URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       True Left
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: True Left vs False Left
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 5812--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: April 23, 2021, 10:14 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Leftists are getting our message (note "Myth #3"):
       [img]
  HTML https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/HFIr0pTwdkC4140bTbMP8g--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTcwNTtoPTk5NS44OTA0ODY3MjU2NjM3O2NmPXdlYnA-/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2021-04/63c49a90-a475-11eb-befc-64b7e0b73b04[/img]
       Of course False Leftists are still misuing the word "myth" with
       a negative connotation, but we can get round to changing this
       later.
       #Post#: 6765--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: May 28, 2021, 10:21 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       More people see the light:
  HTML https://www.yahoo.com/news/im-tired-trying-educate-white-095952986.html
       [quote]I'm Tired of Trying to Educate White People About
       Anti-Asian Racism
       ...
       I find that I am increasingly weary of pleading for
       acknowledgment or empathy. I am ready to stop chasing after
       those who need to see your deepest wounds on display before they
       will even contemplate believing your words. I’ve lost the energy
       or desire to educate or provide reasoned, patient answers to
       anyone who still needs to be convinced that Asian people face
       discrimination and violence in this country. Even the week of
       the Atlanta-area spa shootings that left eight people–six of
       them Asian women–dead, I received many versions of the question:
       What would you say to white people in this moment, to help them
       understand how serious this is?
       What can I say to persuade this or that group of white
       people–white parents, white people with Asian relatives or
       friends or co-workers, white people who aren’t “comfortable”
       talking about race or privilege–to start having these “important
       conversations” if they aren’t already? Is it my responsibility
       to do so? Maybe, if I can, but the truth is that I am tired of
       being asked to think about racism from the perspective of those
       least impacted by it. I don’t always feel like explaining
       anti-Asian prejudice to people who have never considered it
       before. I don’t want to hear or validate confessions that
       someone hasn’t thought enough, done enough, said enough, worked
       enough, read enough, challenged enough microaggressions at work
       or at school. I don’t need an inbox full of emotional labor from
       white people just discovering the fact that Asians in America
       experience racism, and that I am Asian American. I do hope that
       more people read, learn and speak out, as we should all be
       doing, and I’m grateful to those who have more drive and
       capacity to teach right now. But there are days when I feel up
       to it and days when I don’t, and lately the latter outnumber the
       former.
       Perhaps it shouldn’t have taken me so long to realize that it
       isn’t always my responsibility to engage with white people on
       this issue–whether that means cataloging the most recent
       horrific attacks in case someone is still unaware, providing
       examples of racism I’ve personally experienced in diverse and
       insular spaces alike, recommending articles and books for them
       to read, offering impromptu lessons on the Asian American
       history many of us weren’t taught in school, or trying to put
       words to the heavy dread and fury I carry through each day
       now–all in an effort to persuade others to name and care about
       what is happening. Laying down this burden flies against an
       instinct first cultivated so I could cope with and try to close
       the empathy gap between me and the white family and friends who
       loved me but who could never quite see or grasp my reality as a
       Korean American woman. As a transracial adoptee, I was uniquely
       conditioned to excuse and instruct and even comfort the white
       people who adopted me, or hired me, or gave me a chance, or just
       seemed to tolerate my presence–I felt as though I should be the
       one to not just reach out, but stretch more than halfway to meet
       them. It was my duty, I long believed, to be a bridge–even if
       this sometimes required me to offer up my pain or trauma for
       others to walk over in pursuit of some elusive understanding.
       Racism against Asian and Pacific Islander people in this country
       is long-standing. But perhaps I could permit myself to feel the
       full weight of my anger and weariness over it only when, after a
       year filled with so much grief and fear and the loss of several
       people I loved, I found myself buying safety whistles for me and
       my daughters. Now, as each week brings new reports of Asian
       elders being assaulted, Asian women being harassed, Asian
       children being bullied, I realize how little will I have to
       partake in discussions about racism that center and cater to
       whiteness: what white people don’t know; what they’re
       uncomfortable with; what they refuse to see or recognize or
       speak out against. There will always be those who doubt or deny
       the racism, othering and fetishization that dehumanizes us, the
       violence that threatens us. At what cost, I wonder, do I
       continue to exhaust my own finite resources running after them,
       hoping to reach them? Have I not lost enough precious time and
       energy to white supremacy?[/quote]
       Exactly.
       [quote]After the Atlanta shootings, when a fellow Korean
       American texted to ask how we might try to talk with, protect
       and support our families in the midst of our shared rage and
       grief, I realized that the conversations I most want to have
       right now are ones that focus not on the silent or the
       unconvinced, but on the people we fight for–our loved ones, our
       communities, our allies and those to whom we owe our solidarity.
       As I think about what I can do, how I can best help and hold
       space for those more vulnerable than myself, I’ve found the most
       meaningful support and comfort within the community I do have,
       and have had all along: the people who don’t need to hear my
       pleas in order to see and value my humanity.[/quote]
       As for the rest, their bloodlines simply have to be eliminated.
       #Post#: 7340--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: June 29, 2021, 11:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       So why do False Leftists believe racists can be educated to not
       be racist? I have always suspected that it is because many
       racists can pretend to not be racist when it suits them, and the
       hopelessly naive False Leftists are being easily fooled. And now
       our enemies admit it in their advice column:
  HTML https://www.amren.com/commentary/2021/06/guide-for-the-perplexed/
       The problem:
       [quote]I am having problems at work and with my family due to my
       involvement in the racial question and the white nationalist
       movement.
       One of my sisters is now estranged from me because she is so
       angry over my voting for Donald Trump and against Joe Biden.
       This situation has been brewing. I’ve tried to explain our ideas
       to her over the past two years but she just gets mad. After the
       election she told me that I am not welcome in her house and that
       she would not see me during the Christmas holidays.
       Now my parents are annoyed that my sister and I have fallen out.
       In addition to trouble at home my job is shaky.
       A “woke” fellow employee has informed my company of my “racist”
       ideas.
       I’ve been called in and grilled by the boss and I may get fired.
       I need this job and I’m worried that the SJW co-worker could
       stir up an online doxing, making it difficult for me to get
       another job if I lose this one.
       Do you have any suggestions on how I can handle this
       situation?[/quote]
       The advice (plus typically obnoxious cultural appropriation in
       the first line):
       [quote]How, Paleface! How to smokum peace pipe with family and
       boss?
       ...
       I am a great believer in insincerity and hypocrisy. They save a
       lot of trouble in life.
       You might send your sister a birthday gift with a little note
       expressing your affection for her, your regret at the hiccup in
       your relations with each other and your own consigning of the
       whole issue to oblivion.
       Eat humble pie if you have too. Nobody’s watching. You can feed
       her what she wants to hear. It doesn’t matter. The silly cow
       will never listen to you anyway, so why care?
       Be sure to share your note, gift, etc. with your parents. This
       will cause them to soften toward you and, if your sister won’t
       reciprocate, their annoyance will shift and be directed at her.
       ...
       Try to mitigate the situation with your bosses. Give anodyne
       versions of what you believe about our issues. Water the issue
       down. Tell them what they have heard does not accurately reflect
       what you actually believe.
       Assure the company managers/owners that you will never do or say
       anything that will cause them any trouble.
       Do not try to win them over to your views while the matter is
       being digested by your superiors. This is a time for
       equivocation, not martyrdom.
       Here again the principle of the utility of insincerity and
       hypocrisy holds true.[/quote]
       Which is why I keep saying that if anyone with a past record of
       racism claims to have reformed, they are lying unless they are
       willing to attend a far-right gathering and massacre as many
       other attendees as they can. Anyone can make verbal claims.
       Actions are a more reliable indicator of sincerity.
       #Post#: 7678--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Western civilization = sustainable evil
       By: Zea_mays Date: July 23, 2021, 12:56 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Western "sustainability" means finding more efficient ways to
       continue to do this:
  HTML https://i.redd.it/e9ysypln1o771.jpg
  HTML https://i.redd.it/e9ysypln1o771.jpg
       Instead of just...not eating plastic-packaged fruit when it's
       not in season?
       ---
       As far as I am aware, recycling actually doesn't result in most
       of the materials being recycled--they are simply sold/shipped
       somewhere else and put in some other nation's landfill. Reducing
       consumption and utilizing reusable materials are millions of
       times more important than recycling plastic junk that never
       should have been legal to manufacture in the first place.
       [quote]A sculpture of the G7 leaders shaped like Mount Rushmore
       made of electronic waste has been erected in Cornwall ahead of
       the G7 Summit.
       It has been named "Mount Recyclemore" and bids to highlight the
       damage caused by the disposal of electronic devices.
       Sculptor Joe Rush said he hoped it would show they needed to be
       made more easily reusable or recyclable.
       He said: "It needs to be repairable or made to last longer
       because the stuff is going into landfill."
       According to a United Nations report, more than 53 million
       tonnes of e-waste was generated worldwide in 2019 - over 9
       million tonnes more than five years earlier.
       The seven leaders depicted in the sculpture are UK Prime
       Minister Boris Johnson, Japan's Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga,
       French President Emmanuel Macron, Italy's Prime Minister Mario
       Draghi, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Germany's
       Chancellor Angela Merkel and US President Joe Biden.[/quote]
  HTML https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-57406136
       [quote]"We have this looking at them and hopefully we're going
       to prick their conscience and make them realise they're all
       together in this waste business.
       "The key message is 'talk to each other' and let's sort this
       mess out," Mr Rush added.[/quote]
       Sigh, if that had any conscience or thought this was wrong in
       the first place, they would have done something about it
       hundreds of millions of tons ago... By spending hundreds of
       hours making a fancy sculpture and hoping it makes literal
       supervillains spontaneously have some comic book fantasy moment
       where they snap their fingers and magically change every view
       and position they've ever taken in their entire life, False
       Leftists are contributing to the prolonging of all these
       problems.
       #Post#: 7754--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: July 28, 2021, 11:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://newrepublic.com/article/163079/convince-people-eat-less-meat
       [quote]How Do You Convince People to Eat Less Meat?[/quote]
       You don't. You simply prohibit them from reproducing. (Indeed,
       in a world of true justice, you would do to them what they
       consider acceptable to do to their slaughter victims.)
       [quote]A recent fracas in Spain shows that simply telling people
       to reduce meat consumption in the name of climate and personal
       health won’t work.[/quote]
       Especially if they are Westerners.
       [quote]In early July, Spain’s minister of consumer affairs,
       Alberto Garzón, posted a short video on Twitter urging Spaniards
       to decrease their meat consumption. From a political
       communication perspective, it was flawless. He listed the many
       ways large-scale meat production and consumption harm humans,
       the environment, and animals, all backed by peer-reviewed
       science. He focused on reducing meat intake, not eliminating
       it—he praised nonindustrial livestock systems and family
       barbecues. He acknowledged that changing diets is hard for those
       without access to cheap, accessible, and diverse food choices.
       He explained that the government would launch food education
       campaigns and implement regulations to incentivize more
       sustainable diets. He even added a hashtag: #MenosCarneMasVida
       (Less Meat More Life).
       Spanish politics exploded. While Garzón’s nuanced,
       well-researched message received some support (the number of
       Spaniards who claim to want to reduce their meat consumption is
       rising), several fellow politicians turned to juvenile trolling.
       Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, of Spain’s socialist party, gushed
       about his love of the chuletón steak to a press conference, and
       Teodoro García Egea of the right-wing People’s Party tweeted out
       a picture of a grill packed with slabs of meat with the caption,
       “To your health.”
       The affair brilliantly displayed the fraught politics of dietary
       change. The average Western diet—prevalent in Spain, just as it
       is in the United States and the United Kingdom—is high in meat,
       fat, and sugar, its production and consumption an environmental
       and public health disaster. This has been true for decades. But
       in the past few years, a growing chorus of voices have begun to
       call for major dietary changes in the interest of human and
       planetary health. The EAT-Lancet report published in February
       2019 called for a global shift to a primarily plant-based diet
       if we are to keep agricultural production within planetary
       limits. The problem, however, is that actually changing what
       people eat is extremely difficult.
       ...
       The traditional way for NGOs, companies, and governments to
       approach dietary change is through information campaigns and
       so-called nudges that don’t impinge on individual choice or risk
       regulatory and legislative battles. They’re nonintrusive ways of
       suggesting more healthy or ethical choices to consumers—like
       releasing EAT-Lancet recommendations or national dietary
       guidelines, slapping “fair trade” labels on coffee or “humanely
       raised” labels on meat. It can also mean deciding not to promote
       a product, as the food website Epicurious did when it vowed to
       stop running beef recipes for many of the reasons mentioned by
       Garzón.
       The problem with these interventions is that they are not all
       that effective. While consumers may claim they want to make more
       informed or sustainable decisions, they tend to default to their
       usual habits in the supermarket aisles. And information doesn’t
       necessarily shift behavior; it may even have the opposite
       effect. Psychologists argue that when consumers face the “meat
       paradox” of eating meat while being opposed to the harms caused
       by it, they will often create justificatory narratives and
       rationalizations that deny harm or personal responsibility
       rather than actually halting meat consumption.[/quote]
       Most people are inferior, and the inferior cannot be taught to
       be superior.
       [quote]These mild, less effective policy efforts also tend to be
       attacked by critics as if they were actually reducing consumer
       choice. EAT-Lancet was met with a coordinated online
       countercampaign under the hashtag #yes2meat. Epicurious was
       lambasted by pro-beef critics, including foodies and food
       writers, in the wake of its decision. When the United Nations
       tried to call for meat reduction to mitigate climate change, it
       too was brutally critiqued, including by pro-meat climate
       scholars.
       ...
       When schools in Lyon, France, moved to make lunches
       plant-forward (albeit with fish and egg and dairy options
       available), farmers stormed the city in protest and the French
       minister of agriculture clamored against anti-meat “ideology.”
       In the U.S., Joni Ernst, the infamously meat-industry-friendly
       senator from Iowa whose campaign advertising included boasts
       about pig castration, has introduced an act to preemptively
       preclude federal institutions from engaging in nudges like
       “Meatless Monday.”
       [/quote]
       And anyone who still thinks they can be is delusional.
       [quote]The academic case for such taxes on meat is robust and
       convincing. But taxes in general are massively politically
       unpopular and lead to accusations of a nanny state interfering
       in consumers’ free choice, as the battles over sugar taxes
       around the world have shown.
       On July 15, the U.K. released its Food Strategy, a
       well-researched document urging a reshaping of the British food
       system in the interest of health and sustainability. It called
       for reductions in sugar, salt, and meat. But the authors only
       suggested a tax on sugar and salt, shying away from a
       “politically impossible” meat tax. Instead, they recommended
       plant-forward dietary nudges and subsidies for the development
       of alternative proteins.
       It’s a good illustration of the way policymakers often self-edit
       when it comes to such a fraught topic. The problem is that,
       while this approach is politically pragmatic, it is naïve to
       expect that clinging to the lower rungs of the Nuffield Ladder
       can lead to even the Food Strategy’s suggested 30 percent
       reduction in meat consumption, let alone the EAT-Lancet
       standard.
       But the problem isn’t only that policymakers are wary of
       inviting pro-meat backlash. It’s also that virtually all
       governments subsidize and promote meat production and
       consumption. The EU, despite its Green Deal commitment to carbon
       neutrality by 2050, has spent millions of Euros on a
       “Beefatarian” advertising campaign, and both Europe and the USA
       support animal agriculture through extensive subsidies and
       supports.[/quote]
       If Hitler had won WWII, things might be different. But he
       didn't. So they aren't.
       [quote]What does all of this mean for dietary change? The trite
       answer is that there is no silver bullet solution and that we
       need an “all of the above” approach that includes individual and
       collective action and policy shifts. We also need to accept that
       any shift in the status quo is going to generate pushback.
       Eventually the culture war over meat is going to have to be
       fought.[/quote]
       Yes. And our recommendation for how to fight it is to associate
       a meat-heavy diet with Westernization. Then at least among those
       who believe that Western civilization must die, there might be a
       shift. See also:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/dietary-decolonization/
       #Post#: 8442--------------------------------------------------
       Sorry Folks, Trumpists Are Too Far Gone
       By: guest55 Date: August 28, 2021, 6:48 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Sorry Folks, Trumpists Are Too Far Gone
       [quote]--Unfortunately, it has become clear that Trumpists are
       too far gone to be brought back to reality[/quote]
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjge4sOGbZw
       Exactly, as we have been saying from the get go! Anyone who
       thinks leftists should attempt to unite with Trumpists to fight
       the "elites" at this point is also a false-leftist and clearly
       living in lala-land! Furthermore, why would Americans try and
       unite with people who are clearly un-American in an attempt to
       fix the many problems America is facing? That's absolutely
       ridiculous!!!
       False-leftists cannot even bring themselves to acknowledge that
       this is a left versus right issue to begin with. Follow these
       types of people at your own peril! These people aren't even
       living in reality! I would also not be surprised if some
       false-leftists are actually rightist operatives trying to set
       true leftists up for failure!
       See also:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/uniting-americans/
       
       (Keyword: Americans!)
       Hint: If you do NOT believe in E Pluribus Unum then there's an
       excellent chance you are NOT an American!
       #Post#: 9212--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 5, 2021, 4:12 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGt1Ukg7q4Y
       About Blumenthal:
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Blumenthal
       [quote]Blumenthal was born into a Jewish family in Brooklyn, New
       York, the son of Jane (née Rosenstock) and Martin Blumenthal.
       ...
       In March 2017, Blumenthal co-sponsored the Israel Anti-Boycott
       Act (S.270), which made it a federal crime, punishable by a
       maximum sentence of 20 years imprisonment,[187] for Americans to
       encourage or participate in boycotts against Israel and Israeli
       settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories if
       protesting actions by the Israeli government.[188][/quote]
       In short, the dumb Jews are just as evil as the smart ones.
       Also recall:
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-lMIGV-dUI
       #Post#: 9445--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: Zea_mays Date: October 17, 2021, 8:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote]Vegetarians and vegans are seen as less socially
       attractive by the meat-eating majority in part because they are
       viewed as moralistic, according to a new study published in the
       journal Appetite. The findings provide new insight into the
       relationship between dietary choices and social attraction, or
       the willingness to affiliate oneself with particular social
       groups.
       [...]
       “Despite strong arguments favoring a shift toward plant-based
       diets, there is only a minority of people who choose to abstain
       from meat (vegetarians) or other animal products (vegans),
       raising the question why shifts toward plant-based diets are
       often resisted by the meat-eating or ‘omnivorous’ majority.”
       “One of the barriers could be social: People often do not like
       to deviate from social norms, even if there are good moral
       reasons to do so, and minorities are often seen as less socially
       attractive. I therefore decided to examine the role of negative
       stereotypes in predicting the social attractiveness of
       vegetarians and vegans,” De Groeve said.
       [...]
       The participants viewed omnivores as the most socially
       attractive group, followed by vegetarians. In other words, the
       participants were very willing to be associated with omnivores
       and slightly less willing to be associated with vegetarians.
       They were slightly unwilling, however, to be associated with
       vegans.
       Vegetarians, and especially vegans, were seen as more moral but
       also more eccentric and moralistic (self-righteous and
       narrow-minded) than omnivores, which in turn predicted lower
       social attractiveness. Vegetarians and vegans were often
       described as “eco-friendly” and “considerate” during the free
       association task, but they were also described as “judgmental”
       and “preachy.”
       [...]
       “An interesting question for future research is to examine the
       accuracy of stereotypes associated with vegetarians and vegans,
       in particular with regard to moralistic impressions. People may
       have had negative experiences with moralistic vegans, though
       people might also merely imagine being moralistically judged by
       vegans,” De Groeve said.
       “A lot of evidence also shows that many people typically want to
       avoid harming animals, despite engaging in dietary habits that
       harm animals (this has been called the meat paradox in
       psychological literature). To maintain the illusion that eating
       animals or their products is both (relatively) harmless and
       unavoidable, people might engage in motivated reasoning to
       defend their diet. Moralistic stereotypes may serve as a stigma
       to silence morally-motivated vegetarians and vegans whose mere
       existence challenges this illusion.”[/quote]
  HTML https://www.psypost.org/2021/09/moralistic-impressions-help-explain-the-reduced-social-attractiveness-of-vegetarians-and-vegans-61889
       Ironically, for every vegan I've seen preaching, I've seen 100
       anti-vegan reactionaries preach about how much they hate vegans.
       You know, all those low-effort jokes about "How do you know
       someone is a vegan? They won't shut up about it, hah hah hah!!".
       I think this is the real reason why non-vegans are perceived as
       the most "socially attractive"--people want to fit in with the
       majority and will join in on the vegan-bashing stereotypes
       because it signals they are part of the dominant majority group.
       I agree with the author that it probably does get under the
       average person's skin when a moralistic person forces them to
       confront difficult moral questions. The majority of people seem
       highly adverse to such a thing, and I suppose most are just too
       dumb or selfish to want to be bothered with the difficult task
       of self-reflection.
       Unlike the author, I don't think the majority of people would
       care about the exploitation of animals, if they were forced to
       self-reflect on their actions. Rightists are motivated by the
       Judeo-Christian logic that animals were created by Yahweh so the
       superior humans could exploit them. And False Left secular
       humanists are motivated by what is essentially the same
       reasoning (especially when it comes to scientific exploitation
       of animals).
       The majority of people are ignoble.
       [quote]
       I think a lot of the judgement omnivores and carnivores feel
       from vegetarians is self-inflicted by virtue of the mere
       presence of a vegetarian.
       For example, if you offer someone meat and they refuse it
       because they don’t eat meat, the natural human impulse is to
       question - what’s wrong with them or what’s wrong with me?
       Even if the vegetarian doesn’t explain their motivations, we are
       all already familiar with why most people become vegetarian:
       Reduce animal suffering
       Plant based diets are generally healthier
       Plant based diets have a lower ecological footprint
       Why are most people meat eaters?
       Meat tastes good
       It’s what I know and I’m comfortable with it / It's part of
       my cultural upbringing and traditions
       Because of that, many meat eaters look at a vegetarian and
       think, “they think they’re better than me.” Which ironically is
       quite judgmental.[/quote]
  HTML https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/pwcpvb/moralistic_impressions_help_explain_the_reduced/heh4zfv/
       As a side note, I've noticed a similar reaction from alcohol
       drinkers toward non-drinkers. Many actually get angry and
       indignant when they are merely in the presence of someone who
       doesn't drink alcohol. Why? Because they are afraid of being
       judged by others for their degeneracy? Because they have an
       internal conflict with themselves over their desire for alcohol?
       Idk, but they end up reinforcing their in-group status by
       judging non-drinkers for being "weirdos" for not engaging in the
       same behavior as the majority of people.
       Even if a non-alcohol-drinker literally doesn't say anything
       about why they aren't drinking alcohol, they will still be
       judged simply for not joining in with the majority. Even if a
       vegan/vegetarian literally doesn't say a single word, omnivores
       will look at their plate full of plants and make a disparaging
       comment to reinforce that they are in the out-group.
       #Post#: 9448--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 17, 2021, 9:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "people want to fit in with the majority"
       To test this, we could offer people a thought experiment choice:
       would you rather be a) vegan but appear to be omnivorous to
       others; or b) omnivorous but appear to be vegan to others?
       "difficult moral questions"
       Except this is not even difficult. Is it OK to slaughter you for
       your meat? No? Then don't slaughter others for their meat!
       That's literally all there is to it! It's about the most
       elementary analysis that exists!
       "dumb or selfish"
       Selfish. I have known people who could solve brain teasers etc.
       much faster than I can, but who still behave like this when
       confronted with vegans (e.g. me).
       "I don't think the majority of people would care about the
       exploitation of animals, if they were forced to self-reflect on
       their actions. Rightists are motivated by the Judeo-Christian
       logic that animals were created by Yahweh so the superior humans
       could exploit them. And False Left secular humanists are
       motivated by what is essentially the same reasoning (especially
       when it comes to scientific exploitation of animals)."
       I agree. I also see signs that the "for the sake of science"
       crowd are getting worse. In the past, they at least more often
       tried to justify their position with the utilitarian argument
       that the scientific discovery might end up reducing suffering
       for many more others (which of course does not make it ethical).
       Now they increasingly claim that scientific discovery is
       worthwhile for its own sake! They have become worshippers of
       discovery itself. See also:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/progressive-yahwism/
       #Post#: 10087--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Superiority cannot be taught
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: December 12, 2021, 8:28 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Those convinced that "whites" are the victims cannot be
       persuaded otherwise, not even by their own logic:
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqJ5Hq9ETXw
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page