucks
whats this
https://www.facebook.com/groups/263895233629245/
soundtrack for proper viewing:
jools posted:Lessons posted:jools posted:mustang is just pushing africom policy constantly, i dont see why this wasnt noticed before
come on man. do you really think the US military cares all that much about birth control one way or another?
i just mean that the US approach to africa is grounded in permanent instability in many ways, and a shitty approach to reproductive rights is a good way to promote that tbh
okay that makes sense abstractly, lots of narratives make sense, but do you think the US military/CIA/state department actually cares, in reality?