• 0 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 17 days ago
cake
Cake day: September 19th, 2026

help-circle


  • This is an insane expectation. Pointing out that Jews are not oppressed today is not making Jewish critics of Zionism less welcome. You wouldn’t hold anyone to this level of standard for any other people. There is nothing in there that should be offensive to you as a Jewish person, unless you kill babies or are a Jewish Exceptionalist. There is zero anti-jewish sentiment in there. In fact, OP’s post reeks of Jewish Exceptionalism.

    Most of those things that was said could also very easily apply to white people, but if I had said that about white people, it absolutely wouldn’t make White critics of racism any less welcome.

    In fact, let’s do it. Let’s replace “Jew” with “white” in that comment.

    White people, tell me if I am making you less welcome :

    White people today are at the top of a racial hierarchy that exists in western society. Nobody should be worrying about “anti-white sentiment” any more than they should have worried about anti German sentiment or anti Italian sentiment during world war two.

    If somebody says “fuck white people”, it is not as offensive as if somebody said “f-black people”. Black people are actually oppressed in society whereas white people are not.

    White supremacists expect us to treat them better, put them on a pedestal while they are already at the top of the chain. There is a genocide going on. Calling a German a “kraut” wasn’t offensive during the second world war.

    The vast majority of white people live in the imperial core where racist systems exist to maintain their privileged position. They enjoy much better wealth and social prestige than others.

    Apart from fringe black-nationalists, anti-white racism is not a thing. Nobody really hates white people for being white. In fact, many non-white people people internalize and support racist systems inadvertently to the benefit of white people. White people are afforded privileges for being white in every part of the world, and especially in the imperial core.

    The US is a white-supremacist hotspot internationally. All white institutions in the imperial core should be dismantled. Explicitly non-racist institutions should be the only ones that should remain.

    Fuck all the white people who kill babies and support killing babies.

    Oh look at me making all the white people feel less welcome.










  • Free will consists in understanding, little by little, the laws of necessity and then applying this knowledge, little by litle, to practice. And with practice it’s the same thing. Through practice we derive our knowledge quantitavely

    This is not free will. You are operating with a custom definition of free will that only you subscribe to.

    Free will is not the ability to independently act as independent agents. Free will is the ability to make your own decisions unimpeded and independent of external factors. Life doesn’t have this. Humans are limited to doing things that their brain allows them to by nature of how it’s wired. You cannot recite the entire works of Shakespeare off the cuff right now, even if you will yourself to do it so hard right now. That information is simply not in your brain right now.


  • arguing against the idea that “bad genetics” are what make bad people

    I have never said that genetics are what make bad people. I said that there are two things that can influence a person’s behavior, their genetics and their lived encironemnt.

    Genetics obviously contribute to a person’s behavior and this much is a known scientific fact. You can ignore it all you want but that doesn’t make it not true.

    as an autistic person, I shouldn’t have to explain why I think this is vile.

    I fail to see how that’s “vile”. I haven’t looked into autism spectrum disorder but as far as I know it is a mostly genetically defined disorder. But even so, how is that “vile” or “ableist”? I too have disorders I suffer from that I inherited, ie, that I got from my genetics.


  • a mere tautology

    And? Are tautologies banned in this community? What’s the problem here?

    But once we come to know this law, which acts (as Marx pointed out a thousand times) independently of our will and our mind

    And our mind, eh? And our mind. Engels is not talking about what we’re talking about here.

    The mastery of nature manifested in human practice is a result of an objectively correct reflection within the human head of the phenomena and processes of nature, and is proof of the fact that this reflection (within the limits of what is revealed by practice) is objective, absolute, and eternal truth."

    Again, Engels is in perfect agreement with me here. There is still no free will.


  • No we don’t. As materialists, we believe that all that exists in the world is material. What controls a person’s behavior is neurons firing in their brain at any instance, what fires these neurons is the precise arrangement and connections between said neurons.

    There are two things, and two things only that can influence how neurons are wired in your brain - that being your environment and your genetics. Unless you believe in a sky daddy, there is nothing else that has been scientifically proven to influence the way you behave. It therefore logically and scientifically follows that every action you make is a fact of either genetics or environment or both combined.

    We need to push against the idea that people are not susceptible to bad environments and genetics and therefore it is upon the individual who commits a crime the responsibility for said crime rests. That is a vile concept.

    Free will does not exist. Those who commit crimes are always victims of past or present crimes themselves. To think otherwise is idealistic and not materialistic.

    And outside of crimes, people do really have bad genetics. This is not ableist, what the fuck are you talking about really? What do you think genetic disorders are? Try telling someone with hemophilia that they haven’t got a genetic problem, they just have to try really hard to make their blood clot. That’s stupid.

    A “crime” is a social construct. There are no acts that are universally crimes. Even things like murder are okay depending on the context, such as if done in self defense or in times of war. Even stuff like pedophilia who almost everyone in the world currently alive today would consider a crime wasn’t universally a crime across the entirety of human history. As such, there are moral implications of blindly accepting crimes as always products of individual responsibility especially when said crimes are defined by imperfect, or even morally reprehensible societies. According to Israeli law, all Palestinian hostages they hold in their prisons are criminals who did “awful” acts. Do they have to take accountability?


  • So it will be a net gain for US at the cost of Canada

    The Canadians are so subservient to the US that any American president could phone Canada up and ask for literally anything and the Canadians would give it to him immediately at any time no questions asked. The president could ask to sleep with the prime minister’s wife and the prime minister’s wife will be flown in the very next hour.

    Canada being a vassal of the US already, any secession or accession would be purely performative and would only change the de jure state of things rather than what materially matters.


  • Ideally, no punishment at all, and only rehabilitation.

    Criminals are always either made by environmental pressures, or they are made by bad genetics. There is no reason for anyone to be criminal other than these two.

    If a person is made to commit a crime by their environment, well it is not very fair to punish them, is it? It is the fault of their environment - you should try and fix that instead and make sure that the person does not commit another crime again. If I had a hungry child and the only way I could feed them was by assaulting a security guard and shoplifting, you can’t really blame me for doing that. No sane person could guarantee that they wouldn’t do the same if they were in my shoes.

    On the other hand, if a person commits a crime because they just can’t help it and they are ‘broken’ in some way, it is still not fair to punish them for it, is it? They just can’t help it. If, hypothetically, my body was defective such that I breathe out chlorine gas and people near me die because of that, you can’t really blame me for that, can you? I can’t help but breathe. It is not fair to punish people for that which they can’t help but do. You should instead make sure they cannot hurt others without punishing them.

    Therefore, it logically follows that punishing a criminal is always morally unjust. Preventing crimes is the moral responsibility of society as a whole, and punishment is the state lashing out to mask its incompetence.


  • I don’t care whether the judge is Chinese or American, any imposition of death by state apparati is a travesty and incompatible with socialism.

    I would draw a distinction here. If the state’s existence or authority is threatened, then the death penalty is valid, especially if it is a nascent socialist state. The preceding revolution and its survival would be more important than any one individual’s right to life.

    Once a revolution has attained stability and maturity, then the death penalty couldn’t be justified. And of course, no death penalty issued by a capitalist state is ever justified.