>>12214040>doesn't the left support matters of ecology, and it's preservation? Don't they oppose genocide for humans?your argument fails when I'm not part of the left. Thus, it's failed. I care little for ecology.
To me human duty is not to shepherd land and animal, but rather if not to just merely exist then cease after momentary action, then it is that action that is of great importance. And in those actions to solve the flaws of man and reach an optimum unary existence of ceaselessness and continuum.
Humans not partial to my goals serve to purpose to me.
I've no intent to convince them of anything.
>That is the essence of conservation. You're afraid because the truth because it can't be used as a weapon for progressivism in this instance.your argument continues to fail, as I am not one to respect human life in general. It has an equivalence of a gnat or dirt, yet more like a gnat because dirt does not act antagonistically. Ideally nuisances should be eliminated or ostracized.
I am concerned with truth.
but action is acted by actors, not willed by truth.
Truth has no will except within itself.
>deservingno one is deserving of anything.
A wolf does not deserve the flesh of sheep.
A sheep does not deserve the flesh of grass.
A grass does not deserve the flesh of the sun.
Things unadaptable will die with change.
Humans do no deserve their desires, that is why they often suffer for them.
Faggot spacing btw
left politicucks desire one end of self preservation. To align with the weak and ensure their right for if they fall prey to weakness they desire entitlement.
right politicucks are on the opposite side of self preservation, concerned with individuals rights and freedoms, and the protection of competition because they desire to dominate and to ensure their desires with effort
The left would not exist without the back of the right and the right naturally disdains such an existence The right believes natural civility will govern enough laissez faire
