genocide

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by robtex, Aug 5, 2004.

  1. robtex Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    582
    Is there ever a situation where genocide in your personal estimation reasonable, permissable or desirable.

    If you had the political power to wipe out a group of

    1) pedofiles
    2) particular race
    3) particular religion
    4) serial killers
    5) rapists
    6) door-to-door salesmen


    would you exercise that option and if so under what justification?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    Got "would"?

    Americans with mullets.

    (White people with dreds would be on the list, but they tend to sell really good dope, so on that count they actually contribute to humanity.)

    Seriously--as a benevolent dictator charged with the cold and dispassionate stewardship of the human species, I would tend to eliminate anyone who attempted to bend the rules toward a more restricted benefit. I have no problem with standards being forced wide open on behalf of the people, but my response to people trying to twist laws in order to profit while openly hurting other people is obscene. Therefore, the insurance industry has to go. As a benevolent dictator, my state would be obliged to the people's benefit, therefore lawyers become largely unnecessary. Set a quota and dump the rest in the ocean. Serial killers, paedophiles, and other deviant criminals would be kept alive in order to study them. There would be no door-to-door salesmen or telemarketers to kill; nobody should be forced to opt for that manner of making a living.

    Oh, and whoever's responsible for turning a spoon-holder into a piece of hanging wall art. That freak and their entire gene pool to the fourth and fifth valences.

    Does anyone think I'm joking? Remember that liberals are liberal because God help the world if we ever go conservative. Take the American neocons, for instance. Disgruntled liberals, or so says the grandfather of neoconservatism. Or father. Or ... I don't know, it was some dumb, affectionate title.

    I mean, when an ideology so fraught with artists wants to kill, expect it to kill artfully. Which means jaw-droppingly, morbidly-beautifully, insanely, hugely impressively. National Geographic, in 1996 or '97, noted that a theoretical voluntary restriction to one child per couple, by the effect of requiring two parents for only one offspring, would reduce the world population to something like 3.5 billion by 2050. I could accomplish that decrease in six days, taking the seventh for my rest--well, that is, if I was the benevolent master of all humanity.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2004
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Closet Philosopher Off to Laurentian University Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,785
    They better not be on the list. I hads dreads, then I took them out for grad and I'm putting them back in permanently.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ANyway, I don't believe in really killing anyone. But If I had to get rid of groups, I would get rid of people that are fully able to work who live off of welfare because they are too lazy to work, people with an inferior gene structure so that we can accelerate evolution among our species since we seem to be devolving (further explanation of this available upon request), whoever invented Oreos, rap artists who promote poverty an dreally anyone that holds back progress. Everyone who makes a killing (both a literal and a figurative sense) in the oil market (i.e. George Bush and his companions) should die so that hydrogen fuel and clean-air enerygy creation can thrive.

    Mullets are as ugly as hell and they can often be linked to inferior gene structure...

    Any religious fanatics can be eliminated.

    Twangy County Music Bands.

    You get the idea....
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. robtex Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    582
    I see what you two are saying but could you justify mass slayings and if so how?
     
  8. Mystech Adult Supervision Required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,938
    Haha that's almost taking this thread too seriously, or at least too close to a real attitude that would lead to Genocide. Just so we're all on the same page here, there are no inferior gene structures, eliminating genetic diversity weakens a population and makes them more susceptible to extinction from minor environmental changes, and there is no such thing as devolution. If you were under any illusions to the contrary, please do some reading, because it's these sorts of misconceptions that lead to real incidents of ethnic cleansing.

    Anyhow if I were to be crowned God Emperor of humanity I would purge the world of all heterosexual people. I'm sorry, I know that's harsh but it's for the world's own good, I'm afraid. Reproduction would take place through artificial insemination, and all children would be raised by lesbians who are, in my opinion the only people in the world qualified to raise children. Heterosexuals may be spared if they agree to dress in drag and dance in provocative and sexually confusing strip-teases for my own personal amusement as I set in my grand hall in my palace at Greenwich Village, as I sit atop my massive throne made of young boys (all of legal age, I assure you, under my rule there will still be child labor laws). If their shameless display pleases me and the desperation in their eyes seems sufficient they will be allowed to serve out the rest of their lives working as low paid fluffers in the refinance of what was the United State's industrial war complex, now converted to be the industrial porn complex. Also anyone who makes pizza in the state of Arizona will die. There isn't a decent pizza to be had in this state.

    Oh yes, also just to stick with the trend, anyone with a mullet would be on their way out as well, but honestly how many mullets are going to be left after I take care of all the straight people? I'll tell you what, folks, say what you will about homosexuals, but we're not the ones responsible for the mullet.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2004
  9. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
  10. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,225
    I would clear the world of serial killers.
     
  11. Mystech Adult Supervision Required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,938
    Would you get them all in a single go, or would you stalk each one and take his life slowly, then skin him and wear his organs as a fancy hat, only to strangle your next victim with the entrails of the last?
     
  12. DeSeRt RaT UK Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    158
    That's a rather Nazi thing to say. So you think the killing of 6 million jews in aid of aryan advancement was justified?
     
  13. robtex Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    582

    facial interesting reply. I remember reading once from some fbi thingy on the net that the FBI estimates in the United States that there are rougly 100 serial killers active and inactive at anyone time.

    If they were only 1/2 right of if that stat dropped signifigantly you would stil be killing a lot of people.

    I have two questions about your reply.

    1) would you kill only those in captivity (in prision) or would you hunt to kill those lose in society?

    2) How could you kill serial killers and not become a serial killer. In other words what makes them serial killers and you the faclitator of a anti-serial killer program?
     
  14. robtex Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    582

    Again justify it. Realize that genocide in any application is an extreme measure and that you may very well be labled a genocide "fanatic" as there is no other application of genocide. How could you, and I am just asking, articulate a justification of genocide of one fantiatic when others might and probably would see you as one?
     
  15. Mystech Adult Supervision Required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,938
    Well if he just imprisoned them all and got them into one big room and killed them all at once he'd be a mass murderer, not a serial killer.
     
  16. Fallen Angel life in every breath Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    189
    well, a justified genocide?

    i would say the United States did a pretty good job of founding a country on genocide. i guess genocide can only be justified if you are successful, because otherwise, you have people complaining about it and questioning your validity. but if you take out everyone, nobody will notice.
     
  17. §outh§tar is feeling caustic Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,832
    I would get rid of politicians..
     
  18. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,225
    Robtex, I'm not sure how I would clear the world of serial killers. It's probably impossible to do so with 100% efficiency. But if some bored person devised a practical method to do so, I would vote in favor of such political legislation.
     
  19. robtex Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    582
    I found this in the archives and wanted to wake-it-up from the dead. Is there a time when genocide of a particular group is warrented and if so when?
     
  20. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    Gamilons. There came a point when the end of the Gamilons became inevitable. The volcano stunt, though ... us or them. We humans may think of ourselves as kings of this planet, but once the species is on the line, it's the law of the jungle, and if destroying the threat coincidentally involves destroying an entire species, such as the result of rendering the people of Gamilon to a number too few to maintain genetic viability, well, we are merely animals.

    In other words, there is no realistic scenario by which I would consider genocide so necessary as to be acceptable. I mean, Gamilons were idiots. Any species so advanced as to ruin a planet to the point of invading another 148,000 light-years away without having dedicated the available technology to spreading themselves beyond the range of a single, cosmically-minor catastrophe ... well, they seem almost naturally-selected to leave the arena.

    General Note: Click here if you don't know what I'm talking about and it matters that much; high-speed connection is advised. If you do know what I'm referring to, click here for a charmingly sentimental moment. This is the stuff of my childhood.
     
  21. lixluke Refined Reinvention Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,072
    I want to wipe out the group of people who think there could ever be a situation where genocide is reasonable, permissable, or desirable.
     
  22. robtex Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    582
    lol sounds like a suicide pack to me...since you would have to include yourself....I made the thread because many people find war justifiable under certain circumstances and war is an abbreviated version of genocide that never seems to come to a complete.

    Let me explain that statement. Lets look at Iraq. The US went in and carpet bombed cites including bagdad to prepare for an invasion...to soften the target before troops were sent in. To me that mimics genocide in everything but completion because in carpet bombing everyone in that group is killed categorly.

    There is one distinction and one only. That they live there. So I wondered why war is justified and knew if I asked the question "why is war justified" I would the normal political anwers that, while may be valid are not enough for me.

    So i thougth of how I could reword the question in such a way that would express the desire for discrimminating killing (like war produces) and thought genocide was a good way to phrase it without slipping war into the sentence structure just to get a different perspective.

    Didn't work out to well though cause most people poked fun at it..or reacted with repluse to the word or ignored it....what would be interesting though is how some that are aganist genocide ..could justify war which is to me a partial genocide or until one side surrenders an incomplete genocide.
     
  23. Dr Lou Natic Unnecessary Surgeon Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,574
    Genocide is acceptable for, nay- the responsibility of, any group with the ability to committ it.

    Any collaboration of people that are vulnerable to genocide aren't fit to exist.
     

Share This Page