/edu/ - Education

>>19357
I enjoy this scene

Fascists are not even human, read about Dirlewanger Brigade or Unit 731.

Even if you believe in "Venezuela iPhone 100 million deaths" meme, communists never did anything as fucked up as that. They just put their enemies against the wall and shot them.

>>19359
>Dirlewanger
That's cute. Wait until you hear about Ante Pavelić and the Black Legion. They were comically fucking evil. One of their members (Petar Brzica) defied the laws of physics and literally killed and eviscerated 1,360 people in a rampage with only a knife within hours during a killing contest with two other peopld (he won).

>>19359
>Fascists are not even human,
(Some) people have been committing atrocities like this since the dawn of time, it's just that we didn't get to see well-documented examples at a large scale until WWII.

>>19361
Reminds me of Mahmudiyah when American soldiers raped children and murdered them (this happened in 2006 Iraq).

>>19362
Also this video goes into the kind of stuff US troops would do in Iraq (before losing the guerilla war and pulling out in 2011 and losing yet another guerilla campaign to the Taliban 10 years later).

>>19361
Sure the Mongols or Huns were violent, but they didn't apply the Fordist production line to mass murder. That's what makes fascists uniquely evil in history.

>>19364
I agree that this war was unique in history, but he's right that there have been worse times before. Take for example this guy.

Zhang Xianzhong was the leader of the peasant uprising that ended the Ming Dynasty in 1644 and started the Xi Dynasty. The Ming Dynasty started in 1368, so it lasted several hundreds of years (one of the earliest officials was Zheng He, court eunuch and well-regarded admiral) (eunuchs were basically given powerful positions in government that sometimes superceded that of the Grand Secretaries, whereas peasants were the farmers that got treated terribly in ancient China, see Qin dynasty for details, like emperor Qin Shi Huangdi).

So what was Zhang's kill count? 1 million people dead in the Sichuan massacre of 1644 (caused a population collapse). Although it is heavily disputed (he was later snuffed out himself by invading Qing armies storming Sichuan). He was known to chop off the feet of his victim's and burn them in a pile. He is well-known for this one thing he once said:

"Heaven brings forth innumerable things to nurture man.
Man has nothing good with which to recompense Heaven.
Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill."

>>19365
And this is still considered to be the worst massacre in world history.

>>19364
>Sure the Mongols or Huns were violent
Why is it always one of the "stock foreign invaders" that people reference when human atrocities are discussed? Europeans have killed way more Europeans than the Huns and Mongols combined, you know. When are we going to start talking about white on white crime?

>>19362
>Mahmudiyah when American soldiers raped children and murdered them
still have that saved here

>>19359
>Fascists are not even human, read about Dirlewanger Brigade or Unit 731.
That's the problem. they are.

>>19368
Fucking racist pedophile punk.

Capitalism is all about stealing from the future, that's how they profit.
>>19369
>That's the problem. they are.
There is no contradiction here. Becoming human is a process, imagine a child raised by wolves who is lacking in basic literacy and enculturation. The process of dehumanization is just the same thing but in reverse, a self-annihilation of the mental superego that controls our actions with high level morality/etc. Fascism is a retreat to the childish, animalistic id of being paranoid of the wind blowing through trees and being unable to restrain yourself from randomly punching people. Trump is literally unable to not sexualize his daughter even if he wanted to

>>19368
I suspect that his coping mechanism is antirely self-serving.

>>19371
>Becoming human is a process, imagine a child raised by wolves who is lacking in basic literacy and enculturation
You confuse being human for being civilized and being civilized for being moral, neither of which are the same. Morality is a social construct and a method of social control akin to reactionary ideas. Civilization is the industrial society at large. Human is a specie, the homo sapiens. The idea of the "Human" is nonsense made up by moralist demagogues to justify the current social norms. Moralism is pure traditionalism, it's very conservative by its nature. As our society changes, the morality refuses to change, morality is the opposite of flux, it can only exist as an eternal truth. Parenting is indoctrination, with it morality and all kinds of reactionary ideas (religion for example) disseminate.

>>19361
Yes and these "people" were also not human

>>19372
Moralism has a material basis and your disdain and fetishization of it is ironically moralistic itself

>>19374
>Moralism has a material basis
So does reactionarism. Your point? Morality arises from social conditioning. Doesn't mean that one is ought to follow it. You can't extract an ought from an is. Neither does morality equate being a human being, that's a purely moralist rationalization.
>your disdain and fetishization of it is ironically moralistic itself
LMAO, pure projection on the part of moralists. Just because I disregard morality doesn't mean that I want others to be immoral like some kind of anti-moralist. Once again, it is confirmed that moralists only see other moralists in others due to their lack of comprehension.

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/desolationpomo-how-to-argue-with-moral-nihilists-without-strawmanning-more-than-a-cornfield-101

>>19371
>Becoming human is a process, imagine a child raised by wolves who is lacking in basic literacy and enculturation.
still a homo sapien, dummy

>>19371
>imagine a child raised by wolves who is lacking in basic literacy and enculturation.
Are you saying feral children are non-humans? That's stupid.

>>19375
>So does reactionarism. Your point?
Reactionarism is based on delusion, morality is not. Inb4 morality is seperate from moraism, you are clearly jmplying the former.
>Morality arises from social conditioning.
No it is innate to 99 percent of human beings, morality is linked closely to affective empathy which again, the vast majority of people have, which is instinctual although upbringing has some effect
>Doesn't mean that one is ought to follow it.
Yes it does, as it is a code of behaviour and values that concerns how people in common must follow. For common gain in this case, and abstracted to wider conceptions of self-actualizing and perpetuating values.
>wahh I don't agree so I don't have to allowmyself to be effected by this code of conduct
Yes you do because you will be punished by the rest of us if you fail to conform to this dictation. And if you wanna go seclude yourself away from society and only surround yourself with other amoral people then you can go live in a squat with psychopaths that will treat every interaction like a competition and knife you for 50 dollars. It's an "idea" with material consequences that you too are effected by regardless of your smug navel gazing cope.
>You can't extract an ought from an is.
Just did
>Neither does morality equate being a human being,
No. >99 percent of people have a sense of morality and healthier, more altrusitic societies have lower rates of people with amoral beliefs and dark triad personality traits.
>that's a purely moralist rationalization.
As opposed to an anti-moralist one?
>>your disdain and fetishization of it is ironically moralistic itself
>LMAO, pure projection on the part of moralists.
Haha clearly struck a nerve there. I think it's you that is projecting buddy.
>Just because I disregard morality doesn't mean that I want others to be immoral like some kind of anti-moralist.
Yes you clearly are trying to justify anti-moralism and taking a position in this argument.
>Once again, it is confirmed that moralists only see other moralists in others due to their lack of comprehension.
No silly you are are moralizing right now. You keep making balue judgements and allowing your obviously personal and emotive opinions about moralism to cloud the readily observable truth that morality has a material basis that is both enforced through social structures and the basic fundamental prerequisites of higher social interactions that give homo sapiens their place among life, as well as it is a necesaary part of sustaining higher civilization and some level of rules and altruistic behaviour that is necessary to keep pockets of humans bereft of morality from annhilating each other instead of productive tasks, like crabs in a bucket.
>individualist anarchism anti-nihilism
>he bought the psyop meme

>>19378
Also the reason you feel smug and confident enough of this clearly false and delusional position you have to want to share it in conversation here is because you have a low honesty-humility and lack high cognotive ability which might compell you to rethink your conclusions. Both of which are related to altruistic behaviours and greater than average affective empathy. You confuse being a self deluding asshole with being objectively correct.

>>19379
If your gonna post spoilered gore or whatever then just say what it is

>>19381
Its not gore. Its just a intimate moment between Red Army and nazoids.

This is depicted in the movie Downfall. Germans were delusional Nazi fucks all the way up to the very end.

Werwolf did jack shit

No give the kyiyyvan regime ideas, plox.
Tankyoo

>>19371
You’re coping
Humans are animals, what makes us special is that we have behavioral plasticity and thus social plasticity, and these aspects influence each other, humans have a capacity for violence because all animals do, and we have a capacity for immense violence because our aggression and means of dealing out violence and destruction accumulate in ways it can’t with other animals
>>19378
> morality is linked closely to affective empathy which again, the vast majority of people have, which is instinctual although upbringing has some effect
The problem with your thinking is that you see affective empathy as an ontological good, while affective empathy is a large part of why and how the Nazi death squads could laugh and cheer and be merry and drunk while slaughtering civilians, sticking infants on bayonet, and gang raping women in broad daylight

You wanna know the secret?
Even when they were running slave camps where they immediately execute women and elderly people because they couldn’t work and then worked people to death and murdered people essentially at random they still thought they were the good guys

So yea, the other anons point on morality is essentially correct and affective empathy, that thing where you feel what another feels without words, isn’t necessarily the best basis for a moral code, since while it can lead you to feel and try to prevent the suffering of another, it can also let you feel the same perverted pleasure a comrade feels after committing a brutal murder

>>19386
*women, children, and elderly people

>>19386
>The problem with your thinking is that you see affective empathy as an ontological good,
uh no I didn't claim anything ontological. However I do think the value system I mention is aggressively self perpetuating to the point of being similar to ontologicsl beliefs.
>while affective empathy is a large part of why and how the Nazi death squads could laugh and cheer and be merry and drunk while slaughtering civilians, sticking infants on bayonet, and gang raping women in broad daylight
Uh no retard. That is the lack of affective empathy that allowed them to do that. Do you even know what affective empathy is?

>You wanna know the secret?
>Even when they were running slave camps where they immediately execute women and elderly people because they couldn’t work and then worked people to death and murdered people essentially at random they still thought they were the good guys
That's not a secret, that's just a delusion you have that you think is correct because it fits into your (morality based) world view that grim/offending people's sensibilities=correct. It's just antisocial personality cope.
>So yea, the other anons point on morality is essentially correct and affective empathy, that thing where you feel what another feels without words, isn’t necessarily the best basis for a moral code, since while it can lead you to feel and try to prevent the suffering of another, it can also let you feel the same perverted pleasure a comrade feels after committing a brutal murder
Uh no. The key here is "feeling what another person feels as if it is their own pain" sadism is not a part of affective empathy and is in fact in contradiction with it."feel what another person feels without words" wtf is that coming from? A psychiatrist explained it to you? lol
Also you sound like the same poster haha.

>>19360
Glad to see information from my ww2iceberg thread still alive

>>1520775
>Do you?
>Does it puzzle the brain to realize that they felt affective empathy for their fellow soldiers but not for their victims? And the connection to those other soldiers is exactly why they didn’t see their victims as human beings and did not empathize with their pain?
You are saying affective empathy compelled them to act with cruelty like this, but then you point out that they lacked affective empathy for a certain group of people and that allowed them commit cruel acts against them. You are contradicting yourself.

>No those people actually did think they were doing the right thing
According to what information? Source? In what way do you suppose they thought of themselves as "good guys"?
It's a stupid claim to make because basicslly you are arguing that x group of people decided to themselves they are "good" (just trust me bro). Like what is your point? That anyone can claim they are le good if there is 0 prerequisites for that?
Most Germans would not be able to torture and genocide people in the camps and not feel guilt. Most Germans were not completely brainwashed by the nazi ideology either, that is bourgeois (and post-nazi) revisionism.
>Are leftypol tankies so retard you’re at a point where you claim to be Marxists but promote the idea of objective morality?
Max basically does this himself, see picrel. Objective morality exists in the same sense any abstract social phenomena that has effects in the material world ha exists. You are the retard.

>Because empathy isn’t just when you feel someone else’s pain as if it were your own, but someone else’s pleasure, anger, and joy as well, that’s why.
And? Do you not see how sadism is a contradiction here? Affeftive empathy as you repeat here agreeing with me(?) is feeling someone else's emotions as if they were your own. Sadism is an inverse of that phenomena wherein you feel someone's pain and feel pleasure in response. Actually non psychopathic sexual sadists have reported that they have become turned off and stopped their attacks when theybstart to empathize with their victims, like if theybstart crying or show signs of humanity.

The phenomena of affective empathy comes down even to a physical level with mirror neurons. Highly empathetic people have more mirror neurons and psychopaths lack mirror neurons in the same areas of a brain a non psychopath would have. Mirror neurons are associated with mirroring the percieved inner state of another human being, within the brain of the subject. This is a subconscious process and when it is absent, such as with psychopaths, it is very jarring snd disconcerting, unless it is masked properly

>Literally the only humans lacking in empathy are sociopaths,
Well psychopathy primarily, sociopathy in a medical setting often refers more to factor 2 rather than factor 1 psychopathy, lacl of empathy has more to do with factor 1, and factor 1 psychopathy is more related to genetics than factor 2 which has more of a relation to upbrining, both are usually comorbid to greater or lesser extent though.
>acts of mass violence often involve manipulating people’s empathy. Empathy is not inherently “good”, it can be used for constructive or destructive ends.
I agree to some extent however greater affective empathy in people is usually associated with more prosocial behaviour and greater understanding between people/higher and the personal qualities of other people. Like it can help smooth over interpersonal friction in relationships and serve as a good bullshit detector. Additionally, the people most likely to fall for right wing authoritarian ideology are also people with lower affective empathy.
>So at least two people are calling you stupid now?
No as in it seems like you stuck a flag on to samefag. Whatever it doesn't really matter