>>12151681And if i chose to ignore the 'issue' and just oppose every kind of violence or interference with a human life, in the most immediate case me, soledly based on abstract ethical principles that i similarily apply in issues that are not as grave as some outlier possibility like climate change, eugenical policy, nuclear war, economic collapse because i can prove that if by them my possiblities multiply then i do which is good and if noone would stick to similar calculus then collapse would be imminent and out of my control?
I know a POC who is a gifted geologist and i would hate if she were to be genocided. I would also hate if she were have to witness anyone she identifies with on a level that i can not, being genocided. There are also pressing social issues that white people cant propose without creating a shitstorm and i dont think that theres a genetic component to that.
Also i dont even think theres a genetic component to people proposing eugenical programms. It's not like these things create MRI machines or Space rockets, and the thought that inventing such things is not some form of societal wellfare that equally attributes all people while not adressing their relative indifferences towards its abstract properties, just substantially devalues the very thing that is an invention.
And yes if you dont want to eradicate a culture you have to from a technological/white stand point assimilate it partly into your social sphere instead of just genociding them. Why else would you expand geographically in the first place?
