>>736915Doesn't the use of the term 'subhuman' implicitly unravel any logical animosity towards Nazis as you yourself concede that there's biological constructs who appear to be human but not actually if we dissect them. Or maybe you just like saying that word as a new tacky way to vent out your frustration while curdling the meaning of it once more.
I dunno, I think a more sensible use of the word 'subhuman' is used to refer to people who merely taxonomically conform to the term 'human' but lack the epistemic, mental, and cerebral faculties used to facilitate advanced civilizations on a scale which historically separated humans from other primates.
You're not an idealist aren't you? I believe that us socialists are too advanced to continue to assume that collectives all share the same equal strengths and therefore are entitled to the same fruits. Alot of you are atheists so it must be clear that no god put a hand at making men equal, as 'equality' is a social construct that has never appeared to any meaningful constraint in nature. Introspectively applying material analysis into that of modern human populations it's abundantly clear that their biological faculties preconditions the potential productive capacity that they hold, and extrapolating this paradigm to collectives it becomes obviously clear that some social groups are more 'productive' than others. Verily, it is logical social practice to cull the inproductive social groups and let the more productive ones proliferate in a society to achieve a higher state of socialization.
im black btw