/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>470994
>People who make and run vaccinations trials do not cut corner. Like doctors they can and will loose their licenses to such things.
So you are saying that people in the medical research field are infallible and the pharmacological companies that produce the medicines are immune to greed. That's not very realistic. I will say that Vaccine production in general is extremely high quality, and at the top of my head i can't think of another field that has delivered on that level. The attacks they get from anti-vaxers are not justified. However principled and diligent you can be, infallibility is not possible.

>This is the same type of paranoid logic that chocs up election cycles to election fraud in the US when there is zero evidence to believe such a thing exists.
I have to admit I tuned out of the mainstream discourse about US elections, the ratio of substantive debate about policy vs toxic political spectacle has dipped below the threshold where i find it worth engaging with. So i don't really know what you are referring to. I will however state with great emphasis that the US political system is not very democratic, if you measure democracy by the level of how much it enforces the material Interests of the Demos. If you were to define democracy by something else as the enforcement of the material interests of the demos, you would fall under the category of deranged ideologue.

>None of this is true and flies in the face of reality.
Maybe you misunderstood.

You seem to be claiming that the COVID vaccines gave people sufficient immunity to halt transmission. Meaning that people who got the vax-jab and where exposed to the virus did not become infectious them self's in sufficient numbers for the virus to keep propagating. If that was true , the COVID vaxes would have extinct Corona. Which is false. What happened in reality was the vaccines did not stop Corona and it became endemic. Luckily for us it's virulence (how much it damages the host) decreased in the process. That said many people are still suffering from "long covid" which are medical complications caused by the viral infection. The Covid vaccines did not give you immunity they only gave you a degree of protection from severe health damage. While that is better than nothing, the main goal of a vaccine is to stop the transmission of viral infections.

While i can understand that you are overlooking virology nuances, what worries me is that you seem to be denying that the COVID vaccines did have more side effects than was usual for most other vaccines. It's not very surprising given the time compressed development of the covid vaccines.

I wouldn't use this to blame vaccine makers but it has to be acknowledged that emergency vaccines are likely of lower quality than those that go through the full development cycle that takes many years to complete.

What you are doing is raising false expectations and you are denying obvious short-comings. If you lie about these things, you will rouse suspicion and you will boost anti-vax sentiments. Which is ultimately harmful to public acceptance of vaccination programs.

We also have to talk about the actual conspiracy that happened during the Rona pandemic, there was a momentum to start open sourcing the vaccines to increase the accessibility and stream-line the scientific knowledge exchange, and that was blocked by interference by people like Bill Gates (invested in proprietary medicine) wielding non-democratic power.

Why do some Marxist groups peddle pseudo science? OPs articles remind me of those Trots that argue the Big Bang can't have happened, because it wouldn't be 'dialectical'.

>>471043
too much free time on their hands with nothing to do

you can re-read all of the 50 volumes of Marx/Engels Collected Works only so many times before you start wondering how many angels can dance on the head of a pin

>>470977
Hi Eugenicskun! What do you think about the way that the virology pseudo-science is used to peddle blatantly eugenicist, genocide-denying narratives? For example, the idea that the Native American population was decimated largely by contagious disease and not the actively genocidal policies of the Great Satan?

>>471043
Virology is pseudo-science, booklet.

>>471043
Marxists generally tend to be somewhat less prone to anti-science than most other groups. The materialist philosophy definitely helps with the scientific outlook, but it's not a guarantee. Everybody probably holds some really unscientific views in some area, but usually it's not as obvious as ditching germ-theory.

Also the big bang, something from nothing, that's actually rather dialectical.
The big bang is sort off the only plausible explanation we have for the cosmic microwave background radiation. Considering the big bang theory as un-dialectical still would not explain where the cmb comes from.

>>471046
>Marxists generally tend to be somewhat less prone to anti-science than most other groups. The materialist philosophy definitely helps with the scientific outlook, but it's not a guarantee.
dialectics is the opposite of materialism

considering marxists are majority philosophycels, it's not surprising they peddle some anti-scientific talking points - they are already trained in anti-scientific thinking with their dialectics

Orwell hit the nail on the head with his parody on dialectics - the doublespeak.

War is Peace. What could be more dialectical, kek?

>>471047
I would lean towards dropping the Hegelian influences because there are now better/easier ways of expressing those concepts. Like a phase-change in physics or set-theory in maths.

I'm not sure that dialectical thinking makes you inherently more vulnerable to anti-scientific thinking, tho if you already have a anti-scientific streak going, it can definitely magnify it. However the main problem with dialectics is that it kind off maroons people into a 19 century philosophical language island, that can make it hard to talk to other people.

>>471008
And a divisible atom is literally not an atom, but we came to call them atoms because Reasons. It's one of those silly things about science - if you lose sight of what is meaningful, you're not conducting science in a genuine sense.

>>471010
The COVID trials were even more of a joke than before. They were bragging that they could make people comply because they locked up all of the wealth and dared anyone to fight back. So many people lost their jobs, lost everything, and they'll never get it back. Assholes encouraging this are sickening retards.

>>471045
It's basically as you say - biopolitics is the core of the imperial religion, and so they can say it's "the virus" to seed the idea that the empire is ingrained in nature, replaces nature itself.

I should say that the existence of strands of DNA or proteins indicating something is not in of itself pseudoscience. We know those exist, and one of the Germanic mystifications is to act like such entities couldn't possibly exist or be real because it isn't "truthy" and violates the Germanic version of the eugenic creed.

What was done to the natives has been a favorite story of the creed, because it's a test to sell their batshit religion and see if more can be taken.

I'm of the belief that native populations in North America were smaller than believed. It struck me as something like the Greeks exaggerating the number of Persians at Marathon to tell us how the Greeks were totally awesome.
In Mexico the population was very high, because the Aztec and Maya had cities and farming that would support such a population. The death was documented by the Spanish and never denied, and of course the Spanish intermarried with the conquered peoples.
The North American tribes typically weren't known for very large families, and large families would often be a burden. They've historically had almost no problem with abortion, until the white man was outright exterminating them with eugenics policies.
The genocide didn't end, and so the eugenic creed is sold in part with the idea that if one does not follow it, the tribes would revolt, having no reason to ever get along with the American entity.

>>471043
Up until around 1970, the "Big Bang" was a fringe theory and not part of the imperial cosmology. The name came as a dig against the idea. Even then, the "proof" of such an event was spurious and used to draw conclusions that are not supported by the wealth of evidence collected since then. It became necessary when eugenics became the sole ruling idea to arrest history from genesis to the end of time, and so strident belief in a "Big Bang" became ideologically necessary. It is establishment "The Science" which adheres to dogma, rather than the commies… even if they're smelly Trots. Most people just look at every theoretical model of physics since the early 20th century falling apart spectacularly, while most of us still just use Newton.

My belief is that the world is much older than anyone knew, if not "always existing" in some way - to speak of a temporal genesis in a straight timeline is likely to speak of an absurdity. For that to make sense would require a concept that time is entirely a relational concept, which strangely enough is accepted. Causality is a tricky concept in science, and often the cause of so much confusion in the imperial religion of science, since eugenics as a religion places effect before cause flagrantly and necessarily to arrest history forever.

>>471049
Orwell mostly produced bastardized racist misunderstandings of the Germanic concept of "science", without saying he is doing that, and stripping away any context critical of the eugenic beliefs Orwell himself held.
He fears Ingsoc and the Party because such a world would be one of the few things that would have "defeated eugenics" in a sense - eugenics would have attained its final outcome, stalled and perpetually at war with its people, ruling entirely through fear and losing all of its spiritual legitimacy. Orwell only feared that his fellow travelers of the eugenic creed would be exposed and torn to shreds, and terror would overtake all as the only possible world left after eugenics destroyed any hope that this has a better ending.

>>471051
>And a divisible atom is literally not an atom, but we came to call them atoms because Reasons
There's still evidence that the thing we call an "atom" exists and does what we say it does. It's retarded to call things like phages or genetic detritus "viruses" because there's never been evidence that anything with the original supposed characteristics of a "virus" exists.

vaccinesisters… how do we refute this????

>>471068
Not sure what there would be to refute, people made vaccines to eradicate viruses in order to prevent them from re-emerging as a mutated strain. The data you post shows success, since the virus line flat-lines after the vaccinations.

>>471069
What these graphs illustrate is that these diseases disappeared without vaccines.So there is no evidence the vaccines had any preventative impact, and they are in fact worthless.

>>471071
>these graphs illustrate is that these diseases disappeared without vaccines
No they don't they show that the vaccines prevented the re-emergence of mutated strains.

>>471072
Why didn't the """mutated strains""" re-remerge before the vaccines were introduced, then?

>>471073
That's what regularly happened before we did systematic population vaccinations programs that extinct the viruses before they could come back. It's considered by many as the most important human invention, on par with fertilizers (that ended most famines) and the steam engine (that facilitated the end of slavery). The amount of people that would regularly die before vaccination programs became commonplace was staggering. When vaccines were first introduced People voted with their feet to get them.

>>471076
>That's what regularly happened before we did systematic population vaccinations programs that extinct the viruses before they could come back
So why is this not apparent in any of these charts? Why do the charts show a clear decline trend for all diseases regardless of alleged "virality"?

You are making assertions with zero evidence.

>fertilizers (that ended most famines)
lmao, what is this pure liberal ideology doing here on leftypol?

>>471081
What the hell are you talking about.

Viruses that turn into a plague, rise as they infect new hosts, when hosts die off or become immune the Virus dies back down. There can be multiple variants of a virus during a plague but eventually it runs out of hosts it can infect, because everybody that isn't immune is either dead or out of reach.

But often that isn't the end for a virus, it can survive either by infecting so called reservoir hosts who carry the virus but don't have any ill effects, or by jumping to another species. And that means that the virus can lay low until the immunity in the populations goes down again or it can mutate enough to overcome the immunity. And eventually it comes back and causes a new plague.

I have greatly oversimplified this of course

What vaccines can do is drive these viruses into extinction, where they can't come back from. What human civilization began doing since the late 1700s when smallpox was killed, was to drive large numbers of these viruses into extinction, that's why there are by historical standards relatively few plagues in modern times.

The idea that we could develop a vaccine and distribute it fast enough to overtake the evolution of a virus during an ongoing plague, that is relatively new and originally that was not the intended purpose of vaccines. The original purpose for vaccines was about purging existing plague viruses. And to a great extend that was a big success most of these historical plagues are gone. Without the vaccines we would still get regular re-occurring variations of historical plagues like in premodern times.

Compared to purging old plagues from the system, it's much more ambitious to kill off a new plague as it develops, and i would say that we have not fully unlocked that achievement. The covid vaccines did strangle and slow down covid but didn't manage drive it into extinction.

>>471082
This is a bunch of mythology you have provided no scientific evidence of. And it does nothing to explain those graphs: >>471068

>>471083
Can you link the actual sources for the data in those graphs? Bystrianyk and Humphries are anticommusits btw, so why would you blindly trust them, unless you are a agloid liberal who wants to discredit AES states?

>>471085
Have you considered reading the fucking articles in OP, readlet? They have plenty of citations.

I'm always amazed by how retarded conspiracy nusts are

>>471090
>uhm have you considered reading the wikipedia page on the holodomor????
whatever you say you anticommunist lib lmao

>>471098
>Stalin dindu nuffin
State capitalist get the wall.

>>471064
So in the sacred realm of biology, there are special rules for science and definitions that we must uphold? You can smell the ideology. If biology were treated like natural science, my meaning would be understood. It is the dominance of eugenism that makes such understanding an impossibility for true believers.

You're just recapitulating the mechanism-vitalism debate, presumably from the "vitalist" (Germanic ideology) side. There's no honesty there.

With the "atom" we envision it a particular way, except… we really don't know what it is, and make a lot of supposition. It is reasonable supposition, because it is far less tainted by biopolitical ideology, but you can find ideology in physics as well, especially when it was necessary to stop people from harnessing that energy for themselves. Hence ideological interpretations of quantum mechanics and the near-destruction of physics by decades of piss-poor university education.

For a disease, we would presume there is a cause. This is inadmissible for a eugenist who believes disease is a just-so story of bad moral fiber and destiny, and so two positions are created. One is the dialectical woo woo theory of disease, and the other is the version where the body is a technocratic polity obsessed with purity and command of information. Both are absurd, and both are simultaneously believed in the spirit of the eugenic creed. It knows no other way, and exists to promote disease as much as possible, just as Malthus would have it.

The point being here is that you can speak of contagion without "invisible viruses" and this biology-as-computer-code analogy that is deployed for the present slave system. Certain communists don't want to question the institutions because that is their power base, and their grand theory disallows analysis when it would threaten their institutional basis. They can only think in the moment, and they are holding on because their original cause is lost. There is no more concept of democracy or mass politics, and any interpretation of communism still possible is just recapitulating the rule of institutions. Communism refused to fight eugenics, and so it could do nothing but die. They go out of their way to avoid fighting eugenics, even though the eugenists kill them over and over. It happens too often to be a coincidence. The left broadly was set up to lose, and so the Soviet Union could fall without a shot. It's all madness, really, that we were made to die for this, but it was all for eugenics in the end. All for eugenics.

If there is a disease, there is a mechanistic cause - whether it is contagion or a failure of organs, or some combination, or something else, there is always a cause. It is never a just-so story that can be used for political purposes. Political thought, on the other hand, is dominated by just-so stories where it is taboo to speak of causes and effects. Eugenics relies on it. Diamat relies on it, and didn't allow people to criticize the institutions once they had their hammerlock on knowledge. The two work together. If that weren't the case, then communists would have seen it my way, instead of attacking me and recapitulating their servile stance of the past several decades. The communist intellectuals threw the Soviet peoples' determination to live away for nothing. It's a travesty that the intellectuals stabbed the people in the back, but that's where we wound up, because it was too much to fight the creed when it was possible.

As for proving the existence of "COVID" - the whole thing is a scam from top to bottom, and the disinformation is obvious. If you're smart, you're supposed to learn that it's bullshit, and laugh as those who are forced to die for the lie are killed. Eugenics and depopulation know no other way. If you wanted to be in line with reality and science, that is what you would criticize, rather than "the theory". The transmission of biological matter is not controversial. The meaning of that transmission, and the particular etiology of diseases, is the more interesting question.
Anyone who knew diseases knew you wouldn't vaccinate against a respiratory disease. This is something the dissidents who specialized in that area told you outright from the moment COVID started, and again, the regime wanted you to know COVID was a lie. If you're debating as if there ever was a valid position, you've already lost and you're just feeding the beast. What is important in this "debate" is recapiutlating that the institutions can do this to us and we are not allowed to defend ourselves. A century of Germanic institutions and the invasion of private life they entail have taken their toll.

>>472504
And that's why it's a true and useful understanding

>>472504
>>472515
Not really, the immune system looks more like a complex industrial military with hundreds of different unit types doing sophisticated battle maneuvers on a epic scale than a band of elves wielding bows and swords.

I can't think of a suitable macroscopic analogy for germs. Maybe you could compare germs to the Flood from Halo.

>>472517
>the immune system looks more like a complex industrial military with hundreds of different unit types doing sophisticated battle maneuvers on a epic scale
That's just the MCU-tier fanfic written by fraudulent immunologists. That doesn't describe the reality of what exists in our bodies.

>>472517
A mighty, sophisticated, time-tested and noble elf nation waging brutal destruction against various hordes and malignant creatures of foreign origin.

Sounds like an apt analogy to me

>>472518
>That's just the MCU-tier
micro controller unit ?

>That doesn't describe the reality of what exists in our bodies.
Fair enough what does then ?

>>472541
>micro controller unit ?
marvel comics universe

>Fair enough what does then ?
There is no need for an alternative theory to refute a false theory. I think nobody really knows the full truth about white blood cells and other parts of the "immune system". However, it is obvious that almost all of the diseases that are being attributed to magic viruses are most likely caused by environmental poisons.

>>472557
>the diseases that are being attributed to viruses are most likely caused by environmental poisons.
I think that's a long shot, because people get sick when they get infected with viruses. However it's possible that environmental poisons weaken people and the viruses only do damage because of that weakened state that people are in. What speaks against this though are all the deadly plague-viruses that killed off so many people during the middle ages when industrial pollution just did not exist at all. Unless you have a different source of environmental poisons in mind that predates industrial society ?

>>472559
>I think that's a long shot, because people get sick when they get infected with viruses
Viruses don't exist, so no, people don't get sick from viruses

>What speaks against this though are all the deadly plague-viruses that killed off so many people during the middle ages when industrial pollution just did not exist at all. Unless you have a different source of environmental poisons in mind that predates industrial society ?
Of course medieval people were capable of poisoning themselves, and also being malnourished. Anyone with a cursory understanding of medieval history knows of things like scurvy and other kinds of deadly malnutrition that were misunderstood at the time, the general lack of hygiene, and sometimes even consumption of toxic fungi, plants, and metals such as lead.

While the existence of environmental poisons has taken on a new form in capitalism, it's far from a completely new phenomenon. Even in primitive communism, people could get poisoned by certain plants, rotten food, venomous creatures, and other natural phenomena.

>>472559
The way viruses were proven in experiments was to take a concentrate of supposed "virus-infected" material - i.e., an environmental poison. That was sufficient to say that there was an agent causing a disease.

It should be said here that this entire argument is intended to be absurdum ad infinitum - just keep moving the posts with circular definitions of what things "are" until someone is exhausted. This is something that happens with Marxist critique when they forget that there is a natural world where empirical evidence and meaning can be found. It's a common Germanic illness.

It's been settled for a long time that viruses do not "cause" disease, as if a switch were flipped to tell the universal computer to set the "sick" flag on some human. That is what is being recapitulated. The Marxists seek to defend their hold on the institutions so they can keep saying they command reality, so they have every reason to "teach the controversy" without having conclusive answers. They have so much contempt for the lower classes and they decided a long time ago they will never let us in their society. If they did, they would cut the bullshit and speak of what disease is, and what the medical institutions are. A few make oblique references, but always steer back to defense of the institutions. Their political mind won't allow them to see that the institutions they wanted to march through are a trap, and now they're committed to it.

Today's systems theory and analysis would be a proper way to speak of a disease's etiology, and anything that would cause disease. Here we have the dreaded information world problem, where a Hegeloid doesn't want to deal with information because that interferes with some great working they envision to cajole the world to do as they wish.

So with a respiratory illness, there are multiple things happening, rather than "bad information" entering the inviolable and totalitarian body, imagined as a technocratic polity ruled by the Party of Order. The common cold is something the body does every so often to alleviate some condition - it is well known that many disease are the body's attempt to "cure" whatever is malignant in the bodily system, rather than the disease being a foreign entity. This is where the ideological conceit of spiritual purity and spiritual corruption takes over the debate, upholding eugenic faith and the political doctrines which insist that the world can only be cajoled by the right kind of people. Sometimes a cold is just a cold, but it became necessary to insinuate that there was some political crime that someone committed to become sick. They actually believe this, and it's an essentially Satanic view of the body, not exclusive to Marxists who can if they remain sane recognize this is preposterous. For the Marxist, the institution's authority is something that cannot be questioned, because if that were the case, then none of the Marxist view of history would be sensical. It would not just mean a particular theory or institution is wrong, but the whole method of Marxism can't work or only works in a limited purview. The latter conclusion would have been acceptable - Marx was writing about ideology and the situation in his time, not a rule that applies universally in a total world that never changes. The problem is that "dialectical materialism" doesn't allow change to happen until a thought leader declares it so, and this is why Marxists are always decades behind and insist on recycling the past, or envisioning a future alien to the world that is never going to be here. It's inherent to the philosophical approach, if you take it to refer to a natural order. It was never meant to be that, of course - the entire thing and its antecedents referred specifically to political and spiritual thought. The purpose wasn't to disassemble the natural world and make it alien, but to attack political and spiritual institutions, deconstruct them, see past them. It doesn't give anything that would allow someone to build new institutions - that was thought to be a task for a later time, or something that would be a foregone conclusion from common sense. Someone forgot to tell people that when they started jumping up and down like retards and started believing that they're actually going to become gods. It's insane.

The virus properly understood is a marker, an indicator that there is disease in the body, rather than the "cause" or the "center" of the disease. Diseases don't exist for an alien virus to spread itself, but exist only in bodies that react to their environment.

In every event, things which could transmit disease are something more than viral material, because the viruses are so small and impossible to isolate. Their existence is inferred, which would be understood if the machines used for this purpose were explained, even with the explain-like-I'm-five explanations that would be trivial. Instead of doing that though, the ideologues are recapitulating Koch's Postulates, as if the world still exists in the 19th century. The whole point of those postulates was to create a reductio ad absurdum so that Koch could uphold Germanic conceits about the body and spirituality.

>>472562
>Viruses don't exist,
says you.

>medieval people poisoning themselves
>malnourished
>scurvy
>deadly malnutrition
>lack of hygiene
>consumption of toxic fungi, plants
>lead posining
>rotten food
>venomous creatures

doesn't explain plagues.

All those environmental factors you describe would just contribute to higher mortality in general, something that's a constant reaper eating away at the population. Really bad plagues on the other hand kill off half the population in a short period of time and then they disappear for a century or more.

>>472592
>The Marxists hold on the institutions
if only that were true

>>472593
Actually it does, easily. Consider the "asbestos plague," which caused a wave of cancer deaths in the population. Or the "lead poisoning plague," which gave millions of people brain damage. Just because there is a "wave" of disease, it doesn't prove that contagion caused it.

>>472595
It is very true that Marxists chose to enter the institutions and saw that as their only viable power base. That is the only thing they consistently hold, and why academics were at the forefront of Marxism.

The conceit of very bad Marxists is that if they don't own all of it, it doesn't exist, and the reality of the struggle over the institutions must be masked to those outside of the know. The Marxists were given enough rope to hang themselves by entering the liberal institutions and receiving legitimacy, and they very willingly stepped forward to meet their executioner.

>>470680
Viruses are real, and you're an idiot for thinking Marxism has anything to do with it. I don't know why this thread has as many replies as it does. You truly have to be fucking braindead to think this.

>>470710
>I will never live in Eva universe and Asuka will never be my gf
I suffer in 3dpd land

>>472613
The centrality of eugenics made this a political matter. The moment there isn't a coherent attack against eugenics, they're going to keep pounding and pounding until they get what they want. The Marxists see the writing on the wall and cling to their positions, always defensive and always lurching behind current events. They're thinking reflexively and can't bring themselves to truly get what eugenics was, because to do so would make it clear just how much they lost.

>>472613
>Viruses are real
Yes demonstrably so, but as long as all the explanations and proofs are phrased in technical scientific jargon, the part of society that can't access or doesn't care about gaining scientific literacy, will continue to treat it as mere opinion. I think that we have to find better simplifications.

The other problem we have is politicized or moralized sciences. Scientific institutions have gained a lot of trust because they often get closer to the truth than most other institutions. And that leads to a problem where special interest groups like to borrow the "authoritative voice of science" to push their special agenda. We have to improve the mechanisms to frustrate those interferences.

>>472700
People are scientifically literate if they can put two and two together. It was necessary to declare that we cannot do that without overbearing pedagogues, who then told us that they alone dictate that two and two make four and that our thinking on the matter is irrelevant. It seems absurd but that is what they think. Schooling drilled away any native sense we would use to ask questions about why anything is real, and this is intended.

What is missing is a readily accessible body of literature or experience suggesting that we can rely on that native sense. The only reason science had any spiritual authority in the first place is because ordinary people, even dumb people, can replicate its findings, and scientific work was meant to be comprehensible to a layperson. If a scientist shouts and barks at people that they do not follow The Science, the scientist is a shit scientist. That is the problem with institutional science - pseudoscience is granted spiritual legitimacy by diktat, and we're not allowed to tell them no. Our own thoughts which always smelled bullshit are things we are told to invalidate before we're old enough to know the vast program of lying we live in.

With biology, the science is politicized. The concept of a virus and how they can be detected can be explained to any literate adult. The problem is that the explanation is full of so many obvious lies, sleight-of-hand tricks, and so on, and we are told to dogmatically accept "The Science" over our objections. People don't automatically believe in "viruses" because we do not uncritically accept the biology-as-information paradigm that is in force today, nor that "a virus" works in the way that ideology claims. It is why the first investigations of virology were skeptical that virology had anything to do with disease. You had early research in the late 19th century suggesting that disease would be better understood by investigating the tissue or terrain, but that investigation was short-circuited by the eugenic creed and made inadmissible. If it continued, it might have built up into the systems theory that did happen for different reasons, but we would have constructed systems metaphysically in a different way. In secret, there is an understanding used for systems analysis, that would have to be adopted to reliably work with such information, but this is never laid out consistently. A great problem is that imperious assholes seek to make grand metaphysical claims and impose them on reality, which is not how metaphysics can be useful.

I get into this in my writing:
http://eugeneseffortposts.royalwebhosting.net/mymethod.html

Introductory works to the scientific method were once upon a time intended to be so widely accessible that a reasonable child/teen could build from them, without being talked down. The infantilization and insidiousness of Fabianism retarded knowledge and spoke of science as magic - and this is an imperial trope regarding what science is.

>>472720
Compare to now where "The Science" is dominated by legalese, mystification, institutions with Star Chamber-esque laws and policies, and obfuscation. This is possible because pedagogy is designed to retard children from an early age. They don't teach children to "read", but to digest language. They brag that the majority of humanity are not "really literate", because any time we demonstrate literacy, we are beaten into submission and bullbaiting by this Germanic culture, which was designed to destroy anyone who wasn't an aristocrat and uphold their racist bullshit. Then the Krauts project their failed race-theory onto the English or American. Every other culture in humanity asks themselves, individually or collectively, if they are the assholes. Most ordinary Germans, being reasonable people, do the same. Not the aristocracy though! It's so fucking insufferable.

>>472719
>The Retarded Ideology
Absolutely based. Is this the complete book?

>>472778
First part of what I plan to be eight books. Maybe I never finish it, but I'm pretty far into Book 2 which is much larger.

Good website with virus debunking articles:
https://viroliegy.com/

bump