Lessons posted: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?
they're probably aware! i mean i doubt all this evangelical work in africa has absolutely no connection to the CIA, and that kind of thing is connected to that sort of ideology. i think the CIA cares about as much as it can - whether it gets off its arse and does anything about it is another matter - i think that's a very different proposition
double poste
jools posted:also, i'm a cop.
Enjoy My pictures of shooting guns ,copper scum
babyfinland posted:Real fascinating discussion on sharia and the Ottoman empire you fucking dummies
we're talking about race apartheid, not sharia (gender apartheid)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Study_Memorandum_200
National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM200) was completed on December 10, 1974 by the United States National Security Council under the direction of Henry Kissinger.
The basic thesis of the memorandum was that population growth in the least developed countries (LDCs) is a concern to U.S. national security, because it would tend to risk civil unrest and political instability in countries that had a high potential for economic development. The policy gives "paramount importance" to population control measures and the promotion of contraception among 13 populous countries, to control rapid population growth which the US deems inimical to the socio-political and economic growth of these countries and to the national interests of the United States, since the "U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad", and these countries can produce destabilizing opposition forces against the United States. It recommends the US leadership to "influence national leaders" and that "improved world-wide support for population-related efforts should be sought through increased emphasis on mass media and other population education and motivation programs by the U.N., USIA, and USAID."
Sorry I couldn't help myself. Carry on.
Edited by mustang ()
swirlsofhistory posted:On the related topic of eugenics, Hermann Joseph Muller wrote an explicitly marxist defense of eugenics called Out of the Night: A Biologist's View of the Future. Muller even wrote a letter to Stalin advocating that the USSR take another look at the benefits eugenics could bring: www.mankindquarterly.org/muellersletter.pdf
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).
there's an essay collection called beyond totalitarianism that contains an essay comparing the biopolitics of the USSR and Nazi Germany and discusses this, as well as family planning, homosexuality, etc. very good book
Lessons posted:it's less that they don't have a strategy for africa but i'm, uh, less than convinced that family planning policy is a major priority at langley. you're talking about an organization with like 20, 30 thousands employees, they just don't have the staff or time to direct and evaluate every single aspect of US policy for maximum imperialisms.
i never said it was! it's just it'll come into their considerations, i'm sure, so when they're looking into support or connections with your evangelicals who put holes in condoms and suchlike they'll see that element of it and be like, "cool"
babyfinland posted:swirlsofhistory posted:On the related topic of eugenics, Hermann Joseph Muller wrote an explicitly marxist defense of eugenics called Out of the Night: A Biologist's View of the Future. Muller even wrote a letter to Stalin advocating that the USSR take another look at the benefits eugenics could bring: www.mankindquarterly.org/muellersletter.pdf
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).there's an essay collection called beyond totalitarianism that contains an essay comparing the biopolitics of the USSR and Nazi Germany and discusses this, as well as family planning, homosexuality, etc. very good book
I heard it was bad and gay. Your move
mustang posted:Jools, it would be great if you stopped lying to yourself and admitted that the US government supports contraceptive aid as part of its foreign policy.
why do you think "Westernisation" is always in the interests of the West.
mustang posted:Jools, it would be great if you stopped lying to yourself and admitted that the US government supports contraceptive aid as part of its foreign policy.
it'd be great if you died in a bus fire
babyfinland posted:there's an essay collection called beyond totalitarianism that contains an essay comparing the biopolitics of the USSR and Nazi Germany and discusses this, as well as family planning, homosexuality, etc. very good book
I'll look for it, but if it's about biopolitics in the Foucault sense, I doubt I'll get anything out of it.
why do you think "Westernisation" is always in the interests of the West.
It doesn't have to be I guess, I just want to see a rationalization from you on how the Kissinger documents were made up/not real/don't count anymore.
swirlsofhistory posted:babyfinland posted:there's an essay collection called beyond totalitarianism that contains an essay comparing the biopolitics of the USSR and Nazi Germany and discusses this, as well as family planning, homosexuality, etc. very good book
I'll look for it, but if it's about biopolitics in the Foucault sense, I doubt I'll get anything out of it.
what are you stupid
mustang posted:why do you think "Westernisation" is always in the interests of the West.
It doesn't have to be I guess, I just want to see a rationalization from you on how the Kissinger documents were made up/not real/don't count anymore.
yeah as if the usgovt is going to release a document saying WELL I GUESS WE WANNA KEEP ALL THEIR SHIT HELLA UNSTABLE ALL THE TIME are they lol
yeah as if the usgovt is going to release a document saying WELL I GUESS WE WANNA KEEP ALL THEIR SHIT HELLA UNSTABLE ALL THE TIME are they lol
Only after the classification expires.
If destabilization is always the goal why does it invest so much in trying to hold up third world dictators? "The US supports dictators" and "the US tries to destabilize all governments" are mutually exclusive.
i thought you said you were leaving
If Jools is going to be a complete arse I can't do that.
no it isn't, it just alternates, destabilize until a malleable tyrant seizes power, support until inconvenient, repeat
Okay, so there are certain governments the US wants stable. Just like Kissinger said.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Study_Memorandum_200
National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM200) was completed on December 10, 1974 by the United States National Security Council under the direction of Henry Kissinger.
The basic thesis of the memorandum was that population growth in the least developed countries (LDCs) is a concern to U.S. national security, because it would tend to risk civil unrest and political instability in countries that had a high potential for economic development. The policy gives "paramount importance" to population control measures and the promotion of contraception among 13 populous countries, to control rapid population growth which the US deems inimical to the socio-political and economic growth of these countries and to the national interests of the United States, since the "U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad", and these countries can produce destabilizing opposition forces against the United States. It recommends the US leadership to "influence national leaders" and that "improved world-wide support for population-related efforts should be sought through increased emphasis on mass media and other population education and motivation programs by the U.N., USIA, and USAID."
yeah???? why are you constantly pointing out dumb and obvious things and expecting them to rock our world
Me or Getfiscal?
I'm saying this because Jools apparently doesn't want to consider that Henry Kissinger has more impact on US foreign policy than Jool's theories.
anyway, fuck along now cia boy
mustang what do you want to do with your life
Work as a software engineer, write novels and make fuzz rock. Why?
its cool how roseweird, a poster who everyone just had a go at for being too idealistic about political processes, is schooling you on how things actually work.
anyway, fuck along now cia boy
What thread are you reading?
Mises.org did this too. "I couldn't present an argument, but this other person is schooling you now!"
Edited by mustang ()