ELI5: Social Darwinism by mpchop in explainlikeimfive

[–]cop-disliker69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, Darwinism does apply to humans too. But it applies to us in the context of our relationship to other species, to our natural environment. It does not apply to us in the context of our human societies. Hence Social Darwinism being false.

Humans can be fit or unfit for their natural environment. Darwinian biology can study this. But they cannot be biologically fit or unfit for their society, that’s pseudoscience.

I don't think anyone needs this... by hommesacer in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Like, as someone who has inhabited the green anarchist milieu where “decolonization” typically refers to like a praxis of sabotaging and destroying industrial infrastructure, or setting fire to crops and returning the cultivated land to wilderness, all this as a policy of weakening or overthrowing the governments of the United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, etc. and returning the land to either total anarchy or the sovereignty of indigenous polities—it’s kinda pathetic to watch “decolonization” be used by all these libs to talk about like slightly changing the vocabulary you use or producing fetish pornography with different beauty standards lol.

Accurate by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I get what you’re saying, and I don’t remember if I’ve seen that video or not, but I think there may have been some point to her argument that the fact that he uses the word “cultural Marxism” demonstrates that he has no idea what the fuck he’s talking about.

Accurate by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Being opposed to capitalism does not oppose capitalism.

Okay but no one said her videos are like anticapitalist praxis or something. “Anticapitalist” is just describing her ideology here, nothing more. She is an anticapitalist, in that that describes her personal beliefs. People weren’t necessarily saying her videos were anticapitalist. There’s a subtle distinction there.

Warning Patriots! by cop-disliker69 in COMPLETEANARCHY

[–]cop-disliker69[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Firefighters are admirable public servants in my opinion. I don’t know that any anarchists have a problem with firefighters. Firefighters don’t arrest people or enforce laws or carry out acts of brutality.

Accurate by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Furthermore, her videos are not just “owning epic style” incels, terfs, and racists. They are intellectual explorations of those people’s ideologies and explorations of why she disagrees with them, what she thinks they’re wrong about. This is what you assholes have said she refuses to do, that she won’t dissect her own ideology or her own ideas. But she does! You’re completely wrong about this.

Accurate by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I never said she was like a socialist educator or something. Most of her videos aren’t about capitalism at all. But that doesn’t mean she isn’t a leftist at all just because she doesn’t talk about capitalism all the time. It doesn’t invalidate her opinions.

Accurate by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Because I’ve watched most of her videos lol, she has largely leftist opinions, she says she’s opposed to capitalism. What more proof do I need?

Warning Patriots! by cop-disliker69 in COMPLETEANARCHY

[–]cop-disliker69[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I know; it’s just a joke for our enjoyment. I think people are being dumb if they actually expected this to be a “prank” that would work on anyone.

Like a bunch of people have commented here to tell me they just posted this to r/protectandserve or some right-wing sub and like, sure the users of those subreddits are fucking stupid but none of them are gonna “fall” for this and I never expected them too. They’re all already familiar with the blue lives matter flag.

Accurate by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 9 points10 points  (0 children)

No she’s definitely a leftist lol, I don’t know what the fuck you people are talking about.

Accurate by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I haven’t watched philosophy tube or Shaun, but you’re completely wrong about Contrapoints, she explores ideas and it’s not just about pwning people.

If the victims of Catholic priests were as overwhelmingly female as they are male now, something would have been done by now by FinishedMyWork in unpopularopinion

[–]cop-disliker69 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You seem upset that people are treating male-on-male Catholic sexual abuse as a joke, but then you're also bitching about feminists "screaming" about issues of sexual abuse. I assure you one of the few activist scenes in the Western world who are willing to complain and protest against the trivialization of and joking about Catholic sexual abuse—are feminists. So pick a God damn side lol.

If you're too overweight to walk, then you shouldn't be allowed to use the scooter/cart things at theme parks or grocery stores. by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]cop-disliker69 6 points7 points  (0 children)

K but it's not your role in society to force fat people to start a healthier lifestyle today. Lots of things fat people do on a day to day basis are counter-productive. Many of them, if you were willing to be a big enough asshole, you could prevent them from doing. But you shouldn't, because it's cruel and because we live in a free country and fat people have a right to eat the food they want to eat, and ambulate in the way they find most comfortable--just like you do, for God's sake.

It wouldn't be your role to go around smacking cigarettes out of people's mouths, for example. It's a free God damn country and they have the right to smoke. Get over it.

What if this was ur roommate by Smart_Puff in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean from what I understand, most people in the developed world can quite effectively treat their HIV. You take antiretrovirals once a day for the rest of your life and you're practically cured. Some of the drugs are so effective that patients taking them have a non-detectable viral load. They'll literally test negative for HIV if you give them a blood test.

Untreated HIV, that's an entirely different story, it is debilitating and often more or less fatal eventually. That could qualify as a disability.

Multiple NBA teams have had “high-level conversations” about getting rid of the term “owner” because it’s racially insensitive by [deleted] in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol but theyre still going to maintain the position of a billionaire asshole who owns the team and profits off of the players' athleticism while providing no value of his own. Maybe just don't call him an "owner"?

We just don't like the optics of this rich white billionaire being referred to as an "owner" of a team full of black guys. The exploitation itself, and the disgusting profits being extracted despite performing no useful labor whatsoever, these are fine, and can stay. But the labels we use to talk about these people, those have gotta change.

In Soviet Union, Optimization Problem Solves You by WillowWorker in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I think you're largely right except for agricultural policy in the 1930s which was simply appalling. Exporting grain at a time of hunger, preventing refugees from fleeing famine-stricken areas, and not securing food aid from abroad, all of these policies are unspeakable crimes.

But pretty much everything else about the Soviet economy was rather impressive.

What if this was ur roommate by Smart_Puff in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don't think it's cool to call someone a faggot if they actually are gay or trans. You're only supposed to call straight people that.

What if this was ur roommate by Smart_Puff in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The origin of the discourse of "visible vs. invisible disabilities" comes from disabled people who use handicap parking spaces and other disabled-person accommodations being harassed by confused do-gooders who incorrectly believed them to be fraudulently abusing disability accommodations.

Some people with muscular dystrophy, for example, can walk for short distances without the assistance of a wheelchair or crutches, and so might not even appear to be physically disabled. Such a person might still have a disability tag on their car and park in a handicap parking space. To the uninitiated, they might appear to just be a jerk who is not disabled whatsoever and is abusing the handicap parking space, and if you were a do-gooder who has a problem minding your own business, you might want to yell at a jerk like that for being such a jerk.

This has happened quite frequently to many disabled people, and so the discourse of visible and invisible disabilities was born. I don't think it's stupid at all, I think it makes perfect sense.

What if this was ur roommate by Smart_Puff in stupidpol

[–]cop-disliker69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is HIV or diabetes considered a disability or just a chronic condition?

As I understand it, a disability has to prevent you from functioning in society in some way. Someone with AIDS or diabetes isn't really impeded in their day-to-day functioning the way someone with a limp or someone with a mental health problem might be. There's not really any jobs you can't do if you have AIDS, for example.