some people can rise above their animal nature which is why some people are compassionate towards the disabled.

Reactionary take. Animal nature in people which allegedly leads to the death of disabled. Something you find in the bible, but for real not in real life.

As for the majority of society, the reason sick people aren’t simply killed is because people want to feel like good people.

Or maybe they don’t want to see people die, no matter if disabled or not. You can find explanations, why in certain episodes in the history of humanity the treatment of disabled people was different. But you choose to reduce it to animal nature, human nature and “people want to feel good”. Even liberals started to question why the holocaust could happen, despite so much “civilisation” and came to better answers for the reason of atrocities committed by humans then “animal nature”. You seem to think, that everyone wants you death. You maybe frustrated, but your arguments have still reactionary tendencies. The whole human nature thing is wrong. Especially how can you ignore the fact, that its always a certain type of people which push the narrative, that disabled people are a burden and influence heavily others?

So they have set up a society in which there is a bare-minimum, difficult to access welfare state.

They didn’t simply set up a society. For long time there was simply nothing and in many countries still is. Every counter reform against the working class is pushed by a certain class, openly. The welfare state is a reaction to the fights of the working class, like in other countries. They dismantle it and make the narrative. But you conclude it like everything was created by not disabled people against disabled. However they are still alive, because people want to show others, that they are morally fine.

This way they keep costs down, kill off the disabled bit by bit yet can pretend it’s not by design and that they’re actually trying to help.

The bourgeois state has still no interest to help the sick and disabled. Your mistake is, that you think its “society” as whole who wants disabled and sick people dead.

If a black person in America talks about their experiences of racism there, and how historically they were slaves, would you say “Why only choose those examples?” And talk about times and places you think black people were treated well?

No, because it would be historically correct. Racism in the US and Europe has a direct line to the enslavement of African people. But you are making connection between Sparta and today. How was it in Attica then, were the disabled treated better or worse? Is this a general trend in that time how disabled people were treated as whole? And if yes, is this now the explanation, why the NHS is denying basic things? Also the dude from the 16 century. Why him as reference? Believe it or not, I am disabled and my possibilities to work are limited. But I never would explain the bad treatment of disabled people with Sparta. Your experience is valid. But your arguments are not right.

It’s also pointless to argue with someone who thinks leaving people to die because they’re disabled is acceptable,

That’s the point which makes me lose any respect towards you. I didn’t say it, you make it up. I asked you for a source, because google only gave me shitty newsarticles about Great Britain, corona and nothing about what I looked for. Furthermore you claimed, that it would be some nazi eugenic shit, if a doctor had to decide in a catastrophic situation who has to live or not, if not enough doctors are available. That’s where I simply explained, that a Triage is nothing like nazi eugenic.

But you ignore it and now I am apparently support the death of disabled people how Great Britain had done it with disabled people.

Triage is treating the people with the most urgent medical need first. It’s not saying “This person’s life is less valuable and more of a burden to society so we won’t treat them at all.” That is actually eugenics.

Still no. Triage is about setting priorities who should be treated, IF medical resources are limited. The question is there, who should benefit the most from those resources. Its not about disabled people. The “less valuable” are your words, not mine. Nothing I said.