Then why not remove posts that inevitably lead to ideological battle? I do not see that you have banned the accounts of my interlocutors. I also do not see that my account was used primarily for ideological battle.
Taking note of the context within which an acronym or abbreviation is used is part of being an informed reader. In this case, one does not even have to go to the link to get a clue as the URL is right here on HN.
Everyone I know (and know of) espouses obvious claptrap from time to time. If that is the sieve with which you denote undesirables to remove from your personal sphere, your circle either has a radius of 1 or you delude yourself about your detection abilities.
How do you (unconsciously) select for attributes that do not exist? It was not until several generations that the first physiological changes began to be observed and those were in hormone levels, not morphology. In fact, the physiological, anatomical, and morphological changes were entirely unanticipated. The testing & categorization methodology is described in the article:
The tests for tameness took the following form, which was still in use as of 2009. "When a pup is one month old, an experimenter offers it food from his hand while trying to stroke and handle the pup. The pups are tested twice, once in a cage and once while moving freely with other pups in an enclosure, where they can choose to make contact either with the human experimenter or with another pup. The test is repeated monthly until the pups are six or seven months old." At the age of seven or eight months, the pups are given a tameness score and placed in one of three groups. The least domesticated are in Class III; those that allow humans to pet and handle them, but that do not respond to contact with friendliness, are in Class II; the ones that are friendly with humans are in Class I.[5] After only six generations, Belyayev and his team had to add a higher category, Class IE, the "domesticated elite", which "are eager to establish human contact, whimpering to attract attention and sniffing and licking experimenters like dogs. They start displaying this kind of behavior before they are one month old."
What is a racist? Is this a fixed idea or does it change year to year and depend on the context? Shouldn't we be careful about writing off people based on fluctuating social mores? What about fascists, Marxists, communists, and anarchists? And, say, Trump supporters? Do they deserve basic human respect? Is there any reason not to dehumanize these groups too? Or others who fail our moral tests?
I dispute that avoiding obesity requires either exercise or high-quality nutrition. It is simply a matter of maintaining a caloric balance at a healthy weight. This can be effectively controlled entirely on the intake side. (See the nutritionist who lost weight and improved his bloodwork on a gas station junk food diet. [0]) Other countries with varied labor and economic conditions (presumably among them are some you would not label medieval) are experiencing the same obesity pandemic. There is nothing unique about the US in this regard other than it has been leading the trend.
Ideology is a relatively new (taking the long view of human history) mechanism for demarcating tribal affiliation that is a uniquely powerful tool for sowing discord and disunity among people who otherwise have every reason to owe allegiance to and be socially bound to one another.
Dmitri Belyayev's decades-long study on silver foxes produced animals that began to distinguish markedly different morphological features (bushy tails, floppy ears, spotted coats) and physiology (lower adrenaline and stress hormone levels, smaller skulls, longer breeding seasons, larger litter sizes) by selecting strictly for tameness, which they defined simply as aggression toward humans.[0] Belyayev was forced to live in Siberia to carry out this work as Mendelian geneticists and biologists were officially condemned (denounced as "fascist" and many were executed) by the Soviet state as it supported Lysenkoism, a Lamarckian psuedo-scientific theory that minimized the role of genes on behavior, which allied well with Soviet and Marxist ideology.
What does someone who has spent his academic career with a tailored education program that provides extra time to complete tasks and take tests do upon entering the workforce? Will employers go the extra mile to cater to his needs? Will the market do likewise for his business or product? If I could have taken as long as I wanted on the SAT, I probably would have been able to get a perfect score. But then I wouldn't have been taking the same test as everyone else, would I?
Obesity is a sign of improved living conditions that is also a sign of declining living conditions. The former conditions are largely out of the individual's control while the latter conditions are largely in his control. That is, being able to be obese is dictated by the economic vitality of one's country whereas being obese is dictated by one's actions.
Why do you characterize normal parental investment as privilege? Is it to exculpate parents who neglect their children? Again, as the students in The Promise School not only enjoyed these "privileges" but also twice as much schooling, what would happen if all students received twice as much schooling? Does it stand to reason that the claimed success in closing the achievement gap would persist? In terms of resource allocation, why should some populations be excluded from receiving this additional benefit?
I have never heard anyone express any prejudice toward "Asians" regarding a lack of intelligence. In fact, the usual stereotype is precisely the opposite.
"Society" is just another tribe, one that may wish to eradicate your culture. In a multicultural society, whose tribe is deemed "problematic" and whose is "normal?"