adolf hitler, people

Questioning: Smart
Assuming accusations are true without proof: not smart

They used science to promote their insane ideals.. Do some research you will see .

I'm fairly well read on the forms of propoganda and pseudo science used to justify all sorts of bad things. Normally in the form of dehumanizing a group. The same sorry I of propoganda that Jews are inferior as a matter of biology was used to justify racism in America as well. It's probably been used forever.

Always be on the lookout for anything or anyone that tells you a race or religion is other or inferior. Whether they claim it under science, religion, or anything else

I don't personally see anything happening like that to be concerned about.

Then you don’t get the meme

I get what you are trying to say. That we are being taught to comply. I just disagree.

I mean, what's next? Speed limits? Seatbelt laws? Public decency laws? Jay walking?

So you believe without speed laws and things of that nature people would just do 100 miles an hour into a building? Do you really believe those things that people are arrested for and find for keep us safe? Don’t believe people have enough sense to do that on their own? And you believe those fines and laws prevent people from breaking them? Then why do we have prisons?

I think moral philosophy and the social contract are a bit heavy for imgflip, but I think most misdemeanors are about keeping things running, not about morality. Without traffic laws in general, the roads would be more dangerous and disorderly. Without 'drive on the right', stop signs, traffic lights, etc. there would be a lot more chaos and accidents. Fines...I think fines for breaking laws are iffy. I'd like to see a study on how effective they are - do cities with lower fines or fewer issued tickets actually end up with more accidents? There's a saying "If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class." But that's a bit off topic. I think some people follow the rules for order/public good, some follow to avoid punishment, and for others its a mix of the two.

Only a moron looks at the history of the world and our own history and blindly trusts the government to have everyone's best interests at heart. Conversely, blind distrust and suspicion just aren't a way to effectively function. I guess my point is compliance is expected for things to work smoothly for everyone. While each additional thing could theoretically be part of conditioning us, it also might be something that just makes sense at the time. My policy is to comply when it makes sense, make noise if it doesn't, and in the event they start doing something that I think really crosses the line, to dissent even more loudly or to refuse to follow the laws.

And as far as the government using science to justify evil - that gives the government too much credit. Antisemitism was rampant in Nazi Germany (and the whole world actually) - Nazi's repeated the pseudoscience that was already out there and then enhanced it to a degree. They told the people what they wanted to hear to justify bad things. Same with African's having 'smaller more aggressive brains' in the US, the trail of tears, and I'm sure similar things in South Africa or anywhere else people sought to justify treating one group as less. My point is the government is just an organization made up of people. Its the peoples motives you have to suspect. If you lose sight and start to think of the government itself has motives then you might focus on the wrong things.

What you need to watch out for is when elected officials start telling you what you want to hear. When they start beating the drums of war (Iraq springs to mind). What you need to watch out for is the true believer leading the pack.

I appreciate your reply thank you