hnsucks2

By the way, we already do this! We let millions starve to death in squalor already. Why? For the sake of civilization. Or do you think it'd be smart to ship them all over here? Amazing how timid we are about weighing life against life in a controlled fashion when this is already happening every day. We can't even have a little hypothetical chat on the Internet about it.

For a start, the cities you list contain many valuable people. Places doing lots of slash-and-burn farming, not so much. My original comment was a bit facetious, but if it is a civilization-ending threat (and I'm not saying it is), better to start the killing sooner when we can control who dies than collapse the whole thing and lose thousands of years of scientific and cultural progress.

Does nerve gas harm trees?

>First we'd have to stop the massive deforestation that's happening right now. A lot of that is for agriculture, so we'd have to find another way to feed those people.

You say that like we couldn't just let them starve. If their descendants are going to be wiped out by global warming anyway what's the difference?

Where else are they going to go? There is a "significant overlap" between social justice and anti-white, anti-male, anti-cis propaganda. There's no convenient label to stick on that one just yet, but if you want to be consistent you're going to have to paint all social justice people with that brush.

"Boring question", yet you responded to it. Reality is "complicated", yet the move is "obviously positive". Others think it would be "obviously positive" for social justice accounts to be suspended. Many self-described social justice activists engage in racist and sexist rhetoric. Will you be just as enthusiastic to throw the label "bigot" on them? Will you be just as quick to lump them all in together?

We don't have to look far back in history to see what it would be like to live under "communists", either.

Are the banned "alt-right" commentators commensurate with ISIS propagandists? If so, how much else ought to be banned? Black power groups? Anti-fascist groups? Many "social justice" accounts post anti-white, anti-male messages with impunity. Should we then paint all people concerned with social justice with the same brush?

It's rather glib, actually. There is a legitimate question of whether companies like Twitter should operate with neutrality on these issues, regardless of how poorly the issue is broached.