The Fallacy of Centrism

[Washington-Columbia]

Nah bro Centrism is good, it's just not caring about politics which is chadlike

I think that not giving a damn about politics is called Apolitical, not centrist.

[Neutraligon]

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:


This is the list of what is considered genocide by the UN.

This can be debated considering the scientific fact that gender affirming care and not being harassed by society significantly decreases the rate of suicide among trans individuals.

This cannot be debated, the stuff that the Republican party are doing is inflicting serious mental harm on trans individuals

This also cannot be debated as Republicans have been trying to destroy trans individuals by making it impossible for them to live as the gender they identify as, thus pushing them into suicide.

Right now this is not happening.

This is happening as Republican states have decided that parents allowing transition (which does not necessarily include surgery) for their children is child abuse and thus can have their children taken away.

So...using the above 3 and debatably 4 of what is considered genocide from the Un is currently happening

lul, wot.

"genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"

Curiously, I seem to be unable to locate gender on the list of groups there.

That would not be the definition used by the UN. It is interesting that you think homosexuals and trans individuals cannot face genocide, as Hitler attempted precisely that during the holocaust.

[Terra dei Cittadini]

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:


This is the list of what is considered genocide by the UN.

This can be debated considering the scientific fact that gender affirming care and not being harassed by society significantly decreases the rate of suicide among trans individuals.

This cannot be debated, the stuff that the Republican party are doing is inflicting serious mental harm on trans individuals

This also cannot be debated as Republicans have been trying to destroy trans individuals by making it impossible for them to live as the gender they identify as, thus pushing them into suicide.

Right now this is not happening.

This is happening as Republican states have decided that parents allowing transition (which does not necessarily include surgery) for their children is child abuse and thus can have their children taken away.

So...using the above 3 and debatably 4 of what is considered genocide from the Un is currently happening

lul, wot.

"genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"

Curiously, I seem to be unable to locate gender on the list of groups there.

They intend to destroy. This wouldn't be happening if they didn't intend to destroy.

Also, "national group" can encompass gender identity.

[Betoni]

lul, wot.

"genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"

Curiously, I seem to be unable to locate gender on the list of groups there.

That would not be the definition used by the UN. It is interesting that you think homosexuals and trans individuals cannot face genocide, as Hitler attempted precisely that during the holocaust.

That was the definition you said was used by the UN though. It is also interesting that you claim to know what I think.

[Neutraligon]

That would not be the definition used by the UN. It is interesting that you think homosexuals and trans individuals cannot face genocide, as Hitler attempted precisely that during the holocaust.

That was the definition you said was used by the UN though. It is also interesting that you claim to know what I think.

Considering you outright stated that homosexual and trans people cannot be genocided due to them not being a national, ethnical, racial or religious group gives a very big hint.

[Betoni]

lul, wot.

"genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"

Curiously, I seem to be unable to locate gender on the list of groups there.

They intend to destroy. This wouldn't be happening if they didn't intend to destroy.

Also, "national group" can encompass gender identity.

Might be, but I'd say it would not be as easy as you think to show intent here.

[The Pure Russia]

They intend to destroy. This wouldn't be happening if they didn't intend to destroy.

Restriction against expansion in certain territories is not extermination, it is something like closed borders.

Also, "national group" can encompass gender identity.

This is a very bold and broad interpretation. The use of hormones, a somewhat special filling of the head and, for example, [censored] do not make you a representative of a new political nation, or culture, or religion.

[Neutraligon]

Argh, sigh I should not have continued this theadjack, might I suggest taking it to the trans thread.

[Betoni]

That was the definition you said was used by the UN though. It is also interesting that you claim to know what I think.

Considering you outright stated that homosexual and trans people cannot be genocided due to them not being a national, ethnical, racial or religious group gives a very big hint.

You'll note I never stated anything of the short. I merely quoted the definition you provided and said was the one used by the UN. Then I observed that gender didn't seem to be on the list as a separate group.

[Undemocacy]

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:


This is the list of what is considered genocide by the UN.

This can be debated considering the scientific fact that gender affirming care and not being harassed by society significantly decreases the rate of suicide among trans individuals.

This cannot be debated, the stuff that the Republican party are doing is inflicting serious mental harm on trans individuals

This also cannot be debated as Republicans have been trying to destroy trans individuals by making it impossible for them to live as the gender they identify as, thus pushing them into suicide.

Right now this is not happening.

This is happening as Republican states have decided that parents allowing transition (which does not necessarily include surgery) for their children is child abuse and thus can have their children taken away.

So...using the above 3 and debatably 4 of what is considered genocide from the Un is currently happening

lul, wot.

"genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"

Curiously, I seem to be unable to locate gender on the list of groups there.

If the only reason something is not counted as genocide is a technicality, It's a bad sign.

[Betoni]

lul, wot.

"genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"

Curiously, I seem to be unable to locate gender on the list of groups there.

If the only reason something is not counted as genocide is a technicality, It's a bad sign.

Why does the crime become more important when you get to call it a genocide? Is it not worth fighting over if people are merely just suffering and dying, but you don't get to call it a genocide?

[Cannot think of a name]

Considering you outright stated that homosexual and trans people cannot be genocided due to them not being a national, ethnical, racial or religious group gives a very big hint.

You'll note I never stated anything of the short. I merely quoted the definition you provided and said was the one used by the UN. Then I observed that gender didn't seem to be on the list as a separate group.

This is so bad it's kind of awkward.

[Betoni]

You'll note I never stated anything of the short. I merely quoted the definition you provided and said was the one used by the UN. Then I observed that gender didn't seem to be on the list as a separate group.

This is so bad it's kind of awkward.

Yes, when you decide to go the legalistic route with your argument and someone points out the flaws in it, it certainly can get awkward.

[Undemocacy]

If the only reason something is not counted as genocide is a technicality, It's a bad sign.

Why does the crime become more important when you get to call it a genocide? Is it not worth fighting over if people are merely just suffering and dying, but you don't get to call it a genocide?

so we agree, the actions that the American republican party is taking as abhorrent despite not meeting the UN definition of genocide.

[Betoni]

Why does the crime become more important when you get to call it a genocide? Is it not worth fighting over if people are merely just suffering and dying, but you don't get to call it a genocide?

so we agree, the actions that the American republican party is taking as abhorrent despite not meeting the UN definition of genocide.

Certainly, those actions mentioned in the thread, are IMO. Though, from what I have gathered, admittedly too little to make any kind of judgment, puberty blockers and such can have some unwanted side effects on kids. But in general, yes. I would rather trust the doctors on that than the politicians.

[Theodores Tomfooleries]

lul, wot.

"genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"

Curiously, I seem to be unable to locate gender on the list of groups there.

That would not be the definition used by the UN. It is interesting that you think homosexuals and trans individuals cannot face genocide, as Hitler attempted precisely that during the holocaust.

I don't mean to be an "uhm... ackshually" guy here, but.. that is the definition as used by the UN.

[Ulus of Sartaq]

Not enough people seem to know or understand the implications of the Nazis intently studying America to model their own systems and ideologies on. And the really crazy part is, they thought America went too far!

Now consider--in the modern era--the prison population in Chinese Xinjiang, which is bordering on genocide if not already meeting the technical definition vs. America's prison population which is also heavily racially biased. Law and order devotees in America have more in common with the authoritarians of China than they care to admit, regardless of whether they call themself liberal or conservative. Liberals and conservatives have consistently worked together to deny basic human rights to non European populations in the United States.

Add in a purposefully planned community design policy that prioritizes services and value to white neighborhoods, while turning mixed and largely BIPOC neighborhoods into toxic dumps with little inherent equity. It's not just a fucked judicial system, it's encoded in the very streets of the American landscape.

Europeans of largely Germanic descent have already committed active genocide against the Indigenous of North America for over 400 years and counting. It was John Quincy Adams that declared that America's early official policy of assimilation was untenable. Next President, Andrew Jackson, put genocide against the Indigenous into official American policy with the Trail of Tears. Most of the United States isn't even the result of treaties negotiated in bad faith, but straight up seized by force under dubious pretenses.

But America is not genocidal and the Republicans and Democrats don't support it as official US policy.

[Neutraligon]

Like I said earlier, I should not have participated in the threadjack, can we please take it to the trans thread? viewtopic.php?f=20&t=500428

[Vikanias]

None of these are genocidal. I believe you’re the one being lied to.

This website is infested with right-wing know-nothings like yourself. I have been a myriad of idiots on these forums, none of them good.
Fascists, elitists, everything, from the up-in-arms theocrat Floofybit, from the libertarian poor people hater Port Caverton.

Necroghastia and I would agree that this forum is a 4Chan equivalent to the right-wing neofascist movement being perpetuated worldwide.
Bigotry and all the BS fester in this little corner of the internet; I'm sure Max Barry would cringe at some of the people here, . Censoring conservative hate, lies, and fascism is not "violation of free speech"; it is common sense for those who wish to have a democratic government after the far-right coup attempt of January 6th. The paradox of tolerance is that tolerance of intolerance leads to the extinction of tolerance itself, and democracy condoning antidemocracy is the noose of democracy itself. You say we are "left-wing" but think about it. Is the human condition rights of queers, blacks, and other nonwhite, non-Aryan people to be compromise because you find that they are "strange" or "objectionable"?
.

Hey, I want to be on the list of fascistic genocidal trans violating poor peopling hating folks too! Although they really don’t fit in those categories besides Floofybit, which they probably aren’t a fascist who wants to genocide minorities.

[The H Corporation]

Centrism does want change, we just want it moderately, or maybe we have surrendered politics and we want nothing from it. Kind of ridiculous to call centrists "conservatives"

[Terra dei Cittadini]

This website is infested with right-wing know-nothings like yourself. I have been a myriad of idiots on these forums, none of them good.
Fascists, elitists, everything, from the up-in-arms theocrat Floofybit, from the libertarian poor people hater Port Caverton.

Necroghastia and I would agree that this forum is a 4Chan equivalent to the right-wing neofascist movement being perpetuated worldwide.
Bigotry and all the BS fester in this little corner of the internet; I'm sure Max Barry would cringe at some of the people here, . Censoring conservative hate, lies, and fascism is not "violation of free speech"; it is common sense for those who wish to have a democratic government after the far-right coup attempt of January 6th. The paradox of tolerance is that tolerance of intolerance leads to the extinction of tolerance itself, and democracy condoning antidemocracy is the noose of democracy itself. You say we are "left-wing" but think about it. Is the human condition rights of queers, blacks, and other nonwhite, non-Aryan people to be compromise because you find that they are "strange" or "objectionable"?
.

Hey, I want to be on the list of fascistic genocidal trans violating poor peopling hating folks too! Although they really don’t fit in those categories besides Floofybit, which they probably aren’t a fascist who wants to genocide minorities.

Floofy is a fascist. They're far-right authoritarian.

Also, they'd likely genocide queers since they're so theocratic.

[Farnhamia]

They are already committing genocide, they are just not using showers. I already went through what the UN considers genocide one by one explaining which ones the GOP are doing and which they are not.
viewtopic.php?p=40595563#p40595563

I think Euro is being a troll at this point...

A fascist troll, but a troll nonetheless.

Knock it off with the troll-naming. If you think someone's trolling, report them.

[Port Caverton]

Hey, I want to be on the list of fascistic genocidal trans violating poor peopling hating folks too! Although they really don’t fit in those categories besides Floofybit, which they probably aren’t a fascist who wants to genocide minorities.

Floofy is a fascist. They're far-right authoritarian.

Also, they'd likely genocide queers since they're so theocratic.

Floofy is more of a reactionary. He'd feel more at home under Nicholas II than under Putin.

[Floofybit]

Hey, I want to be on the list of fascistic genocidal trans violating poor peopling hating folks too! Although they really don’t fit in those categories besides Floofybit, which they probably aren’t a fascist who wants to genocide minorities.

Floofy is a fascist. They're far-right authoritarian.

Also, they'd likely genocide queers since they're so theocratic.

I'm not a fascist, just authoritarian. And I would on no level like to genocide queer people.

[The Grand Fifth Imperium]

as someone whose political views are more on the Libertarian side of the spectrum, I'm gonna call the idea behind this thread a load of hooey. First off, centrists (i.e. moderates) are probably the smartest people in the room because extremism (regardless of whether right or left wing) is what leads to things like "dehumanization" and "othering" (which you say are the initial steps to genocide, no?). Secondly, to say "left wing is pro rights and right wing is anti rights" is abso-positively ludicrous! I would say it is a rather naive way of looking at things, as it ignores one basic thing: both major political parties in the US oppose freedom in some way.

For instance the Democrats are anti gun, which one could argue is a breach of the fundamental human right to self defense. They also are pro abortion, which could be argued to violate a human's fundamental right to live (while some would argue, on the other hand, that it protects woman's rights, but I feel that's a topic for a different thread). Simultaneously, one could say both parties limit (or seek to limit) free speech in some way. As far the Republicans are concerned, the left wing folks on this thread seem to have shared their thoughts on how they believe Reppies have restricted freedom, so I need not get into that.

Thirdly, to say the Republicans are all or mostly fascist is as ludicrous as saying the Democrats are all or mostly Communists. Donald Trump is no more like Hitler than Joe Biden is like Stalin. Frankly, I find the attempt to label all or most Republicans, conservatives, or whatever you wish to call them as "fascists" (essentially synonymous with "inhuman monsters") as somewhat "dehumanizing" in and of itself.

The key to ending violence and protecting people's rights (which according to the poll is what the left wing claims to go for) is not to be achieved by seeking to tear down and slander those who are not full blown revolutionaries for our respective causes, but by learning to tolerate one another and accept each other as being not just different from ourselves, but having different goals, values, and ideas from one another (diversity of the human mind, I call it). It is only by agreeing to disagree, and compromising on a solution that benefits everyone, not just our political faction, that we can truly cure the ill that is tearing apart the American nation, and ultimately the Free World as a whole. The only way to bring about true change, true progress, is not by fighting and bickering amongst ourselves, but by working together to achieve something great for humanity.

In the words of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "A radical is a man with both feet in the air." Well I disagree with FDR on that. I would say a radical liberal is someone with both feet in the air, a radical conservative is someone with both feet obstinately on the ground, a moderate conservative is someone who places one foot in front of the other slowly on the slippery sands of time, a moderate liberal is someone who runs on said slippery sand, and a centrist is someone who seeks to balance these two sides into a reasonable and responsible walking speed.

Sorry for the rant, but what d'you think, NSG?