Governments actually don't want to help suicidal people

[ringo99]

Hear me out before you tell me to take off the tinfoil hat.

TLDR: Suicide is a method of passive eugenics promoted by the govts of the world.

What brought on this rant was the OFCOM notice to SaSu.

Suicidal people don't usually vote or care about voting. According to governments they're not productive constituents so why bother helping them.

Suicidal people are seen as weak and unproductive and so contribute nothing to the economy thus ending up a burden to the state like incarcerated criminals, the chronically unemployed, the homeless and/or drug addicts.

Suicidal people don't voice their opinions out loud since they're usually too depressed to do so. Thus they go unnoticed and only the opinions of pro-lifers are considered for formulating official policy when trying to "help" people like us.

The vast majority of govts do the barest minimum to try and help those who are suicidal. If they really wanted to help they'd be tackling the root causes of suicide; Eliminating financial disparity, the housing crisis and income inequality through making social programs viable would go a long way instead of pouring money into defense or bailing out corrupt one percenter cunts when they inevitably screw up gambling with the economy. Suicide hotlines wouldn't be staffed with drones reading a script. Therapy would be affordable instead of putting us on the path to financial ruin.

This is essentially a win-win scenario for govts. They look good to pro-lifers by banning sites like SaSu despite doing nothing meaningful to address the root issues. They lose constituents who are unproductive and non-vocal and so hold on to their power base. Perversely, the more number of people who take their lives the more they can claim that they're "solving" suicide since fewer people in their constituency may commit suicide in the following years. Statistics can be massaged to show the same. Money is available to spend on other govt functions that pro-lifers care about instead of being "wasted" on us since we're the minority. When someone famous commits suicide they get to post meaningless garbage on facebook or twitter while "pledging" to help suicidal people when in reality nothing changes. They look compassionate while risking nothing at all.

It's a depressing thought but governments secretly want us out of the way so we won't be a burden on them and don't want to risk resources on us even if there's a chance that we can become productive members of society.

What do you guys think? Am I being crazy or is there some truth to what I said?

 

[Pluto]

This seems to me like a very incendiary topic that nobody in the mainstream would want to discuss openly. With the evils of the Holocaust or Khmer Rouge relatively fresh in the populace's memory, every effort needs to be made by the government to distance itself from a mentality of disposing of unloved members of society.

It is all too rational - at least in an utterly amoral way - to let suffering and unproductive people who do not want to be here be granted euthanasia. It would save serious money on social welfare programs. Yet there's something hauntingly Nazi-esque about disposing of society's Untermensch. It would make for terrible PR, and the government must save face by making an exaggerated point of portraying itself as an opponent of such policies.

Not to mention the fact that many so-called victims of suicide do not actually want to die but are unable to cope with insufferable circumstances; this makes for a very fine line between suicide and murder. If the government were to neglect supporting the underclass with the rationale that individuals can be granted euthanasia upon request, the result could be something of a slaughterhouse for the poor; another ethical minefield.

 

[Lost Magic]

A lot of governments just want work horses. Then they keep bumping up the retirement ages so that a lot of people will die off before they get their pensions. They don't give a fuck about suicidal people. To them we are just a nuisance. I think.

 

[ringo99]

This seems to me like a very incendiary topic that nobody in the mainstream would want to discuss openly. With the evils of the Holocaust or Khmer Rouge relatively fresh in the populace's memory, every effort needs to be made by the government to distance itself from a mentality of disposing of unloved members of society.

It is all too rational - at least in an utterly amoral way - to let suffering and unproductive people who do not want to be here be granted euthanasia. It would save serious money on social welfare programs. Yet there's something hauntingly Nazi-esque about disposing of society's Untermensch. It would make for terrible PR, and the government must save face by making an exaggerated point of portraying itself as an opponent of such policies.

Not to mention the fact that many so-called victims of suicide do not actually want to die but are unable to cope with insufferable circumstances; this makes for a very fine line between suicide and murder. If the government were to neglect supporting the underclass with the rationale that individuals can be granted euthanasia upon request, the result could be something of a slaughterhouse for the poor; another ethical minefield.

No government not even authoritarian ones (except maybe north korea) could get away with openly encouraging suicide without colossal public backlash. Relatives and friends of those who commit suicide would be up in arms. I wouldn't so readily equate this to genocide like during the holocaust or in the killing fields. In those cases governments actively sought to destroy entire sections of the human race in accordance with their ideology.

In a way what governments are doing now is more insidious and requires much less effort and resources to accomplish. As long as they keep numbers within "acceptable"" margins they can claim their hands are clean and that they did everything they could.

Take the UK for instance. Their economy is going down the drain and people are struggling immensely while being headed by a trust fund playboy with zero understanding of ground realities. The Online Safety Act does nothing to help the root cause but still makes the government look good to the majority of voters who are pro-lifers. Suicidal people will just turn to less reliable sources of information to ctb possibly leading to worse outcomes. I doubt it will reduce numbers or do anything to help depressed people in the long term.