all 21 comments

[–]happysmash27 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Good advice. I might try that sometime, for things that would normally be too controversial.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Story of my life. Good thing I'm un-attack-able.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Didn't Shaw think killing disabled people was good? He was a eugenicist.

[–]sproketboy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Worse, he was a socialist. A lot of people had fucked up ideas back then. Just like today.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

Socialism is worse than eugenics? Lol, ok

[–]latuspod 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Socialism has killed more people so....

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It isn’t socialism that causes violence in the countries you’re likely referring to. It’s dictatorships. And eugenics would kill a lot of people if it were allowed to prevail.

[–]SaidOverRed 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And when people refuse to 'socialize' their businesses? Gee we just need more power to force them!

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's true. But I do believe public lands is a good thing. Proudhon's idea of mixing decentralized community socialist policies while keeping capitalism (the good kind) is a better system.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not even tyrants or dictatorships. FOr dictators don't have to kill anyone to be a dictator. Its despotism.

[–]sproketboy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You can only create dictatorships with socialism.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Socialism is a ISM. This ISM doesn't kill anyone, just as guns by themselves don't kill people. Your thesis is like what the left uses on gun control.

What do you call farmer co-ops? The problem is despots can more easily get into power and take control of ANY ISM and recreate society. Totalitarianism or authoritarianism ensues. Communism is what kileld millions of people, socialism can lead into communism if you let despots take over.

Just remember that Capitalism isn't as different as you think to communism. At least not crony-capitalism of what we have today. The USSR would not be where it was or would have grown so powerful if it were not for capitalist giving them billions in arms and ammunition and technology.

[–]infpmmxx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Bit pushed for time, but found this quote by Shaw:

“The only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man.”

My understanding is that Shaw thought himself enlightened, intelligent and progressive (woke). He also admired those characteristics in others and and thought they should be preserved in the population through selective breeding (eugenics).

I didn't see any immediate reference to killing disabled people, but I ran out of time.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

He said in a speech that it would be best for humanity if disabled people willingly were killed for the good of the community. This is the antithesis of Yeshua's teachings.

This speech is on YouTube. I'll get it. I believe John St. Julien did a video about it too.

[–]infpmmxx 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

For the record, that would definitely be worth posting.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

https://invidio.us/watch?v=Ymi3umIo-sM

Shaw says:

George Bernard Shaw: I object to all punishment whatsoever. I don't want to punish anybody, but there are an extraordinary number of people who I want to kill. Not in any unkind or personal spirit. But it must be evident to all of you, you must all know half a dozen people at least, who are no use in this world; who are more trouble than they are worth. And I think it would be a good thing to make everybody come before a properly appointed board just as he might come before the income tax commissioners and say every 5 years or every 7 years, just put them there, and say, sir or madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can’t justify your existence; if you’re not pulling your weight in the social boat; if you are not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then clearly we cannot use the big organization of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us, and it can’t be of very much use to yourself.

That's why he was a big fan of Hitler who was a darwinist and pushed eugenics. They put down plenty of disabled people. Shaw would approve, for their existence does not benefit anyone, such as the mentally ill person, or the child that was born with defects and cannot work. The have God in their eyes but Shaw thinks its best that they be killed for the better of society. This is the antithesis of Yeshua's teachings.

He is very vauge with his statements and knowing his praise for eugenics and Hitler's program killing the mentally ill, which in many cases is due to birth defects or brain infections, it is unpardonable that he would say this. These statements, even if he need not mention the disabled or mentally ill, encompass them as well.

[–]infpmmxx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That's a repulsive thing to say. Even from my own perspective, I'm not convinced I can objectively "justify my existence" or whether I am of any "use to this world", so it's kind of personal. You sure this isn't overdubbed in any way? Not that I don't believe; more that I'm struggling to comprehend such a thought process. I do give it the benefit of the doubt, at face value. Google search isn't bring back many responses to the quote, though it's understandable it would not be publicised much.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

And what use do they deem acceptable? What if those in power are degenerates and you do not want to provide any substance for their bombing campaigns or militarism? Such broad statements can encompass anything and give too much power to people like Shaw or his favorite tyrants.

No there are other videos on this. It is him saying this. Was Shaw your idol or something. If so, I'm sorry.

[–]infpmmxx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Verifying the quote and video does not indicate my support for this guy. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I know, i was being sarcastic. I know a lot of Shaw lovers and they'll never look into his eugenics Fabian connections. I guess everyone, even evil people say some truth some of the time. So, one can still quote from him. I just find some of his views to be very offputting.

[–]infpmmxx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Seems like he has a lot of apologists.

Anyway, from what I can tell, the video seems legit. Shaw even makes the same point again in a separate essay:

"What we are confronted with now is a growing perception that if we desire a certain type of civilization and culture we must exterminate the sort of people who do not fit into it".