4 ms·

Innate… superiority? There are zero ways to interpret this that are okay if you have a sliver of moral integrity in you.

by 9dev 2y ago

Bancakes 2y ago
Quick question, would you rather own a US/EU citizenship or any other? Why?
- 9dev 2y ago
  That’s a cute setup there, but misses the point. The west—aka white people—don’t have any ”innate“ traits that make them superior to other humans. The entire foundation of our lives is built on the exploitation of others over hundreds of years. Suggesting that is the natural order of things is twisted bullshit, and we’ve heard it a hundred years before. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. Even alluring to that school of thought is wrong. And no amount of „admit you like being privileged“ changes that.
  - jjk7 2y ago
    That you have created a new category of people: 'white', that were historically not considered belonging to the same group does not subsume the history of western thinking; which arguably started in the middle east, was further developed by europeans, and is now fully multi-cultural. The west, as a culture, absorbs what is useful and discards the not useful.
  - hyperold 2y ago
    Notice that you are just admitting the superiority of the west here, no weak culture with subpar technology or weak people can exploit or conquer others. And pretty much everyone has tried to exploit others as much as they possibly could, that's unfortunately just how humans are. Everyone has at least one objectively bad ancestor, no matter the race or culture.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > The west—aka white people This is the problem. Western culture isn't just white. Hell, the term 'white' is really a New World race. In the Old World, Europeans were enslaving each other and being enslaved by e.g. the Mamluks and Ottomans.
    - 9dev 2y ago
      No, but that’s what Karp implies when he talks of „the west“. Americans may not realise how close that is to NSDAP propaganda, but it is.
      - animal_spirits 2y ago
        Do you have sources to backup your claim that Karp is only envisioning white people as part of the west? Is he a known white supremicist? I could not find such a claim.
        animal_spirits 2y ago
        I found he wrote this on his letter to shareholders… > “As Samuel Huntington has written, the rise of the West was not made possible ‘by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion ... but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.’ “He continued: ‘Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.’” Yikes.. https://bsky.app/profile/leahmcelrath.bsky.social/post/3lheu3ghhgk2s https://bsky.app/profile/leahmcelrath.bsky.social/post/3lheu...
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        What is the yikes? Martial superiority isn't exactly a groundbreaking metric by which to measure societies. It's also an essential one--sovereignty depends on it. That will be true as long as international relations are anarchic.
        animal_spirits 2y ago
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> There are zero ways to interpret this that are okay if you have a sliver of moral integrity in you I think democracies are innately superior, including morally, to autocracies. I think market-based economic systems are innately competitive against--and in their capacity to empower individual production, morally superior to--command economies.
- pseudalopex 2y ago
  The west is not innately democratic. And the world's largest democracy is in south Asia.
  - gruez 2y ago
    Under that logic can "the west" even mean anything? "White people"? You could argue it's full of immigrants, so it's not really white people.
    - pseudalopex 2y ago
      Some common definitions of the west are white people, western European countries and their former colonies, and the US and their allies. Many such countries are democratic currently. None are democratic innately. Immigrants and white people are unrelated categories.
      - gruez 2y ago
        >Many such countries are democratic currently. None are democratic innately. Okay, so your argument is that "the west" can only mean something "innate"? >Some common definitions of the west are white people Well hold on. I thought "the west" could only mean something "innate"? What makes makes the US "innately" white? The US is 30% non-white, after all.
        pseudalopex 2y ago
        > Okay, so your argument is that "the west" can only mean something "innate"? Karp said the west is innately superior. JumpCrisscross suggested this was acceptable because democracies are innately superior to autocracies. But western countries are not innately democratic. And democracy is not innately western. Superiority is not innate if its basis is not innate. > What makes makes the US "innately" white? People who define the west as white people do not consider all Americans part of the west. And I said it was a common definition. Not good.
polotics 2y ago
Well at least for pigs, cross-breeding is innately superior to consanguinity.... I don't think that is what Palantir's boss was getting at here though.

Innate… superiority? There are zero ways to interpret this that are okay if you have a sliver of moral integrity in you.

by 9dev 2y ago

Innate… superiority? There are zero ways to interpret this that are okay if you have a sliver of moral integrity in you.

Bancakes 2y ago

Quick question, would you rather own a US/EU citizenship or any other? Why?

9dev 2y ago
That’s a cute setup there, but misses the point. The west—aka white people—don’t have any ”innate“ traits that make them superior to other humans. The entire foundation of our lives is built on the exploitation of others over hundreds of years. Suggesting that is the natural order of things is twisted bullshit, and we’ve heard it a hundred years before. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. Even alluring to that school of thought is wrong. And no amount of „admit you like being privileged“ changes that.
- jjk7 2y ago
  That you have created a new category of people: 'white', that were historically not considered belonging to the same group does not subsume the history of western thinking; which arguably started in the middle east, was further developed by europeans, and is now fully multi-cultural. The west, as a culture, absorbs what is useful and discards the not useful.
- hyperold 2y ago
  Notice that you are just admitting the superiority of the west here, no weak culture with subpar technology or weak people can exploit or conquer others. And pretty much everyone has tried to exploit others as much as they possibly could, that's unfortunately just how humans are. Everyone has at least one objectively bad ancestor, no matter the race or culture.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > The west—aka white people This is the problem. Western culture isn't just white. Hell, the term 'white' is really a New World race. In the Old World, Europeans were enslaving each other and being enslaved by e.g. the Mamluks and Ottomans.
  - 9dev 2y ago
    No, but that’s what Karp implies when he talks of „the west“. Americans may not realise how close that is to NSDAP propaganda, but it is.
    - animal_spirits 2y ago
      Do you have sources to backup your claim that Karp is only envisioning white people as part of the west? Is he a known white supremicist? I could not find such a claim.
      - animal_spirits 2y ago
        I found he wrote this on his letter to shareholders… > “As Samuel Huntington has written, the rise of the West was not made possible ‘by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion ... but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.’ “He continued: ‘Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.’” Yikes.. https://bsky.app/profile/leahmcelrath.bsky.social/post/3lheu3ghhgk2s https://bsky.app/profile/leahmcelrath.bsky.social/post/3lheu...
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        What is the yikes? Martial superiority isn't exactly a groundbreaking metric by which to measure societies. It's also an essential one--sovereignty depends on it. That will be true as long as international relations are anarchic.
        animal_spirits 2y ago

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> There are zero ways to interpret this that are okay if you have a sliver of moral integrity in you I think democracies are innately superior, including morally, to autocracies. I think market-based economic systems are innately competitive against--and in their capacity to empower individual production, morally superior to--command economies.

pseudalopex 2y ago
The west is not innately democratic. And the world's largest democracy is in south Asia.
- gruez 2y ago
  Under that logic can "the west" even mean anything? "White people"? You could argue it's full of immigrants, so it's not really white people.
  - pseudalopex 2y ago
    Some common definitions of the west are white people, western European countries and their former colonies, and the US and their allies. Many such countries are democratic currently. None are democratic innately. Immigrants and white people are unrelated categories.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >Many such countries are democratic currently. None are democratic innately. Okay, so your argument is that "the west" can only mean something "innate"? >Some common definitions of the west are white people Well hold on. I thought "the west" could only mean something "innate"? What makes makes the US "innately" white? The US is 30% non-white, after all.
      - pseudalopex 2y ago
        > Okay, so your argument is that "the west" can only mean something "innate"? Karp said the west is innately superior. JumpCrisscross suggested this was acceptable because democracies are innately superior to autocracies. But western countries are not innately democratic. And democracy is not innately western. Superiority is not innate if its basis is not innate. > What makes makes the US "innately" white? People who define the west as white people do not consider all Americans part of the west. And I said it was a common definition. Not good.

polotics 2y ago

Well at least for pigs, cross-breeding is innately superior to consanguinity.... I don't think that is what Palantir's boss was getting at here though.