Discussion in 'The Alley' started by Dex Luis, Sep 13, 2013.
what alternative to democracy do you two recommend
I favor the republic.
my neo-eugenics ideas would correct these problems.
i may do it later, its 6 pages
i don't necessarily think rendering the incredibly sluggish process of natural selection more or less irrelevant for humans is a bad thing. this 'dilemma' is only made possible by accessing more efficient forms of progress.
I am an Antistatist/Pan-Secessionist
You could also say Anarcho-Capitalist, but I prefer the label antistatist to anarchist to avoid semantic wars with lefties who think that anarchism = categorical rejection of hierarchical relationships.
My optimal society is voluntary, stateless and guided by the free-market.
I'm developing my own theories on how things like roads, a military and law could function in a stateless society. We are an adaptive species and I have faith in our ability to find non-governmental solutions to any problem.
I'm not completely opposed to democracy because some amount of direct democracy would clearly be needed in such an arrangement.
Interested in hearing.
I think my society would maximize freedom and growth while being naturally eugenic.
Plus, voluntary eugenic/transhumanist programs and research would be conducted without all the red tape/regulatory hurdles.
sounds very interesting. this could be ideal, but I don't see a stateless society as viable in a world where its competing with centralized nation-states. maybe this could work on a space colony.
I would control for genetic and social factors. anyone with severe genetic flaws would be sterilized so that they cannot breed. in addition, negative gene combinations would be avoided in breeding, e.g. a sickle cell carrier could only breed with a non-carrier. however, no one would be killed.
both nature and nurture are important, so I would set some basic social rules:
you must be 18+/legally an adult in order to have children.
you must have a high school diploma or GED (this isn't asking for too much, even prisoners get their GED).
you must not be convicted of certain felonies (pedophiles could not have custody of children under my system).
in addition, you could combine this with tax-breaks etc. to encourage genetic strength/diversity, and the breeding of affluent/genetically fit people.
my system would need more efficient technology for screening the populations genetics, and would have to be transparent and not prone to corruption.
other than that, I believe this is an ideal solution. you could set the bar reasonably low, while still having a dramatic positive impact on society within a few generations. I've been considering names like neo-eugenics in order to distance this from the old eugenics - which may have had a nice idea, but it became mired in pseudo-science, racism, and a genocidal regime. but those historical phantoms do not change the fact that the central idea is correct. I can also justify this with social contract theory, which is the basis of a republic.
Sadly, attempts at controlling human nature give dismal returns.
I would be willing to sell my sperm, for a hefty sum, to infinitely improve the gene pool.
never got that much into politics to consider myself a right or a left.
maybe it's just me but it seems a bit late in history to try to implement a eugenics program. even if it were initiated tomorrow it seems likely that genetic engineering would render it irrelevant before any significant gains to the fitness of the gene pool could be attained.
take the best out of all forms of government.
pretty much shariah law, come at me bro.
that may be the case. even so, my social regulations would still be very useful.
Pol101 taught me that the whole world needs to grow up. We're essentially still feudal. Immediately switched.
We could do greater things, but money. Goddamned paywall.
You say this like it's funny. Selling sperm already goes for a hefty sum. However, it takes a lot to qualify.
What do you think about the Chinese plans? Letting parents choose their most promising zygote.
The language really needs to be reframed to de-stigmatize eugenics. And soon. As everything becomes more automated, I think people are going to need 120-130 IQs just to be of any real utility.
I'm not 100% certain when it comes to my belief in the efficiency of free-markets. Nor do I think that a bit of state-planning couldn't be useful.
My beliefs are somewhat torn between anarcho-libertarianism and a quasi-fascism.
What makes you think I was trying to be funny?
Have you made any attempt to sell?
I'd have to look into that further, but it sounds promising. as I've said elsewhere, I agree with their implementation of the One Child Policy.
I agree. it's unfortunate that there's such a powerful stigma against this, but it's a result of history - the abortive, misguided attempts in the early 20th century, and association with a genocidal regime. eugenics needs to be reframed in the popular imagination as a non-racist, scientific, rational discipline, based on liberal republican principles, and aiming for a brighter future.
I believe my policies would take the edge off of the festering underclass of the US.
what group should be charged to reign over these tasks
Separate names with a comma.