this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
536 points (99.4% liked)

politics

23101 readers
3104 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

RFK Jr. is using private medical records to create a registry of people with autism in the United States.

The National Institutes of Health is helping to collect private medical records from government and commercial databases, including “prescription records from pharmacies, lab testing, and genomics records from the Department of Veterans Affairs and Indian Health Service, private insurance claims, and data from smartwatches and fitness trackers.”

Kennedy, a longtime critic of vaccination, has made the study of autism one of HHS’s primary goals. He has called autism “preventable” and claimed “he can find a cure for the condition by September.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Second, Asperger was a Nazi, and the child euthanasia program was one of the main projects which experimented with the tools and machinery of mass murder that would later be used in extermination camps.

Let's not demonize him, the whole point he separated the "Asperger syndrome" from the more notable parts of the spectrum is to prevent some of those children from being killed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

"Let's not demonize the Nazi, didn't you know he undertook the arduous and benevolent task of creating a special category just for those of you that were exploitable for your labour? Sure he had a bunch of you exterminated but he sterilized and saved some for work and that should count for something."

Utterly repugnant worldview. If at any point you find yourself coming up with reasons to defend a Nazi, and you don't take a moment to look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself what the fuck you're doing, you're failing as a human.

Someone who actively participated in the mass murder of children might have redeeming qualities (and I'd argue the one you think you're highlighting isn't one at all), but none of them will ever outweigh the fact that they are monstrously inhuman.

Do you have any idea how profoundly his work has negatively impacted every autistic person since? We're still trying to excise all the fucked up useless gendered concepts his perspective injected into the diagnostics. The notions that we lack empathy, have some kind of extreme "male intellect" and/or psychopathy, that the way we're born is some kind of defect in humanity that must be studied and purged, that's his legacy.

He was one of the first to try to identify and categorize us, not out of altruism, but because he saw us as a diseased branch of humanity that was situationally useful but ultimately unworthy of life. If that's not worthy of demonization then I don't know what is.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

You might want to read something by his contemporaries on autism, those who were not Nazis so that association can't be immediately used against them. Also read how people diagnosed autistic were treated in, for example, USA.

didn’t you know he undertook the arduous and benevolent task of creating a special category just for those of you that were exploitable for your labour?

Compared to sending all of a bunch to a gas chamber sending only part is morally preferable. Obviously. Mentally impaired people were by default intended for extermination in Nazi Germany. The "Asperger's syndrome" diagnosis allowed some of autistic people to be considered curious, borderline genius, pathway to making a new supersoldier/superscientist or anything like that not involving euthanasia.

If at any point you find yourself coming up with reasons to defend a Nazi,

I don't care for emotional arguments containing no logical structure. Trying to feed that to your counterparts instead of something meaningful is the most morally repugnant position on any subject. The more morally loaded the subject is, the more repugnant it is to try this.

Do you have any idea how profoundly his work has negatively impacted every autistic person since?

His work should be considered in the context of others' work of the same time.

The notions that we lack empathy,

There are three things called empathy, of which autistic people have problems with one, and psychopaths with another. This is correct.

have some kind of extreme “male intellect”

Maybe you'd like it back in your cell, your highness? Oops, it's not exactly a cell, it's a gas chamber.

and/or psychopathy

It's not a weird concept, it's the obsolete use of the term. In the 40s psychopathy meant basically every disorder with intelligence not necessarily lower than average.

He was one of the first to try to identify and categorize us, not out of altruism, but because he saw us as a diseased branch of humanity that was situationally useful but ultimately unworthy of life. If that’s not worthy of demonization then I don’t know what is.

As I said, sending all of the bunch to the gas chamber instead of some.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago

If you think that eugenicist views being more common at the time is any kind of defense you're sorely mistaken, and if you think there's much of a difference between someone who kills kids and one who tries to decide which kids are worth killing first, you're wrong.

That first reply was for everyone else and reality check for you, but seeing as you seem intent on ignoring it I'm not going to bother wasting any more of my time interacting with you. I truly hope you come to realize how fucking disgusting your perspective is, I've tried to explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.