About political ideologies

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
Messages
3,032
#36
'Liberal' democracy
It is worth noting that the supposed liberalism in liberal democracy will be largely limited to letting people do stuff that is detrimental in terms of their survival and reproduction

0. Aborting healthy babies
1. Doing drugs
2. Dying from covid
3. Dying from passive/active euthanasia (outright assisted suicide is allowed in some 'liberal' democracies).
4. Letting females and young boys transition to become infertile.

A note on 2 is that many 'liberal' did actually implement covid restrictions but these almost without exception were doomed to failed from the start.

A note on 4 is that sperm can actually be banked early on in puberty but this is typically not mandatory in liberal democracies. Either early HRT is denied completely or it is given with no requirement for them to preserve fertility.

But what if a 13 year old girl wants to have children with an older male?

Well that is obviously not particularly tolerated in liberal democracies. The male is likely to face persecution if he actually makes her pregnant.

And even if you are allowed to reproduce the government in pretty much all liberal democracies will be pretty heavy handed in arbitrarily depriving parents of custody sending children to abusive foster-care instead.

Fundamentally democracy is incompatible with individual rights since it's all about appealing to potential voters. Fundamentally in a democracy you just have to please enough voters to get into power you can ignore a lot of people who are unlikely to vote for you in the first place. The less likely someone is to vote for you the less worthwhile it is for you trying to get their votes. Why care about rights someone wants if he/she isn't going to vote for you anyway?

And of course you can largely ignore what people under 18 want since these people cannot vote anyway. This is why teenagers are subjected to harmful AoC laws in most western countries. Pleasing their parents is more important and many parents are very prudish when it comes to the sex-lives of their children.

Liberal western countries have thanks to having a lot of economic liberalism has been able to create strong economies thanks largely to actors outside of government. This is the reason why NATO militaries are conventionally strong while weak when it comes to nuclear cababilities (the US does have many offensive nukes but their nuclear shelters are very lacking).

It's very unlikely that 'liberal' democracies will be able to remain competitive against countries governed by elite rule. We are already seeing china in many ways outmanoeuvring western democracies despite having many issues with their government. Had CCP been more competent (such as not implementing the one-child policy) the west would have been in a really bad situation now.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
Messages
3,032
#37
Medical fascism
In most 'liberal' democracies healthcare is the opposite of liberal. It's usually government controlled on paper while in practice unions like the American psychiatric associations hold very significant power enforcing policies that are bad for everyone except their small special interest group.

Of course fundamentally doctors still have to please ignorant voters but that is not particularly hard to do. As long as the voters are pleased they can continue with treatments that do more harm than good.

Things like abusive psychiatry might we an attempt at social control to compensate for the weak official legal system.

Things like vaccine passports were implemented in many areas because most people wanted it. Of course if the vaccine actually works vaccine passports are not needed because then you can just take the vaccine if you are at risk. Of course some people will make the wrong decision but the difference is that individuals have an incentive to look after their own health while government officials have different incentives.
 

bellePen

New member
Messages
2
#38
Is there a conflict between (radical) nationalism and trans rights?
When governing a country you can focus on creating a nice place for humans to live now or you can go the nationalist route trying to create some great empire in the future (such as conquering the entire planet).

But if you pursue things like territorial expansionism that will very likely come with a high price to pay. Nationalistic leaders will pursue policies for the sake of preserving the state and its territory at the expense of the well-being of the people (such as forcing people to die in wars, see russia vs ukraine).

A nationalistic leader may also pursue a policy that is harmful for society due to being misguided, this has happened many times in the past and it will likely happen again. Hitler though that he would create a 1000 year old rich only so see the borders shrink to berlin.
Let's take a look at strategies to make the state stronger:

Inclusive societies will be more competitive
By including more people in your society you can make it militarily stronger. It's not in the interest of society to exclude people based on factors such as gender identity, appearance, sexual orientation, birth-sex, etc.

In fact the society may benefit from pushing/forcing people to become a part of society even when they do not really want to. You want more people to pay taxes or join the military.

Fertility and eugenics
The society may benefit from policies to change the breeding pattern of the population in an attempt to cause for society beneficial genes to spread more, that can be pushing/forcing people to have biological children when they don't want to.

Having more people be born means more people that can be sent to die in wars or support the economy for the war-effort.
Trans females can bank sperm prior to transitioning so there doesn't seem to be any conflict here, people of male reproductive-sex are not the reproductive bottleneck in the first place.

MtF transition can in theory allow for lesbians to have children together (one born male, one born female).
There does however seem to be a conflict with regard to FtM transition.

Having capable soldiers
The main potential issue with MtF transition in terms of military power is that the transition will make people physically weaker

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2020/11/06/bjsports-2020-102329.full

With modern warfare however this really isn't much of a concern. Trans females will still be able to support the military by doing tasks that are less physically demanding (such as working in a weapons factory).
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
Messages
3,032
#39
Naturalism debunked
Humans currently live in unnatural societies and many want to instead do live a more natural lifestyle away from things like vaccines and food additives. Many people oppose medical transition simply because they don't view it as "natural" to medically change your sex.

The brutal reality however is that your society is in competition with other societies and by embracing new technology we will be able to outcompete backwards societies unwilling to embrace progress.

Going to far in the naturalism direction will be detrimental also for your own survival, you might die of cancer because you rejected an effective treatment (which happens on a regular basis) or you might fail to reproduce because you weren't willing to use IVF technology.

in order to be successful in society you need to be willing to use effective tools available for you to achieve said success and this may include modifying your body to become more attractive. You might find a girlfriend using a dating app and you also need internet to effectively manage your finances.

Not everyone can switch to eating organic food since then there will not be enough food for everyone. The supply or things like meat from wild animals will always be rather limited and it's therefore not something most people can begin eating on a regular basis, most people will end up having to go vegan or rely on factory farming for their diet (regardless of what's best for the health).
 
Top