Intelligence is only good up to a point. The successful people I know were not the best students and their parents were not the most obsessive parents. Those kids generally ended up having more difficult and troubled lives. Trying to make your kids geniuses is a mistake.
Upon reading this the next day, I realize it could use a concrete example:
"We should pass a law to strip all legal rights from, and enslave, everyone who is of [pick some minority group]. Neither I, nor most people, belong to that minority, so most of us will benefit from this slave labor."
That's a logical argument. Thankfully, most people today would find it morally repugnant and unacceptable.
The interesting question is why having a different definition of the German people than "anyone who happened to come here and has lived here for a while" should be considered an extreme position. Throwing out all history and ancestry as a core component of the identity of a group of people seems rather like the extreme view.
It seems like the difference is between a cultural understanding and a legal one. The legal bar to be considered German is citizenship, which is what is being discussed in the context of a political party's official policy.
It would be an extreme view to say a person who immigrated to Germany and recently attained citizenship has more German ancestry than someone who was born in Germany to parents who were born in Germany but I don't think anyone is saying that. The point is just that "unequal German" doesn't make sense because German is referring to citizenship; it's either "German" or "not German", never "German, but lesser".
Yes, traditionally women would engage in passive aggressive slights and backhanded compliments more than men would, who would more likely engage in a physical fight. That is a pattern based on historical reality and observed and acknowledged the world over. Your attempt to make it a pathology to recognize and affirm the observation is itself a pathology, a rabid ideological one.
