@Nisse_Hult
I have followed SATW for years, and your argument was so awful, that I had to create an account.
But I have read your argument.
In the first paragraph, you claim that @Trineff creates a version that lessens the US's responsibility "for the problem." The problem being alcoholism and tobacco use.
In the second paragraph, you bring up dates facts when Greenland was denied alcohol by Denmark and compare them to Sweden's time of alcohol rationing. Which, by the way, is not the same thing. A country government having power over another country's alcohol is not the same thing as a government choosing to cut back alcohol.
Your third paragraph you argue the decades' timelines. But it is the final paragraph that is quite chilling. So I will have to go through it point by point.
The theory is simple enough:
It's a known historical fact that Europe has - for many centuries - produced stronger alcohol and consumed more of it than any other part of the world.
Really? More than the Mayans? More than the Aboriginal people? More than the Navajos? What are your statistics, or are you pulling this out of your ass?
The individuals most susceptible to alcohol have as a consequence of this simply died off or not been able to carry their genes on as successfully in Europe, effectively culling more of our gene pool of these individuals of high susceptibility.
That is Eugenics talk. You are suggesting that Europeans that got sloshed after one drink have died out generations ago due to genetics is completely ridiculous and not how genes work.
Indigenous peoples, who have lived for millennia without being exposed to an endless supply of strong alcohol, simply didn't have a chance when we Europeans unleashed our "firewater" upon them.
Unless the Greenlanders are like the Japanese and have a gene that makes them allergic to alcohol, which they don't, then your point is moot. You are arguing that the lack of alcohol created a gene or a lack of a gene that makes the Greenlanders unable to handle their alcohol, and you use the American Somoa, a completely DIFFERENT society and an example using McDonald's to try to prove your point. Apples and oranges.
Now anything to do with genes is a sensitive subject, since it conjures up connections to racism and opinions on the supposed superiority of different "races".
But viewed as it should be - as a consequence of Europeans killing of many of the carriers of genes susceptible to the drug of alcohol by over centuries drinking themselves to death - it's certainly not a sign of any European "superiority".
Just as Europeans developing increased immunity to syphilis and all kinds of diseases - venereal and other - compared to indigenous peoples it's not either.
Buddy, Europeans didn't develop immunity to syphilis, it is called modern medicine.
Finally, you claim that I am a troll because you didn't want to deal with my response. However, I stand by it. You and @Tzenker have created an incredibly racist argument by shifting the blame off the Danish government and projecting the Greenlanders problems onto themselves. All of a sudden, the years of colonization and oppression doesn't exist, and the Greenlanders are alcoholics because they don't have the proper genes. It's condescending and wrong.
You call me a troll but your ignorance rivals that of a Trump voter.
0
@Nisse_Hult
I have followed SATW for years, and your argument was so awful, that I had to create an account.
But I have read your argument.
In the first paragraph, you claim that @Trineff creates a version that lessens the US's responsibility "for the problem." The problem being alcoholism and tobacco use.
In the second paragraph, you bring up dates facts when Greenland was denied alcohol by Denmark and compare them to Sweden's time of alcohol rationing. Which, by the way, is not the same thing. A country government having power over another country's alcohol is not the same thing as a government choosing to cut back alcohol.
Your third paragraph you argue the decades' timelines. But it is the final paragraph that is quite chilling. So I will have to go through it point by point.
The theory is simple enough:
It's a known historical fact that Europe has - for many centuries - produced stronger alcohol and consumed more of it than any other part of the world.
Really? More than the Mayans? More than the Aboriginal people? More than the Navajos? What are your statistics, or are you pulling this out of your ass?
The individuals most susceptible to alcohol have as a consequence of this simply died off or not been able to carry their genes on as successfully in Europe, effectively culling more of our gene pool of these individuals of high susceptibility.
That is Eugenics talk. You are suggesting that Europeans that got sloshed after one drink have died out generations ago due to genetics is completely ridiculous and not how genes work.
Indigenous peoples, who have lived for millennia without being exposed to an endless supply of strong alcohol, simply didn't have a chance when we Europeans unleashed our "firewater" upon them.
Unless the Greenlanders are like the Japanese and have a gene that makes them allergic to alcohol, which they don't, then your point is moot. You are arguing that the lack of alcohol created a gene or a lack of a gene that makes the Greenlanders unable to handle their alcohol, and you use the American Somoa, a completely DIFFERENT society and an example using McDonald's to try to prove your point. Apples and oranges.
Now anything to do with genes is a sensitive subject, since it conjures up connections to racism and opinions on the supposed superiority of different "races".
But viewed as it should be - as a consequence of Europeans killing of many of the carriers of genes susceptible to the drug of alcohol by over centuries drinking themselves to death - it's certainly not a sign of any European "superiority".
Just as Europeans developing increased immunity to syphilis and all kinds of diseases - venereal and other - compared to indigenous peoples it's not either.
Buddy, Europeans didn't develop immunity to syphilis, it is called modern medicine.
Finally, you claim that I am a troll because you didn't want to deal with my response. However, I stand by it. You and @Tzenker have created an incredibly racist argument by shifting the blame off the Danish government and projecting the Greenlanders problems onto themselves. All of a sudden, the years of colonization and oppression doesn't exist, and the Greenlanders are alcoholics because they don't have the proper genes. It's condescending and wrong.
You call me a troll but your ignorance rivals that of a Trump voter.