But it’s not “traumatic.”

Never said it was.

We don’t even have to bring in epigenetics into this. You spend your time oppressing and abusing those you seeas lesser than, that will carry over into your behaviour as a person. Infamously cops go home and beat their wives.

I mean, humans who work in slaughterhouses experience mental anguish and other adverse effects. Imagine inflicting that kind of pain to humans. I think even prison guards, who could somehow logically justify what they do, also experience mental health problems. No wonder many of them “break” and become abusive monsters. But then how can one be an abusive monster 9-5 and then “switch off”? One can’t, it’s now 24/7.

The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.

Precisely!

“People who are descended from people…” makes it sound like eugenics.

Perhaps I should have written “People who were raised by people that…”?

If you think people from Africa are worth less than people in Europe, then what motivation do you have to teach your kids the opposite? You may even keep your racism to yourself, but you can’t change your actions. A little European kid notices that their parents don’t hang out with anyone else but their own countrymen for example. That’s enough for the kid to view everyone else as “the other”.

So it isn’t so much genetics, but what children are exposed to. If a parent small talks and laughs with random countrymen you see around, but then keeps it short with foreigners and doesn’t have the same rapport, children pick up on that.

But superiority and racism are something that’s taught.

Yes. And those Nazis or whatever who have kids, they’re not educating them in racism every day? Doesn’t even have to be “education” but just how they refer (or not refer) to other people. Children are very good at learning by watching. That is how we learn to live in society.

the woman who avenged Che Guevara was the daughter of a nazi

An exception that proves the rule?

Not even talking about Americans only.

Look at Europe. A couple of years ago it was “refugees welcome” and if you weren’t for letting every single refugee in you were a Nazi (fine by me). But now all of a sudden, it is the liberal, “left-wing” thing not to want immigrants, and to kick them out.

It is the “social-democrats” in Europe who are spearheading the anti-immigrant efforts, want to move asylum-seekers to concentration camps in Africa, pay warlords in Libya to stop the immigrant boats, support building a wall on the EU border (ironic, isn’t it?), support sinking, returning and otherwise stopping migrant boats in the Mediterranean, and so on.

Anarchists too have shown themselves to be nothing more than followers of the dominant ideology. If the state says “refugees welcome” then anarchists say “refugees welcome”. Now that the liberal European states have changed their tune, coincidentally so have the “anarchists”.

Honestly, I cannot remember the last time I saw a “refugees welcome” sticker, banner or protest. Goes to show how much these liberal NGOs control the narrative and various “organic movements”

I got prompted to it by trying to reconcile a contradiction that I experienced. As an immigrant in Western/Northern Europe I think to myself “How can these people be polite to me, yet not see me as a human being equal to them?”

The conclusion I came up with is that because of laws and societal pressure, in public they will go through the motions, they’ll do what is expected and required. But as soon as you leave that space of expectations even by a tiny bit, then it is full mask off. And they don’t care, because in their “rule-based order” as long as you follow the rules, you can do whatever you want once those rules don’t apply.

So as someone who is ND, this has been bothering me a lot. I am not surprised when I meet duplicity and hypocrisy in an individual person, but that it exists on a national level, that is surprising to me.

you have to rebuild your social life from scratch or just put up with being surrounded by evil assholes.

Guess which one most people choose…

Thanks for the response

are we talking about wounded nervous systems and their consequences

Definitely this. It’s one of the reasons why Nazis invented gas chambers, because they saw the psychological damage murder inflicted on their soldiers. They didn’t want there to be tens of thousands of mentally damaged maniacs in their new Reich. So they had Jews from the camp lead other Jews into the gas chambers and they had Jews pull them out and stuff them into crematoria. This way the German soldiers would not witness/experience all of the horrors they were inflicting. But gas chambers are unique in history, all other times humans committed genocide or atrocities they did it “by hand”.

Though these surely have some overlap, I don’t think they are quite the same

I don’t think they’re the same. But for example a slave owner, regardless of how they treat their slaves are still a slave owner. Their way of thinking, speaking, viewing the world will be passed onto their children, then that will probably get passed onto their children.

I can’t think of examples in the West when people were forced to confront their past. It’s always “oh, that was my dad/grandad, it has nothing to do with me”.

You get a situation where people’s thinking and worldview hasn’t changed significantly, yet they believe they are somehow changed just because some time has passed.

Literal murder, and for what?

One woman on the train said that Mr Neely made lunging movements that scared her enough to shield her young child from him.

lmao. The murderer was just looking for an excuse to hurt someone.

Prosecutors said Mr Penny placed Mr Neely in a chokehold for six minutes, compressing his neck even after he stopped moving.

They argued that Mr Penny had acted “recklessly” by restraining Mr Neely for several minutes even after he lost consciousness.

“He’s dying,” said an unseen bystander in one passenger’s video. “Let him go!”

A medical examiner ruled Mr Neely’s cause of death as compression to the neck.

I wonder what the demographics and socio-economic status of the jurors was.

when you think of the insane countries in the world, France is generally not the one you come up with, maybe like Somalia

Ironically, Somalis would disagree as France has been dumping nuclear waste in Somalia. France is also a colonial power with colonies in South America, Africa and the Pacific. They just declares them part of France proper so apparently they don’t count as colonies cause people born there are citizens of France (instead of something they would have chosen themselves).

France has also been cutting down their welfare. Most recently the new retirement law that was met with opposition and protests, but Macron pushed it through anyway.

That’s ignoring the ongoing exploitation and adventurism in Africa, recently they were kicked out of Mali. France was also instrumental in the NATO invasion of Libya, one for pretty much initiating it at the order of Sarkozy (I think it was Sarkozy), and two for securing 1/4 of all of Libyas oil for its oil companies.

The media image of France and every other Western country is “not insane”, yet when all of their actions are taken into account and objectively examined one will find that France and the other “not insane” countries have a much more negative effect, on their own people as well as other peoples, on the environment and on our collective future much more than the “insane” countries we hear so much about.

Oil would help the DPRK a lot. DPRK only has about 28% arable land. Motorised arm machinery would help them a lot. I hope the oil keeps flowing to them.

Good, if true. The DPRK has been forbidden from importing oil for far too long. Now the US can’t do anything to Russia any more economically, so Russia doesn’t have to respect the sanctions and import bans on the DPRK.

If things are as bad as the scientists say they are, then we need to start talking about real tangible solutions which involve moving away from capitalism and growth oriented economy.

Exactly. When I ask “Why should I believe them?” I don’t mean they’re lying, I mean what have they done to make me believe what they are saying is true? Calling me a science denier is not enough. You brought up China. China is doing everything the West says they want to do without the alarmism. So it makes me think the alarmism is simply political performance.

there are a lot of reasons to believe t hat there will be very serious disasters

Yes. I’m originally from the Mediterranean region, every year there’s been a growing amount of forest fires. Where I live (West/North Europe) has been getting “Mediterranean” summers with random shit like 2ft of snow in April. I’m not blind to the problems. But I’m also not blind to the fact Earth has been here for billions of years, and supported life for hundreds of millions of years. I’m not arrogant enough to think that the world will end if I buy a plastic bag.

And that’s the crux of the issue for me. They focus on “emissions” and “atmospheric temperatures” (directly affected by emissions), so what it does is just prevent investment in “non-green” energy which translates to keeping the “developing world” underdeveloped. Don’t quote me on this, but I think the US has greatly reduced how much they invest in “non-green” energy so underdeveloped countries in Africa are shit out of luck.

it’s the cooler climates that have to deal with higher temperature gradients, and that’s what tends to cause a lot of the disasters

Yup. Cause the changes in temperature are so great. If the temperature of the sea goes up a few degrees, coral dies. I’ve seen the white coral with my own eyes. I’ve dived and seen fields of dead coral that stretches for kilometers.

I just don’t think the scientists who wrote that open letter are genuine. That’s it. And usually I have a good sense for that sort of thing.

A lot of people go into science because they genuinely enjoy doing research.

Definitely. Those are the people sitting in the labs crunching numbers. But you also can’t deny that as time goes by many lose the spark. I’m not blaming the individuals, that’s just how the science-industrial complex gets them. To continue the research, they need grants, to get grants they need to publish and publish results. This is why there’s a reproducibility crisis in science. I’m sure many people become cops for “good” reasons too, but the system doesn’t allow you to be a good cop.

they speak out tepidly hoping that will make some difference.

Why can’t I call them out for it without being called a climate change denier?

Science gave us: asylums/prisons for the “insane”, lobotomies, anti-women diagnoses like “hysteria”, phrenology and other racial science, and the list goes on. So yeah, scientists need to do way more than say “The science is settled!” to (re)gain people’s trust.

There appears to be a global consensus on the broad problems resulting from climate change.

Nobody denies that. But there’s a difference between saying “problems resulting from climate change” and “THE CLIMATE IS ABOUT TO COLLAPSE IN THE NEXT 75 YEARS AND WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!”

Why can’t I believe there will be problems but not believe that the world will end?

The biggest effect one can see is the migration from the global south where droughts and warmth are destroying crops. Many places on the planet are becoming and will become very challenging to live in. This is why The West is building a wall around the global south. But again, this is rarely discussed in favour of “climate collapse” and “the temperature is gonna go up by 2°C”, both vague, unactionable statements.

They’re able to correctly identify the problem

Why identify a problem if they’re not going to offer any solutions? That’s why I think “reports” like these are politically motivated. Liberals use these reports to then engage in performative gestures like taking working class taxpayer money to fund endless panels and committees whose only solution is to set emission targets. Then when they meet next year they get to wag a finger at every country that didn’t meet the target.

How many are talking about nuclear power? In Germany, the “Greens” (green wow so environmental!) are the ones who shut down nuclear power plants and are now supervising the restarting of coal power plants. But I bet you anything the Greens are most vocal about climate change and the IPCC reports.

I just hate hypocrites, that’s all. When I see a hypocrite, I see a liar, why should I entertain what they have to say?

All the downvotes to my posts, yet nobody can explain how I’m wrong.

Hey, listen up, here’s some political education. These climate scientists are experts at outlining the problems, but why don’t they ever advocate for a solution that seems obvious? If we truly are heading towards a catastrophe, then that means we should reduce our energy expenditure massively, start scaling back unnecessary production, start actively scrubbing carbon, stop the deforestation for cattle farming, and so on.

But you’re not going to see the IPCC or any climate scientist say it. Why? Because liberal capitalism relies on infinite growth, and scientists aren’t going to go against the mainstream liberal view. So either they don’t believe in what they’re saying or they do believe but they’re too scared to rock the boat and ruin their livelihood, they’re either liars or cowards.

It’s like the driver of the car you’re in saying “We need to stop or we’re all gonna fall off a cliff!” And you’re left there wondering “Wait a minute, but you’re driving the car, why don’t you just stop?”

Keep agreeing with liberals, I’m sure you’ll convince them to become communists one day. lol

Russia is so incompetent they couldn’t even defeat just one country in NATO, Poland

How do you know this? What are the winning lottery numbers for tomorrow?

Remember when that Polish minister knelt at the Bandera monument?

Goodbye any fear Europe had of Russia. They can’t defeat Poland much less all of NATO.

I think you’ll find the war is in Ukraine, not Poland. Easy mistake to make for an American.