Antismoker "final solution"

Status
Not open for further replies.

DrMA

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 26, 2013
2,989
9,887
Seattle area

WorksForMe

Ultra Member
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 21, 2012
2,021
4,778
N.N., Virginia
Militant antismoker extremists call for the extermination of 1.24 billion smokers worldwide by 2040.

Please explain this statement. Although I don't totally understand the ANTZ speak in this article, I don't see anything that says or implies that they want to kill smokers.
 

Scottitude

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 18, 2010
1,496
1,379
Metro Detroit
scottitude.net
"Exterminate" is a more than a little hyperbolic but absent the Murder-Death-Kill notion, the theory is fantastically plausible.

Reminds me of a movie from the 90s about such a controlling society where:
citizens have "joy-joy feelings'
advise agitated people to "enhance your calm"
welcome each other with words like "mellow greetings" and part with "be well"
human interactions involving "fluid transfer" are illegal
people who violate Verbal Morality Statutes are fined one credit for each occurrence
as a result the Franchise Wars all restaurants, no matter the price point, are called Taco Bell
all the radio stations play "mini tunes" (hot dogs - Arrrrmor hot-dogs...)
and San Angeles is the home of the Arnold Schwarzenegger Presidential Library.​

The future could be a crazy place!
 

ckquatt

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Oct 8, 2013
2,962
8,493
Milledgeville, GA
Am I missing something? The article reads to me like a pro ecig (smokeless tobacco) statement.

In regards to the last bit about ecigs, I'm reading that switching to ecigs can be the start to pushing combustible tobacco out the door. (The article specifically states theyre talking about smoking tobacco and not smokeless tobacco)

I'm not reading a "doomsday senario" into this one. Sorry. That sounds to me like a bit of fear mongering...
 
Last edited:

LaraC

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 6, 2013
283
1,229
Tennessee
Am I missing something? The article reads to me like a pro ecig (smokeless tobacco) statement.

In regards to the last bit about ecigs, I'm reading that switching to ecigs can be the start to pushing combustible tobacco out the door. (The article specifically states theyre talking about smoking tobacco and not smokeless tobacco)

I'm not reading a "doomsday senario" into this one. Sorry. That sounds to me like a bit of fear mongering...

The final statement was confusingly worded, yes. Beaglehole was quoted as saying, "With the growing popularity of the unregulated e-cigarettes in the United States—especially among young people—this may be the proper approach to take in regards to tobacco control across the world."

Regarding e-cigarettes, his use of the buzzword "unregulated" and buzz phrase "especially among young people" in the last paragraph got my attention, so I googled a bit more about Beaglehole and Bonita.

Beaglehole and Bonita were among the 129 people who signed the scaremongering anti-ecig letter organized by Glantz and sent to WHO director Margaret Chan in 2014. Given that they signed that mess, I don't believe either Beaglehole or Bonita are e-cig friendly at all.

A critique of the letter is here:
Defending proper science and evidence: our second letter to the WHO, exposing mis-presentation of evidence in the Glantz letter

The scaremongering letter itself is in a link called "response-letter" in the first paragraph on that page.

I didn't take Beaglehole's statement "this may be the proper approach" to be supportive of electronic cigarettes. I thought the "proper approach" he was referring to is his desire for the WHO and other agencies to fully commit to his goal of a tobacco free world.

I believe he would regard vapor plumes and the looks-like-smoking actions of using electronic cigarettes as interfering with his goal of getting tobacco "out of sight, out of mind, and out of fashion."
 

Racehorse

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 12, 2012
11,230
28,254
USA midwest
I didn't read the article. I saw the word exterminate and that was it for me.

I would have no interest in rubbing elbows or even arguing with these kind of ...um....*people*.

You must never have been to storm____ or any of the survivalist type forums (I accidently went there about 10 years ago). Filled with white supremicists and what not.

People who want to exterminate other people are mentally ill. You will be taking your chances re: being stalked etc. by crazy people on the internet, who might actually do you harm.

No thanks. Seen it before. Smokers are only one group.....many forums and posters all over the internet who feel same way about "other" groups, i.e gays, people with brown skin, unwed mothers, women who have terminated pregnancies, etc.

I really caution everyone here not to get involved with this. You can't *fix* people like this, they are very sick.

This is why I don't like sentiments about hate of any kind. It's a dark place for dark psychotics.
 
Last edited:

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US
Not all survivalist forums are National Socialists/..... but some are, and those get their history (as did Hitler) from some of the American Progressives who are held up as icons in the liberal movement today.

History News Network | The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

"Even the United States Supreme Court endorsed aspects of eugenics. In its infamous 1927 decision, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, "It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind…. Three generations of imbeciles are enough." This decision opened the floodgates for thousands to be coercively sterilized or otherwise persecuted as subhuman. Years later, the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials quoted Holmes's words in their own defense."

wiki: Margaret Sanger - progressive

"As part of her efforts to promote birth control, Sanger found common cause with proponents of eugenics, believing that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit."[85] Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing the reproduction of those who were considered unfit.[86] Sanger's eugenic policies included an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family planning autonomy for the able-minded, and compulsory segregation or sterilization for the profoundly ......ed.[87][88] In her book The Pivot of Civilization, she advocated coercion to prevent the "undeniably feeble-minded" from procreating.[89] Although Sanger supported negative eugenics, she asserted that eugenics alone was not sufficient, and that birth control was essential to achieve her goals.[90][91][92]

Sanger's writings echoed ideas about inferiority and loose morals of particular races that were widespread in the contemporary United States."

Margaret Sanger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Jman8

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2013
6,419
12,928
Wisconsin
Militant antismoker extremists call for the extermination of 1.24 billion smokers worldwide by 2040. As if that's not egregious enough, this reads to me as if they're appropriating vaping as a weapon in their fanatical crusade.

New Zealand Health Authorities Lead Charge For Tobacco-Free World | Diabetes Insider

This is completely unacceptable. Vapers and smokers need to unite forces right now and destroy the TC parasitic cabal once and for all.

I very much agree with the last statement.

And lately, am very much finding agreement with your stated or implied politics on ECF.

But (also) don't see the linked article or the Clive Bates piece as calling for extermination of smokers.

I'm all up for hitting back on most to all anti-smoking efforts and enjoy debating whomever dares to step to the plate on this issue. Most of them routinely appear like sheep to me, that have zero critical thinking skills and sound like parrots that stammer when questioned on any of their ideological claims. If I need to make this point stronger, I will.

But again, I just don't see OP link as saying extermination and do see it saying that use of eCigs will plausibly lead to end of smoking worldwide. I don't see that as possible, but do think it is a) pro eCigs and b) not entirely off base. I think for as long as there's a physical reality, there will be smoking/smokers, but also thinking smoking may become obsolete in say similar way to vinyl albums, or even CD's for that matter. I would find it impossible to believe anyone claiming that smoking will be completely eradicated from this planet while also saying there are still people living on the planet.
 

philoshop

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 21, 2014
1,702
4,306
geneva, ny, usa
With the current regulations, a non-smoker cannot be accidentally exposed to a dangerous quantity of tobacco smoke (against his own will that is). So why exactly does smoking need to be "exterminated"?

For some people that extermination has become their raison d'etre. I disagree with their thinking on many levels, but foremost would be their attempts to legislate that thinking.
 

caramel

Vaping Master
Dec 23, 2014
3,492
10,735
I am aware that for some "experts" it has become a swim or sink exercise since they're not employable otherwise.

But the government? Money comes whether we smoke or not. It's not an existential issue for them.

I'm looking at this in view of Kent's post above and the attempt to create "the perfect worker" that doesn't smoke, drink or have any hobbies that would consume additional "resources" to what he needs for just working.
 

DrMA

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 26, 2013
2,989
9,887
Seattle area
As Clive Bates' post highlights, both the number of smokers and the quantity of cigarettes sold has always been increasing globally. In spite if shrill TC propaganda, There is no decline in smoking outside a few developed countries. Thus, TC calls to "turbocharge" elimination of smoking and make it happen within 30 years can only mean one thing: draconian antismoker measures leading to rampant atrocities and human rights abuses.

http://antithrlies.com/2015/03/04/endgame-the-islamic-state-approach-to-tobacco-control/

I will not be part of such an atrocious scheme and refuse to allow vaping to be dragged onto such a course. The only viable way forward for smokers and vapers is to destroy the TC fundamentalist cabal and prosecute those criminals for their past and intended crimes against humanity.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread