We agree but also a dozen ppl in a basement is not indiciative of the behaviour of large pops (>10^6)
-
-
And do you support this? My point is that there has to be a line beyond which you will not cross...
-
I don't cross the line you seem to have which is that some people are inherently;l bad. But why does even ethical point need to be also a legal one?
-
Quite the opposite. I dont think *anyone* is inherently good or bad & it solves nothing to consider every torch-bearing US Fascist as 'evil' & shd be punched/killed: the social factors that led them there must be considered. I cannot agree w the dichotomisation of human behaviour
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
Why is treating them as bad/dangerous mutually exclusive to also addressing the root cause?
-
Because if you say "that guy wants to kill jews, lets execute him" it doesn't really leave much space to consider the context, does it?
-
What's the context? And execute might not be needed in every case. But if we are talking about a Nazi (= power plus fascist ideology) then killing is the only way.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Anyway I thought you were arguing that some people are inherently bad... if not then forget what I said and we agree that people are generally OK as a default. Pre-judging people as lost causes seems more inline with the thought crimes line of argument you brought up IMHO.
-
I'm not prejudging that all people are bad, I'm just saying that not everyone is equal in capacity and not everyone wants to or can be involved in their communities or engage in direct democracy. But that's me, we're all speaking subjectively

-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
Yup, I'll go with that. It's in the same ballpark but not the same game. I support the termination of foetuses with chromosomal disorders if thats what the mother wants. Thats a form of eugenics. The Holocaust did a lot to hold back rational discussion abt these sensitive topics.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
Wait. Either people are inherently good and therefore Nazi-like eugenics cannot be the logical conclusion, or (my perspective) we are all actually shades of grey & shd be able to discuss such things without getting into ideological shouting matches & actually look at the facts.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
If genocide is the logical conclusion is it because certain individuals promote extreme ideologies based on pseudoscience and a variety of people (who are neither inherently good nor bad) get sucked into those ideologies?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.