With apologies for opening yet another thread... This is prompted partly by a comment on a website:
Revisionist:---
With respect - or perhaps not - 'socialism' was a serious egalitarian movement in Britain, supported by a vast range of people - Ruskin, Wells, Keir Hardie, William Morris, F D Maurice, Russell, Oscar Wilde, and so on. It has NOTHING TO DO with the counterfeit movement fronted by Zionist Jews and bankers, who committed mass murder in the USSR. The anti-free speech mobs are NOT socialists; they are funded and backed by the same people that supported Trotsky and Lenin. ...
Reply from 'Powys'---
I neither have the time or inclination to discuss each of the individuals that you listed, but suffice it to state that each of them were philosophically aligned with the leading communists and differed only in methodology -- never as to ends. I do not see Fabianism or Labour Party socialism as ever being a "serious egalitarian movement", it was and is all about class warfare and "social justice" and possesses all of the bankrupt baggage associated with those notions. Incidentally, HG Wells and the fellow you left off your list, Bernard Shaw, were both Fabians and proponents of that delightful "science" euthenasia [sic], you know, that other delightful socialist idea pushed to its logical conclusion by Adolph Hitler and his socialist friends.
Notice that Powys dodges the issue of the Jewish connection to Communism. However, his argument such as it is then veers of into a comment on euthanasia, though I think he may have meant 'eugenics'. (eu + genes = neologism coined to mean ''good genes'. As compared with dys + genes = 'bad genes').
Greek 'thanatos' = death, So eu = good + thanatos = 'good death', as in mercy killings, or soldiers killing a friend who's been almost blown to bits. A lot of people seem to confuse those two words!
Eugenics was based on advances in biology - though there is nothing new in selective breeding; it's just that science was missing, and indeed still is, despite Mendel (who was largely ignored because people weren't interested in genes which just did one simple thing) and Darwin and others. The hypothesis here is that it's yet another 'Jewish intellectual movement'. They seem to all want, and to be almost genetically-driven, to damage their host communities, and all their policies - killing off Russian intellectuals, bombing German women and children, making American education debased, supporting genocide in the third world, supporting mass immigration of fecund and unskilled and uneducated people, and - important here - backing thugs against anyone discussing eugenics - seem directed to that end.
It occurs to me that blacks in particular would benefit from eugenics - if you accept that the top range of black talent is equal to white, which seems doubtful, if they got their act together they might get somewhere. Just a thought.