How easily people talk themselves into proposing genocide

Some caveats to start with:

  • A comment section does not represent the views of the host of a blog in any consistent way. Some hosts are more lenient, some less so.
  • Discussion can go to strange places and without context, an isolated comment may look quite different.
  • People can speculate about the possible behaviour of others without necessarily endorsing that behaviour. For example, somebody might talk about the circumstances in which North Korea might use a nuclear weapon but expect readers to understand that this would be a bad thing that they don’t want to happen.
  • People sometimes make dark jokes about terrible things.
  • Sometimes translated comments or comments made in a second or unfamiliar language may not represent what a person is actually trying to say.

There are secondary ethical questions around each of these. I’ll let readers decide whether any of those apply in the situation I’m discussing.

After the fold, I’m going to discuss some comments on a blog I often look at somewhat adversarially.  Before that, a content warning about what appears to be very disturbing comments aimed at Roma people – an ethnic minority in Europe (primarily) that is subjected to on-going racism and harassment as well as a long history of being subjected to violence and attempted extermination. The comments vary from what is apparent casual racism and stereotyping to extreme proposals including genocide.

I posted a very short post yesterday linking to notable Sad Puppy and Mad Genius Sarah Hoyt’s blog. The comments go off in various directions as comments do.

One comment attempts to make some sort of point about intersectionality. It is a typical style of comment in which somebody confuses their own misunderstanding of a concept with a deep flaw in the concept. That comment has its own issues but it is the reply that goes into extremes.

Before I continue, I’m very mindful that any criticism of these comments will be met with claims that I am selectively quoting to create a misleading impression. Practically, I’m not going to repeat lengthy comments and it is reasonable to discuss specific comments. Also, there is a lot of things said below that I find quite appalling – I don’t want this on my blog particularly. For the full context, an archive link is given above. I do not believe any of the quotes I am providing are misleading about the text as presented. I can’t claim to know what people’s unobserved motivations are but only what they actually said.

The issues start with this reply, which I will quote in full:

pohjalainen | May 21, 2018 at 5:10 pm | Reply
“The big problem with real world – okay, Finland has had Roma, or gypsies, living here for over 500 years, and they are still a separate and shunned group.

Now, for centuries they were shunned and seriously oppressed partly because they were different. But there always was also some cause for that. They had developed their lifestyle presumably in great part because they had to, not having found permanent homes where they could have settled down anywhere, but that lifestyle included thieving and cheating the natives of the lands where they wandered.

Which of course just increased the shunning and resentment. They were the horse traders who cheated you, they stole things and livestock and they were rumored to sometimes steal children too, and you could never ever trust them fully.

Then slowly things changed, and the Finnish society started to try and treat them better. Social security, efforts to integrate them into our society – in the beginning that did include efforts to make them to abandon their culture fully, but that got dropped decades ago.

But as a group they refuse to comply. They take everything they are offered. But they still cheat and steal. Most times any of us end up personally dealing with any of them it is because of something like that, they stole from you or cheated you or somebody you know, or caused a disturbance in the apartment house where you live, or vandalized something. Most times you see them in the news it’s because shoplifting or stealing gas or because their interclan feuds – although they don’t kill us whiteys all that often they do kill each other. Yep, newspapers never outright tell it was Roma doing something, but there usually are certain tells in a story which indicate it was a member or members of that group, and when it gets to court and names are told they do have different types of surnames and first name traditions.

So – how the hell do you solve that kind of permanent SNAFU? They are given lots of chances now but hardly any of them seem to take those up, most just seem to use without any intention of ever giving back to society. Which causes increasing resentment. Unless this can be changed the main society’s current almost tolerance towards the Roma (yep, they often are still treated differently, but while that often may be unwarranted as said there also are some valid reasons why lots of Finns are more or less suspicious of them) may end up as a temporary situation, and as a group they might once again become full on outcasts. But they don’t want to play because they still see the main society and its members as the enemy.

This is not a stable situation. It has to be solved one way or another sooner or later, and preferably so that everybody can be happy with the solution, but HOW?

Just singing Kumbaya does not cut it, I’m afraid.

(And then there these new groups now coming in… if any of them do become permanent residents and end up as the Roma, never fully or even partly integrating – NOT GOOD).”

If you don’t read many rightwing blogs you might find that comment very shocking. However, much of the sentiment presented here is close to the default level of many people in the rightwing SF blogosphere who genuinely believe that they AREN’T racist. If you are expecting self-styled libertarians to push back on a comment like that then you will be disappointed. ‘Pohjalainen’ is a frequent commenter at According to Hoyt from at least 2012.

The reply to that is by TXRed, another regular who shares an anecdote about a Czech man joking that he feeds his dogs on “Gypsies”. TXRed then compares Roma to “certain American Indian groups in the US.”

“They don’t want to make the cultural changes needed to succeed and fit into modern society, but they want the benefits of modern society. Alas, the traits that worked well for group survival in the past are real drags on the same group today.”

Pohjalainen and another regular Foxifer then discuss the appearance and dress of the Roma in Finland. Foxifer mentions video of Roma shoplifters.

Commenter ‘gospace’ then answers Pohjalainen’s “SNAFU” question:

“The traditional answer is genocide. It works. Mass expulsion also works. You send them somewhere else where someone else does the dirty work of- genocide. Keeps your own hands clean. You simply expelled them.

If you don’t like those answers, then you have to live with SNAFU.”

If you are expecting some substantial pushback to that comment or clarification that genocide is wrong, then you will be disappointed. Instead, the alternative is offered by ‘Mary”:

“Mass sterilization and forcible removal of all children also have worked.”

The nearest to any sort of pushback to the casual proposals of genocide versus child kidnapping is Robin Munn, who proposes Christianity as the solution. Munn at least manages to change the subject but there is zero attempt to counter the earlier comments. Just prior to Munn’s intervention, another regular ‘BobtheRegisteredFool’ adds:

“I felt bad earlier for thinking things through so superfically that I’d forgotten about taking the kids away.

Reservation schools might not work with Roma. It is a theft culture, not a warrior culture. No critical warrior training cycle to interrupt.”

And just to be clear, each of these proposals are all ways in which Roma have actually been actively persecuted in Europe.  State sanctioned taking of Roma children remains a problem,

After the diversion into national IQ (actually not as terrible as you might imagine), ‘BobtheRegisteredFool’ picks up where they left off:

“Have you heard about the Reservations and the Bureau of Indian Affairs?

Finland surely has some inhospitable, isolated and desolate location. Resettle families that cause problems there. Give them just barely enough resources to survive. Now, they probably have more enzymes for digesting alcohol than the Indians did, so you can’t rely on drink to kill them off.”

And so on.

As mentioned above, I don’t doubt it will be said that I’m selectively quoting to make people look bad. I don’t think I am but if you are saying stuff like the stuff I have quoted then note THAT STUFF REALLY DOES MAKE YOU LOOK BAD. If I’ve somehow misunderstood the nature of the conversation then perhaps the people who wrote all of the appalling stuff should consider who might also ‘misunderstand’. If the comments somehow do NOT represent the inner views of the people that wrote them, they still contribute to a climate of violence, hostility and state-sanctioned repression of an ethnic group that has suffered centuries of violence and abuse (including being targetted by Nazis).

What about the host of the blog? As I have said above, the comments on a blog do not have a simple match to the beliefs of the blog owner. However, we can rule out Sarah Hoyt being unaware of the comments proposing genocide. She adds her own perspective on Roma people.

accordingtohoyt | May 22, 2018 at 9:59 am | Reply
“Yeah. I grew up with gypsies nearby/coming into the village.
When regency romances fastened on the Roma as the poor minority that was oppressed and that the lady would marry and redeem, I threw them against the wall.
The culture itself sets its hand against everyone. It’s not a clear cut oppressed/oppressor.
The Jews were similarly despised and mistreated but they gave far less reason, and as soon as the barriers were down they became an integrated part of society.
So it can’t be just “despised and mistreated” causes “bad culture.”
BTW interestingly NONE of these romance writers wanting to sanctify the oppressed minority use Jews as the good but oppressed guy/gal. I wonder why. Historically, in Europe it would make way more sense. Or you know, Catholics in England. Protestants in Catholic Europe.
But no, it’s always Roma.”

It is almost a relief that the comment is only stereotyping and victim blaming by this point.

Obviously me saying anything will just result in Hoyt et al either doubling down or becoming hyper-defensive. The point of this post isn’t to imply that Hoyt or her followers are eager to commit violence towards ethnic minorities. The issue isn’t that the people quoted above are closet Nazis – in some ways that would be less of an issue as it would be clear where the problem lay. No, the issue is that these are people who genuinely see themselves as being on the side of liberty and truth and opposed to government sponsored murder BUT the ideas that lead to mass murder just slip into their discourse as naturally as demanding lower taxes.

That’s the essence of the problem here. Nazis themselves are only ever part of the problem, the other part is non-Nazis who regard Nazi ideas as exterme but also somehow reasonable or effective.

72 thoughts on “How easily people talk themselves into proposing genocide

  1. There’s crypto-fascism, and then there’s this… rot13’d fascism? Slightly obfuscated but right there for anyone to marvel at.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. The only context I can even think of in which proposing genocide as a solution does not at once, all on its own make you a despicable person — yes, even if your caveat is “it’s not a good idea, just an effective one” — is in plotting fiction, when discussing the villain’s potential methods to achieve their aims. Discussing it about real people is NEVER EVER right.

    BobtheRegisteredFool makes me almost more sick, because the monstrous legacy of MY people really trying those things is right here in the culture I swim in, not far away in Rwanda or Cambodia, or historically in WWII.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Strangely enough, Hoyt has a valid point about the use of Roma in fiction. I’ve seen a number of stories which treat being Roma as a kind of generic exotics — sexy because they’re Other, in a way Jews or Catholics just aren’t.
    Otherwise, yuuuuuuck. Hoyt has no idea how much her view of Roma resembles anti-semite views of Jews (distinctive culture, refuse to assimilate, etc.).

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Ditto for the First Nations and other Indigenous peoples. Romances about them are almost always about being swept away by The Mysterious Other. When not about random plagiarized ferret facts*. 😉

      *Yes. If you don’t know the story I’ll have to see if I can dig up an article.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. There’s also a hint that genocide might be the proper approach to Muslims (and “other groups” that won’t assimilate) in that comment stream.

    Hoyt argues Jews are different, since they assimilate, but of course not all Jews do or have (or should have to). This made me think of a recent discussion over on File 770, about Catholics, Jews, and Muslims. Not that I want to import that over here.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. comments about Jews assimilating are pretty creepy in their own right given (a) they often weren’t given much choice in the matter and (b) that still wasn’t enough to stop the violence.


  5. They don’t want to make the cultural changes needed to succeed and fit into modern society, but they want the benefits of modern society

    Wow, so they’re like Republicans and Right-Libertarians who don’t think they should pay taxes but willingly reap the benefit of things bought with the taxes of other people. No wonder RW folks don’t like them. They’re working that side of the street and don’t want competition!

    Liked by 5 people

  6. So the argument seems to be – and always is – that group X can NEVER be a part of Nation Y due to some unchangeable incompatibility, therefore all sorts of terrible things are justified.
    Depressingly the first half of the argument was being advanced in earnest by someone on F770 only yesterday.
    Even if some sort of bad philosophical argument brings you to believe the first half, shouldn’t basic human empathy prevent you from advancing to the second half?

    Liked by 4 people

    1. I think the subtext here is that these pseudo libertarians don’t want Nazism and hence if they get rid of ethnic minorities there will be no need for Nazism. They hate Nazis because Nazis might nationalise the steel industry not because Nazis commit genocide.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Sure, but that would involve a government he supports being in a position to do it. As long as that isn’t happening, he’ll keep denouncing it as socialist evil.


  7. Racism is racism, regardless how ingenious the racist is in their attempts to cover over their racism in respectability. Sooner or later the racist drops the facade and shows the world the true nature of their hatred.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. It’s pretty common on the far right, I think. And I’ve never met a Libertarian who didn’t resort to “all the people like that deserve to die” within 30 minutes of any serious discussion about the problems with their ideas. But it exists on the left too–just not as visibly these days.

    The open question is what should a society do about immigrants whose culture contains unacceptable elements. Does a society need to tolerate female genital mutilation? I would say no. That’s extreme child abuse, the adults involved should go to prison, and the state should take their kids away from them for good. The same would be true of parents who trained their kids to be pickpockets. I think I’d endorse (with some reservations) removing the children even if the parents just advocated doing that to their kids. These are things where the “it’s just our culture” argument leaves me cold. The old American South was a slave-owning culture, but that doesn’t mean it was wrong to destroy it.

    However, you can’t preemptively take away people’s children just because of what someone else with the same ethnicity did.

    Voice of America has a recent article, “For Roma, Life in US Has Challenges.” What struck me in the article was a Roma man describing how (many years ago) his father made him drop out of school in the 8th grade, saying “it’s time for you to get married.” That’s definitely the sort of practice that the state should put a stop to–even if it means taking children away from their parents.

    Maybe to find the right balance one must first accept that there is a tension between the desire to preserve the traditions that define your culture and the fact that the world changes and things that don’t change tend to die. You have every right to try to preserve your culture, but not if you have to abuse your children (or other people) to do it. And, of course, the state should only act against individuals–not whole ethnic groups.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. This is an interesting argument. In the US, as I’m sure you know, we’ve got a culture that has never assimilated — the Amish. They won the right to stop educating their children at age 13, just as in your example, and they certainly do a thorough job of enculturating those children into their separatist way of life.

      Are we going to argue that the Amish should have their children removed from them? That this is child abuse?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. They shouldn’t be allowed to restrict their children’s education. I think that could be fixed without having to go so far as to take their children away. Particularly if they knew that would be the ultimate consequence of fighting it too hard.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Wisconsin v. Yoder disagrees, though. They’ve already won that fight.

        Here in the South, we’ve got Evangelical home-schooling parents who are making similar arguments, especially when it comes to their girls. And Hasidic Jews certainly have their own ideas about how to educate children.

        I’m not sure we should be talking about taking kids away from parents because those parents want to educated / inculcate their children in their cultures. We can argue that their cultures are “bad,” but absent real harm (and I agree that FGM is real harm) I think we’re on shaky ground.

        Liked by 4 people

    2. Thing is that with the possible exception of your actual example, most of the cultural practices we’re most likely to consider inappropriate or worse (child brides, honour killings) are already illegal in most Western locales. People tend to obey the law, and the diaspora, sufficiently exposed to other influence, adapts to local law. The cultural marriage rites remain, but with older and probably more consenting brides.

      (The only reason I even hesitate over FGM on the legal front is that Western society has had its own cases of altering the genitalia of minors, with intersex kids and circumcision which as well as its religion specific practice, for a while became mainstream medical practice, though it’s been found the arguments for it are now bad science. It’s harder to make a thing explicitly wrong **by law** even if we agree it’s morally wrong when there are cases that can be cited as precedent. Mostly what you find is doctors will flatly refuse to do any version of it as against their oath, and charges against non medical practitioners attempting it either as medicine without a license, child abuse, or both.)

      Liked by 5 people

    3. The problem with removing children from parents, no matter how good your excuse for doing so, is children do not see this as “my parents were doing something which was ultimately detrimental to my long-term happiness, and thus I had to be taken away for my own safety”. Children see it as “I was Bad and Wrong and Awful, and my family was taken away in Punishment”.

      So when you remove a child from their family before they’re willing or ready to leave, no matter how good your reasoning, you are causing permanent psychological damage to that child. I think there has to be a better solution.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. Taking children away causes severe psychological damage — even when they luck into being brought to a safe new environment. That’s why CFS, flawed as they are in so so So SO many ways, aren’t wrong in their emphasis on trying to find a family member, or even return the child if they can determine it’s not in that much danger after all. You have to be absolutely sure, when you do it, that you’re taking them away because leaving them will do *worse* damage, and your choice is a bad choice over a worse one.

        That’s why a company that gave Hundreds of false positives on drug tests here in Canada created such an absolute furor. That’s why a case of a false accusation of Shaken Baby Syndrome here in Winnipeg was an explosion. That’s why what’s happening at the southern border of the US is getting so much outcry.

        Liked by 6 people

  9. I can’t hit like on this, but I think I needed to see it. I need to sit with it before I have any response but nausea.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Is this classic The Mote in God’s Eye? Or the Ender’s Game cycle?

        Or is it some other work I’m not thinking of?

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Mote. Didn’t Ender only get the sad about genocide after committing it?

        Cycle of Fire also has a subplot about genocide once the humans work out how the alien life cycle works, one of many details it shares with Mote. It’s a Hal Clement novel, though, so it was very unlikely to end with “Fuck, yeah. Kill them all.”

        Liked by 4 people

      3. I was thinking of the sequel to Ender’s Game, where Ender finds a Queen Bug and, via deus ex machina, thus hasn’t *really* committed genocide after all. (Unless I’m remembering this wrong — it’s been years since I read the books.)

        Liked by 1 person

  10. This is just straight-up racism and genocide, absolutely bare-faced and unashamed. And then they wonder why the Roma don’t assimilate (Or the Amish, Hasidic Jews, many native/aboriginal/indigenous people…).

    Of course, all this was said about the Irish in America not that long ago. Within living memory, some places. The Cajuns too.

    North Americans and Australians of decency are horrified by the past kidnapping/sterilization of children from ethnic minorities to force them to give up their culture and assimilate. These idiots aren’t, and they don’t even realize those methods AREN’T actually effective!

    How that first person considers the Roma are “almost tolerated” and then goes on with that screed of how evil they are and how no ethnic Finn actually tolerates them… eesh.

    One sees how easily the Nazis came to power in a civilized, educated country.

    Liked by 6 people

  11. Jeez, Cam, way to bring me down. I found out only last night about Martha Wells finally winning a Nebula, and then today I come across this. About 17 hours of joy, max.

    Now I’m really fucking depressed. Again.


    1. Sorry, I’d read some of those comments late yesterday and I needed to vent. I was originally going to post the short story ballot post later in the week but I brought it forward so I’d have a post today instead of this one. But I decided that I shouldn’t ignore it just because it might look like ‘Puppy kicking’. Heck they already thing we sit around calling them Nazis all day – not pointing out the festering desire for genocide so as not to upset the permanently aggrieved made no sense on balance.


      1. Well darn. If they’re going to go around making noises like Nazis, they really don’t have the right to complain when someone connects the dots and calls them Nazis.

        Liked by 2 people

  12. That is disgusting. What is worse is all those commenters just go along with it. Nobody says, “Hey, wait a minute,” or “WTF is going on here?” (including the blog host). Gah. Sickening.

    Liked by 5 people

  13. The remarks about the Roma in the first comment are pretty much a laundry list of anti-Roma prejudice that has been around for hundreds of years.

    However, while Roma beggars are certainly visible (and I did see some of them in Helsinki during WorldCon 75), they are actually a minority and often not actually native to the country in question, but people who came in from usually South Eastern Europe, where anti Roma prejudice and persecution is even worse and are looking for better opportunities. And most Roma beggars are no different from non-Roma beggars, they simply sit there with a bowl and a sign and don’t harm anybody. Occasionally, you get aggressive beggars who accost others, but then you find aggressive non-Roma beggars as well.

    Meanwhile, the majority of Roma, particularly Roma who have been living in western countries for a long time now, are actually assimilated and not all that different from their non-Roma neighbours. Which doesn’t mean that they don’t face a lot of prejudice. For example, in my hometown there is a housing estate where the Nazis forced Roma and so-called anti-social people to live, so they could keep them under supervision. The housing estate still exists, a secluded neighbourhood of little row houses surrounding a lawn with some trees that looks very idyllic, if not for the old Nazi gate house/guard HQ (nowadays a kindergarten and community centre) blocking half the road. However, the estate still has a bad reputation eighty years later as the place where “those people” live. I still recall hearing stories about that horrible place and its inhabitants as a teenager, even though the actual estate is quite lovely. BTW, some of the current inhabitants actually are descendants of the people who were forced to live there during the Nazi era.

    Liked by 5 people

      1. Sadly, this reminds me of a song by Eddie Furey from the late 70s/early 80s about the Roma, This Town Is Not Their Own:
        (Jim McCann version)


    1. Romani people in Sweden (and I believe this is true for Finland too) are much more likely to be unemployed, much more likely to have bad health and there is a general distrust against the rest of society which means they might not seek healthcare. On a structural level, there is a higher problem with crime, alcoholism and getting children to school. That it is mostly romanian romani that you see begging on the streets does not mean everything is well for the larger romani groups.

      Much of this has historical reasons, romani didn’t get full rights in Sweden until the 70s. Before that, counties had the right to be ban romani from staying. With only 50 years since then, there are still segregation, several integration projects running. A lot of the older romanis are still analphabets. While things are getting better, there’s still a lot of mistrust because of old policies.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I suspect those of the German Roma who survived the holocaust might actually have fared a little better than elsewhere, because the state was more reluctant to openly discriminate against them after 1945. Though assimilated Roma often did not openly say that they were Roma until approx. 15 to 20 years ago. One example is Marianne Rosenberg, a popular singer, who never talked about her Roma background until fairly recently and was actively discouraged to mention it.

        Liked by 3 people

  14. I started to read the comments a couple of days ago but stopped after about two or three minutes as the comments section diverged into the whole Roma, Hillary, “we’d be doing everyone a favour” line of thinking seemed to be taking hold. It’s nauseating, sobering, deeply unthinking (about the logical extensions of their claims and arguments, not least of which is what if time comes and your particular subculture becomes the “out” group, hunh?)

    Really though, it’s not at all hard to see how people who believe themselves to be good can slide into this line of thinking. It’s the missionary impulse, imperial, “white mans burden” redux. My country is wrestling with the intergenerational trauma of the residential school system and the “Sixties Scoop” whereby well-meaning people thought it a good idea to take First Nations kids from their homes and adopt them into white families or place in residential (often religiously-affiliated) schools to “help them integrate”. I am sure they thought they were being kind and engaging in positive social engineering. Instead, we have a gaping, open wound in our collective good, a significant concentrated inter-generational racialized trauma that’s really apparent and in the news — yet still a sitting Senator is saying it was a good idea.

    In the UK, Prof Nigel Biggar who has proposed a well-funded research scheme called Ethics and Empire, to rehabilitate the idea of empire. Conservative historian Niall Ferguson has written “Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World” — same goal. And in many corners of the poorly-informed right-o-sphere the argument is emerging that the slave trade was Africa’s fault — that Africans sold other Africans into slavery and it was white Christian abolitionists who are responsible for ending it.

    It’s really very disheartening to me to see how many deep and wide this evaluative impulse has gone. I was thinking recently that our cultural turn toward the constantly evaluative (on a linear scale of bad to good) has infected all aspects of human interaction and so it’s not surprising that the conditioning is there to supercharge these exclusionary judgmental impulses. We now are eing asked to rate and rank all sorts of human and commercial interactions, and so people get really stupid and picky and have impossible standards. So what if your eggs were a little runny at iHop or the maid forgot to bring extra towels. Sheesh. People need to back the f&ck up and just live and let live. No one’s perfect, point a finger at someone but remember that there are four fingers pointing back at yourself then too — and all that jazz.

    Liked by 4 people

      1. Yes, that’s surely exactly the same thing on the same time frame. There have been disturbing stories about indigenous women in my province — but also elsewhere like immigrant Latinas in Los Angeles — being sterilized without their knowledge or consent “for their own good”. There are lots of people who think they are good people who mean well, who in fact are horrifically violent and socially brutalizing.

        I didn’t mean the previous regular comment to sound as glib as may have. I just meant that people’s expectations of perfection in their environment are being fortified by the constant evaluation and ranking and expressing of dissatisfaction or judgement. it gives little people big power (or the sense of it) on a public platform. I think being a judge can feed our baser instincts, somehow.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Similar policies on social class grounds used in the UK and in Ireland. Ironically British kids effectively stolen from their mothers and sent to Australia.

        (I didn’t read your last comment as glib)

        Liked by 3 people

  15. I apologize for leaving so many comments here today. This is a subject that really has upset me too.

    I just went to the comments section again to see what my compatriot CCh might be saying, and I got hung up on SH’s vehement claim about how Aficans would have wiped out all of Europe if they had gotten gunpowder first, because all they had ever known was tribal warfare. She says that European Christians at least considered everyone to be human. There is so much factual incorrectness in her short vehement comment that I hardly know where to start. The premise is wrong, the facts are wrong, the conclusion is wrong. Her failure to learn anything about t the majesty and accomplishments of pre-colonial African Kingdoms is embarrassing. Her counter-factual scenario is ridiculous. She should read David Northrup’s excellent book Africa’s Discovery of Europe, 1450-1850 (Oxford UP).

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Not even wrong, as the saying goes. Wronger than wrong.

      And as the other saying goes, lemme Google it:
      What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

      I see by your next post that the MGC and friends are still SO TOTALLY OVER IT and they absolutely don’t pay ANY ATTENTION to what their so-called “enemies” say, NEVER EVER reading their blogs.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Yikes. Don’t look now but they’re justifying the slave trade by basically saying “yeah but THEY DID IT TOO!”

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Sadly, that is boilerplate for Confederate apologists. How they reconcile that with their claims of superiority for white culture is, well, typical.

        Liked by 5 people

      2. Ummm… yeah. Right. And something like seven hundred years of colonial exploitation (first the Greeks, then the Romans, then the Arabs, then various other European nations) showing there was a market for human chattel didn’t have a damn thing to do with it. Of course not. Nothing to do with anyone north of the Tropic of Cancer. At all.

        Liked by 4 people

      3. This is a standard the Right holds themselves to. If they can find someone, anyone, anywhere, at any time in history, who has done something vaguely reminiscent of whatever they’ve just been caught doing, then they point at that and jump up and down, and they are magically cleared of all charges and don’t even have to stop doing it.

        This does not apply to anyone else, however. It is all part of the Conservative Single Standard. “Everything we—and only we—do is PERFECTLY FINE.” Not hypocritical at all.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. It makes me very sad. Did nobody ever tell them that two wrongs don’t make a right? The closest you can get from that alchemy is a (John C.) Wright.

        Liked by 1 person

      1. Or talk about the gates of Vienna while ignoring that many Protestant Hungarians supported Suleiman the Magnificent because they saw him as the better choice to allow them to practice their faith in freedom.

        Liked by 2 people

  16. It’s fascinating to see how these self-professed libertarians are actually straight-up racist authoritarians.

    I’m probably more right wing in voting preferences than most people who comment here but I am definitely not OK with crypto-fascism.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Yup – at best that thread of comments is people wanting the state to force people change because they don’t fit in, at which point there is zero sense in which that can be called ‘libertarian’ except in the unfortunate sense that many so called libertarians seems to think that’s a great idea.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I suspect a big part of that is that the Romani aren’t seen as productive members of society. The same way so many conservatives freak out about twenty year olds who would sooner have fun than work at a crap job–dammit, how dare they not work (according to stereotype these are people staying at home with their parents so the issue isn’t being on welfare)

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Libertarianism is a very thin veneer over right-wing authoritarianism. It doesn’t take much to scratch it. They only approve of freedom for themselves and their tribe. The old saying “libertarians are just Republicans who want to do drugs and have sex” is basically true.

      There used to be Republicans of great integrity, and there are still some decent conservatives or middle-right people (like lastcallistanbul). But they’re drowned out by the fascists, warmongers, racists, oligarch-lovers, sexists, ammosexuals, homophobes, etc. nowadays. Any number of people don’t admit to being Republican now b/c they don’t want others to think they’re fascist, racist, etc. and even Republicans running for office are distancing themselves from the national party and the MAGA hat wearers. A few of them are going independent or even (gasp) Blue Dog Democratic. They’re maybe voting Republican locally but abstaining nationally. It’s a shame.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Gah appalling and, sorry, I can’t click through to read more. Really, vile stuff.

    BTW when Hoyt wrote: “The Jews were similarly despised and mistreated but they gave far less reason….” This bothers me; it reads as anti-semitic to me, though commenters above seem to not see it that way. Just me? Am I over interpreting her (to me) implication that Jews gave reasons, as well, to be despised and mistreated?

    Sorry to nitpick a relatively minor thing in comparison to calling for genocide, etc. I can’t believe I just typed that sentence. It’s all horrible.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Sounds like the pretty much standard authoritarian stance towards many targeted groups, with the standard myths and standard hand-waving. It’s been the justification for genocide, slavery, imprisonment, etc. for all of human history.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. How easy to talk themselves into …
    And how much fewer and shorter are the steps between talk and action than one might think.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. God, that’s unspeakable.
    Part of me wants badly to go scream at them – someone, somewhere should remind them that this is not – or SHOULD not be – normal. But I feel it’s probably futile.
    I don’t expect you to get an answer from Chupik, either.

    Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.