A marginalized group does not receive human rights, they are stripped of them. The removal of your birthrights should be violently opposed as soon as possible.

  • Vegan btw (LOUD)@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    oppression people is an action(a thought such as making the other village the enemy put into action) while not oppressing people is nothing(natural).

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So a bear choosing to eat me isn’t natural?

      If we say “okay, bears are natural so anything they choose to do is natural” then you have a problem because humans are natural too.

      That’s why I made the distinction between humans and nature. Everything humans do is unnatural, including when we choose to do nothing at all.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, anything that can be debated internally with words or even with feelings.

          The only human behavior I think that can be called natural is truly thoughtless or automatic action. Natural breathing is when you breathe without thinking about it, unnatural breathing is when you become conscious of your own breath and start thinking about it. And it really does feel unnatural! I’m sure you’re manually breathing now too, and I’m sure you’d agree it’s quite different from natural breathing.

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Animal intelligence and its products and human intelligence and its products are fundamentally the same. If beaver dam is natural then Three Gorges Dam is also natural. Difference is only in degree of sophistication.

      • JucheBot1988@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Animal intelligence and its products and human intelligence and its products are fundamentally the same.

        This may be true from the “outside” – i.e., from the perspective of some hypothetical non-human observer – but what it doesn’t consider, I think, is the subject-object distinction so important to historical progress. Humanity experiences itself most purely as subject (intelligible) and the non-human worldmost purely as object (alien and unintelligible). Since humanity begins in bondage to external nature, the original traumatic experience is the collective discovery that subject is in fact, and from a certain view that may be considered more “correct,” also object, and this with regard to the brute, unintelligible forces of external nature. Historical progress is humanity asserting and maximizing its subjectivity by control over the external world. Thus, dialectically, a real distinction between humanity and nature develops. Nature is that which cannot be known (by humanity) as subject, and over which humanity is struggling to assert control; humanity is that which can be known as subject, which itself struggles, and which is experienced as struggling. The precise boundary between the natural and the human is discovered and created within the conflict itself.