Hello i am a rather prominent figure in my country currently tasked with making a case for a eugenics program. I was wondering if anyone opposed to eugenics would care to make a case as to why a eugenics program would be non-beneficial to any country on this earth. I know any opposition towards eugenics is impossible as it is the only way we may progress ;)
What is the defining factor above all that causes a utopia to fall? The fact that the utopian man thinks the utopia can and will be built by and for the inferior man. When a genetic mutation occurs in Man A which would cause man A to be extremely weak or of extremely low intelligence or any other non-beneficial new trait then the 'utopian' will say that is of no importance and the rest will just pick up his slack. But in any populace that has been together for a long period of time a haplotype/haplogroup will form which is essentially where the entire populace has interbred enough that they now share a common distant ancestor (this is natural and causes no negative affects at this point as long as all the ancestors were strong and healthy) But the problem arises when Man A is one of these shared ancestors because he was allowed to breed and become a part of the gene pool. Another way negative evolution occurs and is the most drastic form of negative evolution today is when a superior or a group which is more adapted to a region mixes with an out-group member which is inferior or less adapted to the region then their offspring stays in that region and stays in the genepool. The problem with all forms of inferiority whether through mutation or otherwise is that it will stay in the gene pool forever and his descendants will always be inferior even if it is very diluted by other genes. Now multiply this by all the inferiors that we have in our societyies today and you will see that this is no small issue but in reality is going to lead to the extinction of the vast majority of us.
I propose that the only way utopia will be able to take place is if we live in an environment in which evolution may still occur. For this to happen natural selection must also be present and for natural selection to be present we must live in a way in which natural selection may take place OR we must introduce artifical selection (EX: Eugenics) Without artificial or natural selection evolution stops and de-evolution begins
Those who would deny the existence of superiority and inferiority in any creature are to be disregarded as men ruled by their emotions instead of logic. They are worthless and will only hinder their group. They would most likely dismiss the notions of inferiority and superiority because they belong to the inferior group and do not want to face that fact or believe they are a part of the superior group but are ruled by emotion and ignore the call of necessity and real progress in their group and are thus a major hindrance to the society they belong.
By putting even one inferior/low intelligence or physically un-adapted individual (somalians for example have an average iq of 64) into a european group (average iq 100+~) the society will never recover as long as the inferior gene is allowed to prevail. When an organism of 100 intelligence is mixed with an individual of 50 intelligence (keeping in mind that intelligence is hereditary) as long as all other factors are kept the same it is simple logic to assume that the byproduct of the two will be an organism will be a balance of the two organism's for the most part ("dominant"/"reccessive" traits come into play here.) It is known that if two organisms, one having an intelligence level of 100~ and the other having an intelligence level of 50~ were to procreate they would produce an offspring with an intelligence level of 75~. But why would this be beneficial to their group? it simply is not and will lead to their own death. there are different intelligence levels required for different habitats.
You realize eugenics will eliminate retarded whites like the shitposters here, right?
Lucas Clark
If they are inferior then why must they live? i see no problem with anyone inferior dying. You may look at the lowest intelligence and weakest individuals of all races and make your own assumptions about who does not procreate.
Just want to see you're on board. Stupid whites are the cancer killing this world.
Christian Jackson
i would say brainwashed. stupid? yes of course but the stupid of the 50s were still able to tell the differences between the sexes, races, work together and form functioning societies because they were not brainwashed towards their destruction as they are now. 100 iq is enough to be able to make good decisions for yourself as long as you are actually making them for yourself and your countries own interests. anything else can only be the product of brainwash.
Jayden Davis
just fucking lol @ you guys supporting eugenics when most of you look like steve buscemi
Dylan Bennett
why would it matter even if everyone on this board was hideous, stupid, 4'5 and weak? why would it matter if we are inferior in every way? then we would not reproduce and our group lives on for the better of it. As long as these non-humans die as well it is worth it a thousand times.
>Surely this is proof of a "secret" pedophile conspiracy that bizarrely everyone seems to know about >not just some fucking ring she liked the look of
Why is the right wing so full of schizos?
Jacob Cox
I was not referencing the ring i was referencing the baboon non-European trespassing in america. If it is a pedophile for white children then it is just double the reason to exterminate it.
Nathaniel Cox
Nigger, YOU are trespassing in America. The only thing that belongs here are Elephants and Peccaries.
Colton Wood
How can that not be said for all land on earth? A silly notion. Human beings that do not cause destruction to the earth anymore than non-human animals have every right to be here as they do.
Christian Robinson
You arent going to find people for your cause because your entire cause is to kill off the majority 90% of people you consider "inferior". eugenics will never work if you actively seek out to kill people to make it work, because, well, people dont want fo be fucking shot.
yes the weaklings dont. so incentivized reproduction and incentivized lack of reproduction untill the majority fit in the superior group and then removing the inferiors so the majority will be superiors is the solution.
Evan Torres
Some people are fine with sacrificing themselves for the good of many Your cause is having Most people sacrifice themselves for the good of the very few
What guarantee do you have that the 7 billion people on earth which you'll have to cull to achieve your progress aren't gonna simply instantly revolt and kill you the moment they hear your "proposal"?
Do you actually expect for 95% of the earth just sit down like sheep waiting to be killed? Please dont tell me you actually dont understand basic population control Egoism has a fucking limit and you took that limit and raped it in a bathroom. I'm legitimaly disgusted to share a planet and website with people that actually think like you.
Here's your blackpill: Utopia is literally impossible in the way things are and you would need extreme amounts of brute force to achieve it in a single country, let alone the entire planet.
there is no need to propose it just as the negative evolution we are seeing today we will just do it subtly and silently. i never said they had to be killed just stop reproducing.
>just fuck off good argument.
Evan Hill
utopia will never exist evolution occurs every day take off the meme flag
Hudson Nelson
Who are you to judge people on their infieriority/superiority? Get your mental disorder checked out, you will find it in the red area among the other control freak authoritarians, who cannot escape their reptilian brain.
Once we get gene editing abilities that aren’t a meme or limited to zygotes then we wouldn’t have a need for eugenics at all. So in that line of thinking I can’t imagine supporting eugenics until we for sure understand that in vivo gene editing won’t work.
And even then, we have the ability to edit the genes of zygotes through IvF which makes the whole case for eugenics fall apart for me on a moral level.
Henry Baker
Do you know why people give their hardest when they work? Do you know why a lot of people on earth invest time and energy on their jobs and projects? Because it is going to reward them when it is done
what incentive does 99% of the planet have to be sterilized just so a few very select people can succed? Let me explain to you real quick. IF YOU DIE FOR SOMETHING, YOU AREN'T GOING TO SEE THE REWARDS OF YOUR EFFORT. that is the mentality of almost every single person on this planet and they are 100% correct to go against genocidal maniacs like you.
No matter how you look at it, what you're proposing is as negative as any movement can get. A few 1% enjoying the sacrifices of billions is your main plan and people are going to realize it sooner or later, and they will not like it. In the end your plan will go exactly the opposite way, with all the "weaklings" banding together and beating your fucking ass dry. Did you forget about the french revolution? Even though the movement was organized by the burgueoise, the ones who actually fought were the majority and they beat the living shit out of those who fucked them over so much.
>We will just do it subtly and silently Who is this "we" you speak of? The 0,5% of the 1% that would survive your eugenics program that actually agrees with your batshit insane plan? Do you seriously think you can achieve that just with that few people? AND DO YOU ACTUALLY THINK THE PEOPLE WHO YOU WOULD SPARE FOR BEING "SUPERIOR" WOULD ALSO AGREE WITH YOUR RETARDED BULLSHIT?
Jesus fucking christ, youre the most egoistical, insane, narcissistic and retarded freak I've met on this shithole
Consider in your approach that it is much more efficient to work with people instead of against them. Artificial creation of a batch of embryos, testing, selection of the strongest and reimplantation into the biological mother would filter out bad genes over a few generations (no one is a completely lost cause genetically). Financial incentives to participate would also result in more resources for the imrpoved child, leading to further potential improvement. I doubt it would be feasible today but somewhere in the future a similar program could produce great benefits.
Chase Cruz
Let's pray he meets God in his life, but I am afraid at this moment he and this guy are lost in the dark.
Christian Hall
I'm an agnostic theist but I agree with you. These people geniunely think that just because there isnt a higher force judging them, they can basically do whatever they want without ethical or moral consequences.
What these people dont realize is that ethics comes from a rational logic of "is this going to be good for me and the others around me", not just religious brainwashing
Not only that, but modern society arealdy found a way to use the dumb and weak to reward the smart and even themselves, by having a multitude of jobs and options those people can take to support themselves and the 1% Obviously, we have problem on who exactly IS this (((1%))) amd what they want, but if we had actual good people in power, we could possibly achieve a good utopia for everyone What you shoudnt be advocating isnt mass genocide, but selection of leaders. If we have good leaders that direct the many who are smart,dumb,strong and weak, we could have a society where we could all live peacefully without the need of death or sterelization.
(They) will never ever allow this. The only way the would ever allow it was if the introduced a 100 iq hidden cap and also made the bio engineered babies extremely docile and easily persuaded. otherwise why would they? give me one way that it benefits them.
yes i understand this. but only an animal or evil beingwould be incapable of sacrifice for the greater good. Is the modern man benefiting by importing millions of africans? no it is severely harming themselves yet they do not care.
As ive already stated the mentally weak inferiors such as yourself would never know if it was implemented and would enjoy the benefits they recieve for not reproducing. it would always be a choice. (untill they are a vast minority and can not stop it)
yes, yes i have. if i said i would pay you to not reproduce and i would pay someone else to reproduce is that really oppression? is that torture? of course not. a silly notion.
Jonathan Gonzalez
>100 iq cap that's your cap? fucking kek >if i said i would pay you to not reproduce yeah, people take the money and then go have as many babies as they want any modern method of sterilization that is not physical castration is reversible you are not as intelligent as you think you are my guy
Josiah Lopez
>yes i understand this. but only an animal or evil beingwould be incapable of sacrifice for the greater good. Is the modern man benefiting by importing millions of africans? no it is severely harming themselves yet they do not care. >As ive already stated the mentally weak inferiors such as yourself would never know if it was implemented and would enjoy the benefits they recieve for not reproducing. it would always be a choice. (untill they are a vast minority and can not stop it)
YOUR PROBLEM ISNT WITH THE 99% OF PEOPLE, IT IS WITH THE 1% IN POWER BRAINWASHING THEM NEGATING THE RIGHTS OF SOMEONE TO REPRODUCE IS A HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION NOT ONLY THAT BUT THERE ARE NO BENEFITS TO BECOMING STERILE SO SOME PEOPLE CAN LIVE A LIFE JUST A LITTLE BIT HAPPIER UNTIL THEY REALIZE THEY JUST DOOMED THEIR OWN FUCKING SPECIES And I'm not going to even mention on how the ACTUAL 1% of smartest people on earth you want to live would be completely against this themselves because this is such a huge fucking moral pit of despair even them realize it
Jesus fucking christ you are beyond retarded. If you want an actual utopia just change our leaders. They are indeed horrible and make horrible decisions for everybody Not only is changing the leaders of our society actually possible thanks to voting, but it is something YOU can actually do by gathering support from those who also realize this and explaining to people that those people in power are taking obviously bad decisions
why would they tell you the cap they have set? why would they be honest about it? why would they ever create those smart enough to see their scheme? Answer me.
its very simple. The only way they could hide the birth would be to have it at home and somehow hide the wife for 9 months straight but that would make them seem suspicious and would lead to them being found out anyways. if they have a child then just take the money back it is very very simple. The vast majority of people do not want children nowadays anyways and only have them in 3rd world countries due to a lack of contraceptives >any modern method of sterilization that is not physical castration is reversible you know very little on the subject clearly.
>a human rights violation awww... maybe we should add some requirements onto the label "human" are somalians and europeans the same species? If you really believe so you are in need of a mental eveluation
>changing the leaders of society is possible due to voting Hahahahah... brazilian iq showing here again. Sorry but it isnt. They are different sides of the same coin owned by the elite and will never hinder the progress of the elite even a tiny amount. Even if i made a new party tommorow and received 70% of the vote it wouldnt matter. it is pre-determined.
Isaac Myers
>for natural selection to be present we must live in a way in which natural selection may take place You're retarded or completely ignorant on what natural selection is. Are you arguing that natural selection does not take place in modern society, and each individual has the same amount of offspring?
Easton Richardson
And he replies with ad hominem Great
Mason Sullivan
>for natural selection to happen natural selection must be able to happen >arguing against this
>look! the handsome and tall are reproducing more than the wheelchair bound! natural selection is going strong!! This is not natural selection of any value natural selection involves that it is helpful to the survival of the species and group. having a group of handsome and tall people is not beneficial to the survival of the species.
7th grade level debate skills here.
Isaiah Carter
Eugenics is impossible, those that should not reproduce will always want to have 10 children and the ones that should won't reproduce and probably are thinking about suicide.
Leo Diaz
Nooooooo I want to live damn it live ;_;
James Barnes
ok live just dont fucking reproduce why dont you idiots get it? And you would still be paid to reproduce if you had good genes and made yourself superior through work
Daniel Cook
>Eugenics you said?!
Geneticist has been summoned ... what's going on here?
In-vitro fertilization combined with pre-implantation genetic screening may be the way to go. Only best possible genetic combination of a certain couple will be implanted. Yes, current issue is we do not know nearly enough about human gene variants and their phenotypic effects to truly assess what the 'right combination' will be ... maybe two more decades of research, maybe less.
Oliver Evans
a modern day geneticist is such a waste of time you will never be able to publish any """"hateful"""" or (true) information. whats the point why even bother taking the position?
Jeremiah Cook
Abortion is an accepted eugenics program in the West. I think we could also tie welfare to mandatory sterilization, and we could offer felons time-served for voluntary sterilization. Neither of these policies violate anyone's individual liberties, so most egalitarian cucks will accept them.
yes but it is only stopping children from being born into bad homes OR the MOTHERS SHAPING UP and raising their children. The root, as always is the mind control
Kevin Gutierrez
I do it mostly as a hobby by now ... have long decided to leave academia behind. The data is btw published quite well, they just avoid spelling it out in the discussion or go full doublethink, trying to relativate their own data (actually fucking funny how afraid Reich appears to be of his own research). Postgenomic age, it will be inevitable. Pandora's box has been opened, the poison has sept out...
>we must live in a way in which natural selection may take place This implies that we are not currently living in a way in which natural selection may take place. Are you or are you not claiming that natural selection is somehow not present in modern society? If that is your claim, then you do not understand what natural selection is.
>natural selection involves that it is helpful to the survival of the species and group No. Natural selection is the phenomenon that some individuals breed at a higher rate than other individuals, and that therefore some genes will be preferred in generations to come. It has nothing to do with pragmatically useful biological features, but is solely about the number of viable offspring.
Joshua Hernandez
True, it doesn't get at the root, but it does provide a "foot in the door" towards "normalizing" eugenics.
>MOTHERS SHAPING UP and raising their children This is much better than having the state subsidizing (non-widowed) single-mothers--which makes tax paying men unwilling cuckolds.
Connor Long
>Eugenics program Simple idea: Import genius sperm, and pay women to use it.
Brody Butler
All you gotta do is collect sperm from superlative human donors and pay people to use it. Sperm is abundant and can be shipped all over and literally transform humans everywhere into super-intelligent beings. The argument goes like this: stupidity is a global health emergency. We must cure stupidity. Sperm from intelligent donors can cure stupidity. A world where everyone is very smart would probably be nation-less with no war and very little crime and much less suffering and deprivation.
Natural selection with 100% efficiency in humans would be spartan society. Laconophilia is a sign of a strong man unwavered by his emotions. Children go out and fend for themselves for a few years then (the strong) come back alive and the weak do not come back. this is how you ensure strongth and intelligence. brute strength will never work against animals in the wild. you must use your mind and think of a way to overcome your disadvantages. Survival of the fittest no longer exists today. Survival for all even the weak! The weakling preaches.
Like it or not the intelligence of the woman also counts. And come on. We all know here the sperm would be from a white man and the retards would oppose the whitening of their country. (actually not in asia they quite like whites) but imagine the backlash.
Easton Anderson
my idea is the only idea that would work so cut it out. and nothing you say is a valid criticism. the hybrid offspring that inherit the intelligence genes could be used instead of imported sperm, preserving the racial character of the country while still boosting intelligence over time.
Julian Bell
so then they would all just be half mullatos instead of full mullatos.
Nicholas Jones
>Survival of the fittest no longer exists today. Does every individual reproduce at the same rate? No. Survival of the fittest still applies, even if the "fittest" is someone getting child support gibs.
Alexander Nelson
so survival of the weakest most desperate negroids=survival of the fittest. i see.
Brayden Wright
Eugenics already exists. It's called standards.
Austin Mitchell
...
Cooper Myers
>so then they would all just be half mullatos instead of full mullatos. They can be whatever they want to be. The initial resistance will fade once their intelligence increases. So after the initial resistance, humans will simply design themselves to look how they want, and obviously intelligence and other traits will be a high priority for them as well.
Thomas Sanders
The discussion on this board is absolute garbage due to posters like this. Why do I even come here anymore?
Easton Foster
Actually intelligence of the woman counts more since a significant portion of alleles modifying G is most likely located on the X chromosome.
Anyway 's idea doesn't solve shit by itself since the main contributing factor to ongoing dysgenics is extremely fast reproduction of subhumans in absence of any form of control.
>minor effect on the overall situation unless a basically unimaninable ammount of resources is put into it >it would take too long to create realistic grounds to implement it even on minor scale (1st world countries, not obligatory) Shitty idea desu senpai.
It seems you're finally understanding that survival of the fittest doesn't necessarily mean that the strong and/or smart survive. "Fittest" in the context of evolution only means those well adapted to the given environment. If the environment is abundant with food to support offspring, who will be more "fit"? Those who breed recklessly or those who do so conservatively? Going by the number of offspring, it'll be the former group.
If you want natural selection to work in your favour, you must tailor the environment so that those closest to your goal are the more fit specimens.
Cameron Perez
Go visit some fucking AIDS ridden shithole in Africa or just your nearby inner city zoo and tell me about those standards and how much they contribute to the whole picture.
Andrew Hernandez
Survival of the fittest in a misnomer. It is really survival of those who most successfully reproduce. In hard times, these tend to be the fittest. In easy times, these tend to be the most promiscuous. Big difference. There is no catalyst of fit evolutionary traits to dominate in any civilization where everyone survives to reproduce.
Further, more bad mutations occur over good once each succive generation. This only makes sense as we are the product of billions of years of evolution where good mutations prevailed and as such most new mutations are naturally going to be disruptive before they are beneficial.
Eugenics will/should be determined to be a necessary and essential component for long term survival of the species. I believe China, which is not encumbered by the SJW emotions of the West, has already reached such a conclusion. We likely never will and thus this is yet one more reason why China/Asia will be the source of the future evolution of the human species and the west will likely suffer some catastrophic depopulation event someday.
Henry Wood
Wow. you're a genius. its almost like i outlined the traits i wanted as intelligent, strong, amrt and adapted to the climate/habitat not to the fleeting society they are apart of. there is objective superiority and inferiority that can not be challenged or moved just because of the temporary society you are living in which cradles you and carries you for being (key word) inferior.
Kevin Harris
That would be the best solution. Maybe not the fastest but if implemented correctly it could be the most stable, least dangerous and least morally ambigous.
Unfortunately somewhere around the start of the last century we started a massive avalanche of fuckups that only gets worse still. In my opinion we already lost our chance of implementing the best solutions and now we are not in a situation where we have the luxury of being picky about this.
That's the standards themselves that failed, not the use of them. What we need is a way to keep the standards high. Stop encouraging bullshit standards, start encouraging good ones. Then things will fix themselves.
Lucas Johnson
>Survival of the fittest in a misnomer I disagree, it's very accurate. Fittest does not refer to high physical fitness, but to the degree at which something fits. Consider the natural environment a filter which all organisms must pass through. Those organisms who best fit to the filter will pass through, while those who do not fit will not pass through. Square peg round hole.
How do you intend to discuss eugenics when you do not understand the fundamentals of evolution and natural selection?
>there is objective superiority Fitness (as described above) is the only one. If you like to think of strength as an objective superiority, consider briefly the sabre tooth cat and the common household cat. One is extinct while the other flourishes.
Connor Butler
Low-IQ boomers and rednecks are the bane of this board
Jaxson Adams
URRRRRRRRRRR URRRRRRRRRR URRRRRR
>define what you meant >NO I DONT LIKE THAT! thats not what i said at all
Oliver Brown
>Are you arguing that natural selection does not take place in modern society Yes, because naturally way more less fit faggots would die without offspring.
Jayden Edwards
How do you suppose we should go about encouraging good standards in places where it matters the most? These places never had nothing even remotely resembling good standards.
How do you succesfully introduce good mating patterns into a population with average IQ of 75? Hell this would be a fucking struggle that takes generations among whites in developed countries.
We have neither the time nor the resources to do that.
Joseph Martinez
It's still natural selection. It's just that the environment no longer favors traits that you would consider positive. This is temporary and will inevitably lead to a collapse that will either lead to our extinction or shake things up to a point where natural selection becomes eugenic again.
Cooper James
The purpose of survival is to reproduce and continue the genes to future generations. Fit and even adaptability will only come into play when there is a significant die off event. Then and only then will the "fit" and "adapted" make it through while the unfit will perish.
Think it through. Game scenarios in your mind. What if we had a famine tomorrow, who makes it? What if we go another 50 generations like we are, who makes it?
