Nonsense spews forth from the parrot's beak.
People aren’t going to make the sacrifices necessary to save Europa over a superstitious claim that their genetic data has moral pathos of some kind.
A person who believes in the juvenile “Big Daddy Sky God” superstition has the…let us say chutzpah….to assert that a deep (and ultimately emotional) concern (“moral pathos”) for one’s genetic interests – those interests being an objective quantifiable fact is “superstitition.”
Even the people promoting that don’t actually believe that.
What kind of insanely mendacious turd assumes to know the beliefs of ideological opponents. I DO believe that, you idiot.
If you woke up tomorrow as an Indigenous Australian, you wouldn’t suddenly begin doggedly defending your new genetic interests.
What kind of silly argument is this? Fantasies are not arguments. I’m not an indigenous Australian, but I do believe that they have every right to “doggedly defend” their genetic interests.
You’d find a new way to rationalize fighting for the White heritage and identify you’ve come to love and identify with on an abstract level, not as an instinctive genetic imperative.
It’s not “instinctive,” lying jackass. Salter openly states we are talking about rational thought mechanisms. Of course, we can become very emotionally invested in interests that we value highly, but no need to invoke “instincts” (or “genes for altruism”).