Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
True Left vs False Left / Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
« Last post by 90sRetroFan on January 14, 2026, 07:20:40 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOiQuqJ7R88

About Tur:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katy_Tur

Quote
Tur is the daughter of journalists Zoey Tur and Marika Gerrard. She graduated from Brentwood School (2001),[5] and from the University of California, Santa Barbara (2005) with a Bachelor of Arts in philosophy.[6][7] She is of Jewish and Greek descent.[8][9]

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/
12
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by 90sRetroFan on January 14, 2026, 06:30:26 pm »
"The end (non-suffering) is their clear preference"

You say it is. Someone else says the opposite. Now what?

"Babies have no "choice" they can "pass to others" in the first place. Nature is already choosing on their behalf, without their consent."

If someone has been non-consensually locked inside a room with presently no way to communicate with those outside, but a window is timed to open tomorrow which will enable communication, should we wait until tomorrow to hear how the prisoner wants us to help, or should we release poison gas into the room today?

"Any intervention would be in violence which is already being committed"

You are arguing that, because violence was already committed by non-consensually locking the prisoner in the room, you are entitled to release the poison gas without permission from the prisoner.
13
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by Aucontraire on January 14, 2026, 02:34:46 pm »
We hate life. We only live to complete our mission.

Resentful attachment is still attachment.

Quote
Everything you just said is the opposite of what we believe in.

Yet you promote it anyway, even though criminalizing abortion doesn't serve as a "means to an end" (unlike selective conception).
14
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by christianbethel on January 14, 2026, 12:23:38 pm »
You don't want to be killed because you've grown attached to life and afraid of death.
We hate life. We only live to complete our mission.

Innocence means babies have not. They don't consent to life or death. They have no discernable preference. They grow and survive because they are programmed to. Not because they will it — because nature wills it.
The only way to stop this cycle of torture is to prevent them from being conceived in the first place.

Aryanists understand life means they will have a body. That they will suffer and decay. They believe this outweighs any supposed "advantages". That life isn't a gift but a curse. Yet Aryanists advocate letting nature impose this curse on unborn babies, on top of having state authorities coerce people to carry through unwanted pregnancies. They also advocate exploiting children by selectively conceiving them to further their political aims.

What say you in your defense?
Everything you just said is the opposite of what we believe in.
15
True Left vs False Left / Re: JEWS HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH US!
« Last post by 90sRetroFan on January 14, 2026, 04:49:37 am »
Lonsdale & Co.:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl7vb1-gw5U

Previous Karp coverage:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/leftists-against-progressivism/msg30898/#msg30898

Previous Altman coverage:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-western-civilization-does-not-die-soon/msg30968/#msg30968

About Lauder:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Lauder

Quote
Lauder was born in New York City to a Jewish family, the son of Estée Lauder and Joseph Lauder, founders of Estée Lauder Companies. He is the younger brother of Leonard Lauder, chairman of the board of the Estée Lauder Companies.
...
Lauder was elected president of the World Jewish Congress on June 10, 2007,[26] following the resignation of Edgar Bronfman, Sr. He beat the South African businessman Mendel Kaplan and Einat Wilf of Israel by a clear margin.
...
Lauder called for Israel to be admitted into the Western defense alliance NATO: "Israel needs real guarantees for its security. European NATO member states – including Turkey – must admit the state of Israel into the Western alliance," the WJC president wrote. He referred to the uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia and said they were reminders of how "unpredictable" developments in the Middle East were. Israeli NATO membership "would send a strong signal to other countries not to take on Israel", Lauder argued.[35]
...
Lauder has been strongly critical of business deals by European energy firms with Iran and called for stronger UN sanctions because of Tehran's threat against Israel and its nuclear program.
...
In 2019, Lauder launched the Antisemitism Accountability Project (ASAP) to fund campaigns fighting federal, state, and local candidates who support or promote antisemitism.[46]
...
Since 2016, Lauder has donated more than $1.6 million to pro-Donald Trump organizations.[50] He contributed $200,000 to Donald Trump's 2020 presidential campaign.[51] He attended the 2025 Trump inauguration.[52]
...
In 2025, Lauder donated $5 million to the MAGA Inc. super PAC.[56]
...
Lauder has repeatedly come to the defense of Israel in public and is seen as an ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But False Leftist Kulinski will never mention the Jewishness of any of the above.
16
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by Aucontraire on January 14, 2026, 02:55:52 am »
If they have no preference, intervention is neither kindness nor unkindness towards them. It is initiated violence, though, since you have not been given permission by them to choose on their behalf.

Do you understand the difference between a signed contract with a declaration that the signer has no preference in a given matter (therefore passing the choice to others) and a similar contract without a signature? You are arguing in effect that the latter entitles you to choose on behalf of everyone who didn't sign.

I was referring to intervention in their suffering. The end (non-suffering) is their clear preference, they just can't answer which means they'd prefer. Just like if you were to choose "on their behalf" between non-lethal treatments, like different kinds of analgesic, or a warm bath or some milk and a cuddle.

But, besides (apparently) attacking an argument I didn't make, your reasoning has a major flaw: Babies have no "choice" they can "pass to others" in the first place. Nature is already choosing on their behalf, without their consent. Any intervention would be in violence which is already being committed — not in an individual's agency over whether they live or die.
17
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by 90sRetroFan on January 13, 2026, 05:17:41 pm »
"If they don't prefer life or death, there's no need to let that question delay intervention."

If they have no preference, intervention is neither kindness nor unkindness towards them. It is initiated violence, though, since you have not been given permission by them to choose on their behalf.

Do you understand the difference between a signed contract with a declaration that the signer has no preference in a given matter (therefore passing the choice to others) and a similar contract without a signature? You are arguing in effect that the latter entitles you to choose on behalf of everyone who didn't sign.
18
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by Aucontraire on January 13, 2026, 03:55:56 am »
Pick one.

You're deflecting. Answer the questions.
Or don't. I don't care. It's clear babies don't want to suffer. If they don't prefer life or death, there's no need to let that question delay intervention.
19
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by 90sRetroFan on January 13, 2026, 01:19:05 am »
"Do you listen when a newborn cries, or do think that's not a clear enough expression of preference?"

Also you:

Quote
They have no discernable preference.

Pick one.
20
Questions & Debates / Re: Abortion = Kindness?
« Last post by Aucontraire on January 13, 2026, 12:44:20 am »
It would be kinder to the conceived to keep them safe until they have expressed a preference one way or another, and only thereafter help them on whichever path they prefer.

Exposing them to life's cruelty is hardly "keeping them safe", is it? Do you listen when a newborn cries, or do think that's not a clear enough expression of preference?
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10