politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
You might want to read something by his contemporaries on autism, those who were not Nazis so that association can't be immediately used against them. Also read how people diagnosed autistic were treated in, for example, USA.
Compared to sending all of a bunch to a gas chamber sending only part is morally preferable. Obviously. Mentally impaired people were by default intended for extermination in Nazi Germany. The "Asperger's syndrome" diagnosis allowed some of autistic people to be considered curious, borderline genius, pathway to making a new supersoldier/superscientist or anything like that not involving euthanasia.
I don't care for emotional arguments containing no logical structure. Trying to feed that to your counterparts instead of something meaningful is the most morally repugnant position on any subject. The more morally loaded the subject is, the more repugnant it is to try this.
His work should be considered in the context of others' work of the same time.
There are three things called empathy, of which autistic people have problems with one, and psychopaths with another. This is correct.
Maybe you'd like it back in your cell, your highness? Oops, it's not exactly a cell, it's a gas chamber.
It's not a weird concept, it's the obsolete use of the term. In the 40s psychopathy meant basically every disorder with intelligence not necessarily lower than average.
As I said, sending all of the bunch to the gas chamber instead of some.
If you think that eugenicist views being more common at the time is any kind of defense you're sorely mistaken, and if you think there's much of a difference between someone who kills kids and one who tries to decide which kids are worth killing first, you're wrong.
That first reply was for everyone else and reality check for you, but seeing as you seem intent on ignoring it I'm not going to bother wasting any more of my time interacting with you. I truly hope you come to realize how fucking disgusting your perspective is, I've tried to explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
He worked in Nazi Germany. Say, baron von Stauffenberg, famous for his attempt to kill Hitler, wasn't a Nazi because he was a Christian fundamentalist and a more traditional chauvinist, the thin difference that today would be ignored, but in that context he's considered a hero.
Thank you for your opinion, but that's something people in responsible professions have to decide regularly and by design.
Like - "the mother or the child", or "we have an emergency situation with far less donor blood of a certain blood type than we need, how do we share it", and so on.
The reality check is that you consider yourself intelligent enough to do reality checks for others. Yes, don't let the door hit you and all that
And Hitler killed Hitler, I see no one lining up to give him a medal because we understand what fucking context is.
also interesting that you are comparing Triage to Eugenics,