this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
405 points (91.8% liked)

Memes

45734 readers
1135 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 months ago (55 children)

But it is what the comment said. It's saying that people promote eugenics without realizing it. They do so by talking about the mechanics of eugenics without naming them.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 3 points 4 months ago (54 children)

i'm baffled as to what's going on here

  • if you describe the mechanics of eugenics, people like the idea
  • if you label the mechanics of eugenics as eugenics, people do not like the idea

versus

  • if you describe the mechanics of marxism, people like the idea
  • if you label the mechanics of marxism as marxism, people do not like the idea
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago (53 children)

Your confusion comes from the fact that you assume most people like the mechanics of eugenics. If that's the sort of crowd you hang out with, then you may be associating with fascists.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

but that's literally what the comment's saying? and you're saying "that's an example of the opposite?

e.g., there's a pretty good argument that pre-natal screening is a form of eugenics

if you describe the mechanics of pre-natal screening to somebody, i suspect most would be in support of that, but wouldn't be if you described it using the term "eugenics"

like, if you were to notice that completing tertiary education makes it more difficult for people to have children, and you decided to create some form of government aid to offset that, then oopsie daisy you just did a eugenics, but you could absolutely package that idea in a way that most people would instinctively go "yeah that sounds okay"

also to preempt pls nobody do the intellectually dishonest thing of pretending me following this line of argument means im in love with eugenics and am here to argue for more eugenics or that i just dont think eugenics is such a bad thing after all thnk u

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

This is all just semantics and how the word 'opposite' can be applied in different ways. I wouldn't spend too much time on this.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

if you want to use the sentiment expressed in this post as an argument for marxism being good, which seems pretty transparent in this case, then that same sentiment being used to justify eugenics isn't a good thing for said argument

i'm not that concerned with the precise definition of "opposite", but i am concerned with whether or not the post's logic is sound

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Except that doesn't follow logically, but it's pretty clear that you're determined to work hard not to understand that.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

logic seems pretty clear and laid out to me but you do you, pal

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

multiple people are working hard to explain the obvious holes in it to you in this very thread pal 😂

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

i wouldn't say you're working particularly hard given that all you've done is issue a blanket "no", and cowbee seems to be coming at the problem from the angle that i'm secretly the ghost of joseph mccarthy

i've given you two examples where i think most people would agree with the concepts of eugenics before being told it's eugenics, and so far nobody's disagreed with them? what's your issue? that you don't think most people would agree with them, or that you don't think that that fact draws enough of a parallel between eugenics and the post?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

As I've said earlier, if you genuinely believe that most people are into eugenics, then you're likely a fascist and there's not point trying to have a discussion with you. Bye.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

also to preempt pls nobody do the intellectually dishonest thing of pretending me following this line of argument means im in love with eugenics and am here to argue for more eugenics or that i just dont think eugenics is such a bad thing after all thnk u

wow you did the thing well done

you made a bad argument, it's okay

if your argument was good you wouldn't be working so hard to avoid defending it like you are

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I just love how you don't know when to stop digging. 😂

if your argument was good you wouldn’t be working so hard to avoid defending it like you are

this is what projection looks like

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

this is what projection looks like

actual brainrot

 

also, people willingly vote for fascism all the time so long as it isn't called "fascism" so this post supports fascism too good job

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

yeah we know you have actual brain rot since you think most people support eugenics, really says a lot about you as a person

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

literally deploying the "i'm rubber you're glue" defense to protect your pro-fascism, pro-eugenics meme

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Says the fash who thinks that most people support eugenics. What an utter clown you shown yourself to be here. The best part is that you don't even know you're a clown.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Says the fash who thinks that most people support eugenics.

buddy i'm not the one making posts in support of fascism

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You literally are, but you lack self awareness to realize it. You're the only person in this thread who think that most people would support eugenics because you're the only fascist here.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

don't make me tap the sign

also to preempt pls nobody do the intellectually dishonest thing of pretending me following this line of argument means im in love with eugenics and am here to argue for more eugenics or that i just dont think eugenics is such a bad thing after all thnk u

on the other hand, your post advocates for fascism and eugenics

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

My post does no such thing. You made a false argument premised on the idea that most people would support the mechanics of eugenics. You believe this to be true because you are a fascist who believes in eugenics, and you're projecting your depraved views onto others. Everyone can see through you. Go home little fash.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

*taps the sign*

Donald Trump, a fascist, is currently polling about equally with his opponent, who is not a fascist, because while his policies are fascist, he isn't describing them as such. People are willingly voting for them because they think they're a good idea.

If he campaigned on "I am a fascist", he would not be polling equally with his opponent.

Please explain how these two ideas put together aren't an example of what you advocate for in your post.

You'll also notice that me referencing polling figures doesn't mean that I agree with the outcome of polling. Absolutely shocking that I need to make this clarification, but there we go, I suppose.

Or, you know, continue desperately avoiding making an actual argument because of how obvious it is that you accidentally made a pro-fascism, pro-eugenics post and for some reason can't accept that fact.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's because US is and always has been a fascist state. Only difference with Trump is that he's open about what burgerland truly stands for. Thanks for proving my point.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

have you forgotten what your point was? because a minute ago it was that you could trust the average person's gut impulse when it came to political philosophy. now it's that you can't? are you feeling okay?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I have not, I'm just pointing out that people are a product of their environment. And you live in a fascist nations, which is what shapes your fucked up views.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

can you trust a gut reaction or not? i'm getting mixed messages here

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

you're getting mixed messages because you have low reading comprehension, I'll let you wallow in your confusion.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

my guy it's actually comical how shit your comebacks are getting

can you trust it? yes or no? it's a pretty simple question

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Where do you think your gut reaction comes from genius? Absolutely hilarious that you can't understand that it's shaped by your conditions. You just continue to highlight the quality of your intellect here. 😂

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

oh my god is that the point you were trying to make? i kind of assumed it wasn't because it actually doesn't help your argument in any way

like, okay, you're shaped by your surroundings. so? so you can't trust your gut because your surroundings could have shaped you to have the wrong gut reaction?

incredible that you're actually arguing against yourself now

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yup, I'm arguing against myself here, you're very intelligent. 😂

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

excuse me buddy i think you need to work on your

reading comprehension

let's try again

can you trust a person's gut reaction? yes or no?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

can you trust a person’s gut reaction? yes or no?

Depends on what that gut reaction is born out of obviously, which is something you appear to be unable to comprehend. Somebody, like yourself, growing up in a fascist environment, naturally has fascist gut reactions. That's why my original point wasn't about discussing gut reactions, which are meaningless, but reasoning about the actual mechanics, and thinking through their implications, something that's clearly beyond your cognitive abilities as you've shown here time and again.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

oh my god it was beautiful

it was nearly an argument and then it just crashed and burned so quickly, and it was so clearly meant to be some kind of coup de grâce

reasoning about the actual mechanics, and thinking through their implications

okay so if a person grows up in the wrong environment, and so they reason about the actual mechanics, and think through the implications in a way that you don't like, it's bad

but when they do it and get an answer that you do like, it's good

the only difference between the two scenarios is your personal opinion on their conclusion

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Growing up in a fascist environment does not preclude critical thinking, being an imbecile does however.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

ah and thus we arrive at the final stop of our journey

"the right answer is right because i say it is right", confirming that, at no stage did you have anything resembling a good point to make in its defense

i'm glad we could all reach this together i'm so happy for us

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And thus we arrive at the final stop of our journey where you are unable to distinguish between the beliefs people internalize through their conditioning and rational thinking. I’m glad we could all reach this together. I’m so happy for us.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

it's hilarious that you think that has anything to do with your post

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

it's even more hilarious that you can't understand that it does 🤡

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

dropping the emojis again i love it

your post boils down to "marxism good because i say", which is a shit argument for marxism

there's really nothing more to it than that, and it's pretty obvious that you've realised it at this point

hence how pointedly you're avoiding actually engaging with anything i say and i'm here for it every step of the way

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I, as well as numerous other people did engage with what you said, and explained to you the fallacy of your argument in detail. You just ignored that and continued to double down on it. I absolutely love how your method of argument is basically to just repeat nonsense like a broken record hoping that the other side will get tired and you get the last word. That presumably constitutes winning the argument in your head. Enjoy having the last word being the child that you are.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i'm not that concerned with the precise definition of "opposite", but i am concerned with whether or not the post's logic is sound

The problem is that your argument relies on the idea that "most people support eugenics until you say what it actually is," which is false in my experience while the post is correct.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i've given two examples where i think the average person would come down on the side of "let's do some eugenics" until being told "haha you just agreed to do some eugenics"

the problem with the post is that if you boil it down, it becomes "things that sound good on the surface are automatically good", which doesn't hold

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't say they are automatically good, just that people have a negative connotation to the word Marxism even if the ideas are sound and good.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"people have a negative connotation to the word Marxism" absolutely has baked-in implications, and an argument left unsaid, even in total isolation

if i say to you "people think the word nazi has negative connotations", then even with no other context then obviously you'd conclude that i'm a nazi freak

the post doesn't make any justification for the ideas being sound and good, it says they sound good

i don't think this post's subtext is as simple as the interpretation you're providing

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago (7 children)

if i say to you "people think the word nazi has negative connotations", then even with no other context then obviously you'd conclude that i'm a nazi freak

Good thing Nazism isn't sound, nor does it sound good, even without the label.

the post doesn't make any justification for the ideas being sound and good, it says they sound good

It does, actually. Marxism is popular and easily understood, yet red scare propaganda and anticommunism has given it a negative connotation. Eugenics and Nazism are not popular, and have bad connotations because they are bad ideas in general, not to mention Nazism being based on pure evil extermination.

You're not cooking here.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago

Actually I think I get what you're saying now and I think you have a point. I am not sure the two can be directly compared that way, though. There are different reasons for why people think each is bad once they hear the name and I don't think the meme is actually saying that this is an argument for or against anything. Just a funny observation.

[–] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

But but there's a person on the internet that might be wrong! *shakes fist at sky*

load more comments (51 replies)
load more comments (51 replies)
load more comments (51 replies)