Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
Baseless? You mean that you don't believe me when I say that I was like you once?
It's funny indeed. Because I didn't always had this hope. The period I'm talking you about, I kinda lost it. And this is very telling.
You vision doesn't rely on rationnality, it's relies on cynisism and fatality. You didn't grew up, you let yourself be taken by the system.
Not in the data.
It's the risk of an invisible massacre, so we are far from just a tiny law. The danger is real and already happening. All disabled people (mentally or physically) are potentially at risk.
It's not about who writes these laws, it's about the effect these laws have in a capitalist society. I implore you to watch and read the documentation I gave you. Especially this: https://blogs.mediapart.fr/collecti...-avec-une-deputee-eelv-revele-le-vrai-clivage
The way we come up with that kind of vision on these laws is through materialist thinking. Basically the fundamental thing to understand is that people who are disabled are systematically pushed by their condition and environment, social and material to see themselves as burden and belittled themselves as unworthy and undignified by their conditions.
This is something we pretty much all experience. Psychiatrized, invisibilized disabilities, physical disabilities etc. Our societies are constructed to push us toward marginalization, for capitalist reasons and eugenist ones.
So we are all likely to think about suicide one day or another. These laws invite us to do just that. First because of suffering (that can actually be fixed through better palliative care) then through an ableist definition of "dignity". A definition we have no control over at the moment.
"Regol admits that some people would indeed not have access to palliative care before making a request. She offers a justification: some illnesses degenerate too quickly to wait. This justification does not appear anywhere in the text. It is not a criterion, it is not a condition—it is an explanation given during a session.
But this explanation reveals something important. The argument of rapid degeneration amounts to saying: the person must be allowed to die before reaching a state of dependency or loss of capacity—before being in a state where they could no longer make the request. It is no longer irreducible suffering that is being avoided: it is the state itself. The possibility of dying is being organized before what is implicitly perceived as an inevitable indignity. The priority is not given to access to care for those who might change their minds—it is given to the ability to decide quickly, before becoming unable to do so. " - cf source given before
"The law is justified not by the existence of irreducible suffering that nothing else could alleviate, but by the physical inability of some people to commit suicide on their own. It is a tool for equal access to suicide - not a response to specific suffering. It helps people die, but it doesn't help them stay at home. It helps them die, but it doesn't help them access a palliative care team. This isn't autonomy: it's abdication disguised as a right. " - cf source given before
These laws, under capitalism, are not only a threat, they are a ticking time bomb placed by the institutions under the beds of every disabled and ill persons. No matter how much they suffer physically in reality. This is not a fantazy, this is a massacre in waiting.
Under capitalism. it's the factual equivalent of doing this:
And it's already happening. So please, take the time to read the source I gave you.
It's funny indeed. Because I didn't always had this hope. The period I'm talking you about, I kinda lost it. And this is very telling.
You vision doesn't rely on rationnality, it's relies on cynisism and fatality. You didn't grew up, you let yourself be taken by the system.
Not in the data.
It's the risk of an invisible massacre, so we are far from just a tiny law. The danger is real and already happening. All disabled people (mentally or physically) are potentially at risk.
It's not about who writes these laws, it's about the effect these laws have in a capitalist society. I implore you to watch and read the documentation I gave you. Especially this: https://blogs.mediapart.fr/collecti...-avec-une-deputee-eelv-revele-le-vrai-clivage
The way we come up with that kind of vision on these laws is through materialist thinking. Basically the fundamental thing to understand is that people who are disabled are systematically pushed by their condition and environment, social and material to see themselves as burden and belittled themselves as unworthy and undignified by their conditions.
This is something we pretty much all experience. Psychiatrized, invisibilized disabilities, physical disabilities etc. Our societies are constructed to push us toward marginalization, for capitalist reasons and eugenist ones.
So we are all likely to think about suicide one day or another. These laws invite us to do just that. First because of suffering (that can actually be fixed through better palliative care) then through an ableist definition of "dignity". A definition we have no control over at the moment.
"Regol admits that some people would indeed not have access to palliative care before making a request. She offers a justification: some illnesses degenerate too quickly to wait. This justification does not appear anywhere in the text. It is not a criterion, it is not a condition—it is an explanation given during a session.
But this explanation reveals something important. The argument of rapid degeneration amounts to saying: the person must be allowed to die before reaching a state of dependency or loss of capacity—before being in a state where they could no longer make the request. It is no longer irreducible suffering that is being avoided: it is the state itself. The possibility of dying is being organized before what is implicitly perceived as an inevitable indignity. The priority is not given to access to care for those who might change their minds—it is given to the ability to decide quickly, before becoming unable to do so. " - cf source given before
"The law is justified not by the existence of irreducible suffering that nothing else could alleviate, but by the physical inability of some people to commit suicide on their own. It is a tool for equal access to suicide - not a response to specific suffering. It helps people die, but it doesn't help them stay at home. It helps them die, but it doesn't help them access a palliative care team. This isn't autonomy: it's abdication disguised as a right. " - cf source given before
These laws, under capitalism, are not only a threat, they are a ticking time bomb placed by the institutions under the beds of every disabled and ill persons. No matter how much they suffer physically in reality. This is not a fantazy, this is a massacre in waiting.
Under capitalism. it's the factual equivalent of doing this:
And it's already happening. So please, take the time to read the source I gave you.
nah bro, reading your stuff about how people wont be longing for private property and move towards this perfect collective where everyone works for everyone else was comical as fuck. thats what i mean with utopian. that shit wont ever happen, and this has nothing to do with letting "myself be taken by the system" in any way lmao.
This is really sad to see. And the saddest part in this is that you actually believe it to be a rationnal stance.
More like the more the access to the paliative care, the lesser the need for suicide, for high end suffering, there are medications possible, even to high degree.
yeah, google translate is not ideal
wtf lmao
More like the more the access to the paliative care, the lesser the need for suicide, for high end suffering, there are medications possible, even to high degree.
yeah, google translate is not ideal
wtf lmao
i agree that its sad, and i wouldnt say this is rational. its just realistic. people are real suckers for capitalism and private property and possessions of all kinds. i personally dont see the majority of people going along with your utopian view of society.
i would love for it to become that way, dont get me wrong, i just dont see it happening. Maybe you can say that im pessimistic about this, but this has nothing to do with me thinking this is rational. because it isnt. People arent perfect, im also a fairly emotional guy.
if i can make a vague analogy with vegans, in that same sense i dont think the aspirations of vegans will ever change the world where we dont mistreat and slaughter animals in masses and keep them in extremely bad conditions, even if vegans are mostly right about their arguments regarding animal suffering. sadly, too many people dont fucking care so this wont drastically change.
at least not in our lifetime
i would love for it to become that way, dont get me wrong, i just dont see it happening. Maybe you can say that im pessimistic about this, but this has nothing to do with me thinking this is rational. because it isnt. People arent perfect, im also a fairly emotional guy.
if i can make a vague analogy with vegans, in that same sense i dont think the aspirations of vegans will ever change the world where we dont mistreat and slaughter animals in masses and keep them in extremely bad conditions, even if vegans are mostly right about their arguments regarding animal suffering. sadly, too many people dont fucking care so this wont drastically change.
at least not in our lifetime
Ok, so what i guessed was your point when i responded to matthias last page.
and i agree, if you optimize palliative care among other things, the need for assisted suicide wont be high. and with your example, it seems the laws phrasing doesnt help.
but this will then be a case by case basis, depending on the country and its social systems. But generally i would want for people to have better options regarding suicide than jumping off a high building or shooting themselves at home to reduce trauma of people around them?
obviously with extensive psychological assessment.
and i agree, if you optimize palliative care among other things, the need for assisted suicide wont be high. and with your example, it seems the laws phrasing doesnt help.
but this will then be a case by case basis, depending on the country and its social systems. But generally i would want for people to have better options regarding suicide than jumping off a high building or shooting themselves at home to reduce trauma of people around them?
obviously with extensive psychological assessment.
I'm not affirmating that there will be change today, or even in 10 or 50 years. If I had to gave you my personnal assesment on the moment we will enter a real socialist society at this pace, I would say between 100 and 1000 years (taking into account the fact that we are most likely about to reset the entire society because of people who keep on acting for reactionnary causes).
My point is that change requires action and self-dedication. It's one thing to be hopefull, it's another to be angry and hopefull. Hope in itself is useless. What we are trying to do is to make you people angry, to help us move faster before we lose billions of lives.
Sucide is a social consequence before being a physical one. It's the result of abandonment and the lack of care. Under capitalism, there is no safe road to assisted suicide. It will inevitably push all disabled people in danger.
You need to know that I wasn't always against. When I was valid, I didn't care about the details of these types of measure. My mind was focused on the suffering of people I thought needed special treatment. I was for assisted suicide.
But I'm handicaped now. My material condition have changed the way I see the world. I now see the danger.
My point is that change requires action and self-dedication. It's one thing to be hopefull, it's another to be angry and hopefull. Hope in itself is useless. What we are trying to do is to make you people angry, to help us move faster before we lose billions of lives.
Sucide is a social consequence before being a physical one. It's the result of abandonment and the lack of care. Under capitalism, there is no safe road to assisted suicide. It will inevitably push all disabled people in danger.
You need to know that I wasn't always against. When I was valid, I didn't care about the details of these types of measure. My mind was focused on the suffering of people I thought needed special treatment. I was for assisted suicide.
But I'm handicaped now. My material condition have changed the way I see the world. I now see the danger.
Technically, it could be very fast, even to a point where we transition before both our death.
It doesn't require much. Simply people listening to leftist. Taking us seriousely. Looking at our ressources, being curious. Understanding that you guyz have a choice between:
- No solution and you continue to laugh at leftist like me and be fatalist
- A solutution but you will have to listen to me and maybe challenge your belief system.
For a majority of people to accept an ideology, a threashold but be attained. This is why you feel a lot more social pressure to accept informations spreaded by your close social circle than from us.
So if enough people manage to accept this, the threadshold will naturally do the job for us and people will naturally start to listen and politicize. And if we are lucky, the transition could be VERY fast. And without even one single drop of blood. Simply by listening very care and being careful about biases..
It doesn't require much. Simply people listening to leftist. Taking us seriousely. Looking at our ressources, being curious. Understanding that you guyz have a choice between:
- No solution and you continue to laugh at leftist like me and be fatalist
- A solutution but you will have to listen to me and maybe challenge your belief system.
For a majority of people to accept an ideology, a threashold but be attained. This is why you feel a lot more social pressure to accept informations spreaded by your close social circle than from us.
So if enough people manage to accept this, the threadshold will naturally do the job for us and people will naturally start to listen and politicize. And if we are lucky, the transition could be VERY fast. And without even one single drop of blood. Simply by listening very care and being careful about biases..
A month is not easy though, this sleep was torture and kind of destroying my life because thanks to God now I do a lot of very good things and unless something else bad happens, I will have my dream life, if my sleep gets fixed
And bad sleep makes my cptsd worse
Not only that, but bad sleep causes high cortisol, when the reason I had bad sleep was high cortisol
So you put high cortisol and high cortisol together and you get an extreme amount of cortisol in my body
Plus men on ptsd and cptsd have been helped very much by testosterone, and my lifestyle gets very high testosterone, but the problem is, testosterone is produced during sleep, if you don't sleep well you won't get it
And bad sleep makes my cptsd worse
Not only that, but bad sleep causes high cortisol, when the reason I had bad sleep was high cortisol
So you put high cortisol and high cortisol together and you get an extreme amount of cortisol in my body
Plus men on ptsd and cptsd have been helped very much by testosterone, and my lifestyle gets very high testosterone, but the problem is, testosterone is produced during sleep, if you don't sleep well you won't get it
Last edited:
but then we get to the point that you keep rejecting despite it being very true.
you (plural) make it hard to take you seriously if inbetween your nice vision you have for society ( which as i mentioned in the previous posts is a little naive and too utopian) you say stupid shit like "there is no biological sex" or call everyone and their mothers racists, sexists, ableists, and whatnot. This isnt motivating people to join your cause. And while i agree that its a stupid reaction to then vote right-leaning against your interests because of very specific disagreements you cant just cant get over, people fucking do it. And the saddest is that the bad aspects mentioned above usually come from a vocal minority.
you (plural) make it hard to take you seriously if inbetween your nice vision you have for society ( which as i mentioned in the previous posts is a little naive and too utopian) you say stupid shit like "there is no biological sex" or call everyone and their mothers racists, sexists, ableists, and whatnot. This isnt motivating people to join your cause. And while i agree that its a stupid reaction to then vote right-leaning against your interests because of very specific disagreements you cant just cant get over, people fucking do it. And the saddest is that the bad aspects mentioned above usually come from a vocal minority.