- 12 Posts
- 29 Comments
2·4 hours agoUS actions are partially the reason though. The population could have changed if it was not being actively convinced not to do so.
Instead of moderates, hardliners became more popular because of the constant US threat, refusing to normalize, and not holding up its end of deals.
Iran has a long history of US and European meddling and stealing their oil since 1953. You might not understand but they have plenty of reason to fear the US. And they have been betrayed many times when they let their guard down.
It would be akin to asking why Ukrainians do not love Russian culture after Russia invaded their country and bombed them.
They tried to suck less and then America put a knife in their back. Which is not very encouraging.
Each language points to an entirely different website. Most with completely different topics. Interesting.
2·6 hours agoHaha okay. Next time try telling Democrats to make concessions to voters. Voters are too stupid to understand the lesser evil you keep talking about :)
You convinced me. There is no other solution than to bomb Irans nuclear sites and power infrastructure. Also take out a few dams and grain silos while we are at it to really liberate those oppressed people.
The president did promise to revert many of the more conservative laws and extended an olive branch in exchange for sanction relief. Which was quickly set ablaze.
12·9 hours agoTIL anyone who shows that Darwin was factually racist is a crypto creationist.
Give it up. Science.org is very clear about Darwins racism and the quotes leave nothing to the imagination.
Iran elected a more moderate president. Then Israel bombed the Hamas leader at the presidents inauguration.
Is Science.org a creationist website? Further research affirms my believes instead of debunking it.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abj4606
Darwin portrayed Indigenous peoples of the Americas and Australia as less than Europeans in capacity and behavior. Peoples of the African continent were consistently referred to as cognitively depauperate, less capable, and of a lower rank than other races. These assertions are confounding because in “Descent” Darwin offered refutation of natural selection as the process differentiating races, noting that traits used to characterize them appeared nonfunctional relative to capacity for success. As a scientist this should have given him pause, yet he still, baselessly, asserted evolutionary differences between races. He went beyond simple racial rankings, offering justification of empire and colonialism, and genocide, through “survival of the fittest.” This too is confounding given Darwin’s robust stance against slavery.
As for your other question, same source
In “Descent,” Darwin identified women as less capable than (White) men, often akin to the “lower races.” He described man as more courageous, energetic, inventive, and intelligent, invoking natural and sexual selection as justification, despite the lack of concrete data and biological assessment. His adamant assertions about the centrality of male agency and the passivity of the female in evolutionary processes, for humans and across the animal world, resonate with both Victorian and contemporary misogyny.
Maybe I misinformation. A few quotes I saw did not provide a great look.
Nonetheless evolution was widely used in the past to provide a “scientific” argument for racism instead of a “religious” argument.
the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races.”
Civilized is the word which was used for White.
Savage is the word which was used for non white. There is no real way to spin this.
Acknowledging Darwin was racist like basically everyone else back then is not defending creationism.
So the Harris campaign not only ignored, but actively lied about the voter feedback they received on Gaza…
“Expert” recites Democrat propaganda about blaming voters. Choir laps it up
Is this expert as expertly as Democrat campaign leaders?
No they want cheap eggs.
The article I linked previously was the top result this one might be slightly better it contains some quotes
Indeed, he articulated this same principle in his scientific study of human evolution, The Descent of Man (1871), where he claimed, “At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races.”
Not only racism, but racial extermination was an integral feature of Darwin’s theory from the start.
There is more this is only a small part. Darwin also had passion for misoginy
Promising to wipe Palestinians off the map like how Joe Biden wiped every building in Gaza off the map?
Darwins was pretty bullish on white surpremacy and sexism.
https://wng.org/roundups/darwins-racism-1617223432
After religion took a nosedive it was very convenient that slaves and colonies suddenly turned out to be “biologically inferior” humans.
How did supporting genocide work out for you guys?
I have not followed recent developments much but I recall the new president partially aborting the new headscarf law. https://apnews.com/article/iran-mandatory-headscarf-hijab-law-protests-26e6015d6e47b18238f0ac4c08c4d33a
Whether this was followed up on I do not know.