Empathy

ANB, I wouldn't be surprised at all if you were to admit you were a Holocaust-denier, but until you do that, don't compare Wounded Knee to the Holocaust. A dumbass Civil War general killing less than 200 Native Americans just to show off his firepower does not compare, whatsoever, to what happened in Germany. Just don't. For your sake and mine.

__________________

Island of 1,000 Condiments

Whoa, whoa.


Comparing the slaughter of Native Americans to the Holocaust?

The same Holocaust which 6 million Jews died?

__________________

Fred

Let's not forget the numerous casualties of Poles, Gypsies, and Homosexuals, etc. etc.

__________________

Empathy

The Jewish deaths were barely over half of the total casualties. I like how everyone overlooks the other 5.5 million people who died and also the Armenian Genocide. Did any of you even know that happened before Wikipedia?

__________________

Island of 1,000 Condiments

The total was around 11 million, no? The majority of the victims were Jewish, so it's only natural that one would point them out. Compare 6 million Jews to a few million gypsies, homosexuals, Poles, Russians, disabled folk, and other minorities that escape me at the moment. In all honestly, I'd rather mention 6 million of a single religious affiliation than 5 million of a collective bunch.

__________________

Fred

@Emp. Yeah, but that's only because of SOAD =\

And Hitler even commented on the Armenian genocide, saying something along the lines of "Who remembers them [therefore, who will remember the Jews?]"

__________________

Empathy

Half the victims were Jewish. If you want to get technical, then yes, a "majority" were Jewish. But that doesn't mean you should forget about the other people who were treated just as unfairly.

EDIT: This might be a touchy thing for me to say, but I believe the Armenian Genocide is forgotten because the enforcers/belligerents weren't Caucasian. Because it was committed by the country of Turkey, it is overlooked. Had a country in Central Europe done it, it would be regarded as the biggest violation of human rights. But because Turks committed the genocide and still deny it today, the world lets it slide by. Planet Earth makes me sick.

__________________

Fred

Armenians weren't the only people who died in that genocide either =\. Why didn't you mention them?

__________________

Empathy

I know what you're trying to do. The Assyrian Genocide and the Greek Genocide are two different things. I don't lump them conveniently under the Armenian Genocide.

__________________

Ivan

I forgot how the Jewish/Tutsi(Hutu?)/Armenian/whatever Genocides were always about the people who weren't part of the name.

Fred

...

Way to take my dis and make me look like a bigot.

__________________

Kaio

But they are.

Of course, some of those responses were just examples. I cannot predict every single reason to why someone would do something, but it's always for themselves, and perhaps it's not me who has to post "real" answers, but perhaps you need to just think. This post wasn't really a counter-argument at all.

I'm talking about a real clone. . . Not a semi-clone; a clone. That clone would hold the original person's memories, cells, organs, etc. Anyway, I don't really care because I'm considering that it was sort of a bad example, but I think you understood my point, I hope.

Yes. . . .

I wasn't trying to imply that working together is an instinct, but out of instinct, it's what happens when organisms are basic enough/smart enough to realize the benefits if they utilize each other. Organisms don't always work together, but it's usually because another instinct/emotion is dominating them, like pride.

Unless it's justified by a majority of idealists through principals such as inferiority. Germany's National Socialist party and China's Socialist party are examples of these idealists. Of course, my point being that not everyone can draw a line to when it's "okay" to stomp on a toddler's head and that murdering children being awful is merely an opinionated view, just like selfishness.

I could say that to most of your responses. And recognition could have a lot to do with it, and possibly other egotistic reasons, kind of like government war propaganda.

You're right. . . but it's fact that we all have the same, basic instincts. And I thought that I was implying that all my examples weren't necessarily the person's reason (s) for doing things, just an example. I'm sure the reason(s) would be similar in accordance to their own survival nonetheless.

So, you've basically helped my explanation, except for that last sentence which contradicts it all and also considering what I've said before about the basic instincts and us in comparison to animals makes it look like you didn't really read what I've said.

I wonder how many times I've assured this? I dunno. . . But I never said being selfish was negative, and I never said I had a negative view towards the world or humanity.

Looks like we got something in common.

Look up to see response to assuming my view of the world/humanity is negative. And believing that selfishness is wrong is simply an opinion, a hypocritical one, especially since everything we all do is selfish.

Maybe not necessarily those, but perhaps other personal reasons.

Really? I could say the same to you.

Did you read any of my posts? Because if you have, you'd know that basically everyone has already whored that argument to death.

There was nothing ever stopping ourselves, except ourselves.

You say that as if it were a joke.

I must be having deja vu, because I am seeing the same ignorant and close-minded monologue over and over.

. . . . . . Yes.

Which I am not and I'm sure I've explained that many times previously.

I guess it depends on what you consider good or evil, so I cannot argue with you that true human nature is good or evil, but I will say that true human nature is selfish, which I'm not arguing is good or evil.

You're absolutely right. . . Thanks for reiterating my basic points; and I was never attempting to generalize.

Nikushimi

The use of the term "animal" was used rather liberally on my part.

I was speaking more in the sense that we become animals because we cease to listen to our moral conscience and act solely on instinct or personal gain. If a male lion wants to have sex with a female lion, he'll kill her babies and assrape her on the spot. By human standards, that's appaulling. The animal does this because it has no moral qualms about doing it.

Hence "We become animals".

__________________