What's the appeal of egalitarianism? I feel like 90% of

>>128231816
They know they are losers and identify with other losers. It's a rabid lash against fate and the blind inheritance of nature and reality in general.

> I also don't understand why a group that treats the theory of evolution as a surigate bible adopts the exact opposite of darwinism in thier political thinking.
For a while they straight up denied survival of the fittest and shit out a bunch of pseudo-science

>>128233451
any links?

>>128233660
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
Enjoy

File: hqdefault (1).jpg (19KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 480x360px

>>128235696
>In 1948, genetics was officially declared "a bourgeois pseudoscience";[14] all geneticists were fired from their jobs (some were also arrested), and all genetic research was discontinued.

Over 3,000 biologists were imprisoned, fired, or executed for attempting to oppose Lysenkoism at one time and overall, scientific research in genetics was effectively destroyed until the death of Stalin in 1953.[3] Due to Lysenkoism, crop yields in the USSR actually declined as well.

>>128231816
there is no appeal, it's just people who are bitter that they suck at life and want government to hold their hand at the expense of everyone else so everybody is equally miserable

>>128235696
Never taken seriously outside the USSR, and even there he was eventually discredited though.

How can everyone be equal if everyone is different due to genetic variances? And in some cases, why wouldn't the ruling class want to promote dim-witted, reliant subjects instead of people who could potentially be self-sufficient?

File: 21b2cdc8a0b5f02306984daf2f7cc68fcb3f07f1b920a26f535494310194c1f6.jpg (70KB, 732x672px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 732x672px

>>128237377
Genetic variances are appearntly a bourgeois spook.

>>128231816
Because it is the only way liberals' theory of the tabula rasa and the noble savage can ever make sense.

They think that characteristic differences could never ever be anything more than superficial and cosmetic, despite this rule being completely false elsewhere in the animal kingdom, where different breeds of a species have completely different behaviours and instincts. Funnily enough, it is straight up denial of science that is actually settled.

I've seen taught in schools: Darwin's evolutionary theory is taught to only apply to animals, and you cannot mention natural selection in humans because that's WHAT THE NAHTZEES DID.

It's just human exceptionalism and the inability of many people to see humans as just another species that is just as fallible to change as other animals. It's a comfortable thought to have, for you mustn't think further than "we're all human".