Good Genes: An Argument for Eugenics

Post Reply New Topic

Discouraging people in that way is more ethical than forcing them.

My diagnosis shows that I have a very uneven profile. My performance measure of the working memory is considerably above the average. My measure of speed lies in the average's lower level. Concerning the perceptual function, I perform either considerably higher or considerably lower, than the average.

Asperger's has not been the worst part. That is psychosis, which led me to experience (real) mental agony for the most part, and some kind of "religious" experience (connectedness to nature) otherwise. It was a living fable. The episode lasted for a long time (years even). But I never wanted to accuse life. How could I want so?

And yes, today I study and have helped many people with programming a lot. I even scored perfect on one programming exam. There may be some big obstacles to surmount, some tough morsels to swallow. But it's the faith in life that counts.

I'm not arguing against helping the disabled to reach their potential. I'm taking about selective genetic mutation and abortion. Not killing people.

I also have less of a problem with Barron during the election night on stage. But I do have a problem with his handclapping where the hands did not touch each other, with his mannerism at the very end of this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f14sIv6YVX8 (the swinging left and right, the clinging hands), with Barron looking pretty overwhelmed on most pictures when in public, and a little sad on most others. He is definitely not a child that is participating in what is going on around him like an NT child would do most of the time. Sure you have to consider that he might be overprotected by a hen mother and being kept like an outsider, but that cannot explain everything - and needs itself some explanation. Yes, you are right, irony or not: it is a pity that not everyone has the capacity to judge a person s behavior against a complex context.

I was also wondering about some statements Melania made about her son in the parenting.com interview (his detailed visual memory etc.), that the parents insisted that there is no nanny, but Trump saying a few days later that a "young woman" "works with Barron". Then the family as a whole: Donald is socially rude, there are a number of fashion junkies in the family (Donald s mother, Ivana, Ivanka, Melania, im(NT)o, people on the spectrum often feel attracted to one another and there is a strong link between ASD, identity issues and a strong interest in fashion with some Aspergers, girls and women in particular, it has something to do with the missed-out role play as a toddler and kid); for me Ivana has a lot of quirks, Melania is surprisingly stiff, view that she had been in the international fashion industry from 18 years on, Ivanka tries hard to be authentic, but doesnt quite succeed (for an NT), there is also something nearly like a speech fault in her articulation, although I cannot nail it down (some aspies should be better at this), she sounds in any case a little bit like a foreigner, which is strange, I know the sons less but for their background they lack confidence (which makes them likeable to me, because people with the parents they have tend to pretend to be extremely confident and sure about everything, just like Donald does, apparently the parents of Ivana, and also their teachers, did a good job) . Then there is Donald s sister Maryanne, the judge (!) who says that she was very scared at college and is scared every single day (NTs would hardly be scared for basically no specific reason), her son who is a neuropsychologist (!) turned author (!) ...

The link you asked for: a youtube video on "Donald Trump: eugenics" presents pertinent statements from Trump. It is from Huffington Post, which compiled it from the Frontline documentary "The Choice 2016".


Well, most scientists tend to either overstate the fault of the parents (so have a limited understanding of environmental causality, the Freuds, Bruno Bettelheim and many other famous psychologists or psychiatrists were most probably on the spectrum themselves, so it relieves them) or exaggerate biologic stability (Freud once blamed the ice age for neurasthenia!, which btw he believes to be in his paternal family and which is pretty similar to what would be now called ASD, maybe with some more comorbid stuff inside, like ADHD and a). After all they are scientists. The more reasonable theories of the less-attention-seeking theorists (Jean Piaget, Jerome Kargan, Michael Rutter) get also far less attention.

This is a trip. Pretty much this goes to show that, unless a real loser gets into a seat of major power who wants to do what they will anyway, eugenics by killing people will be utterly pointless.

Here is the video in question

What I saw was Trump stating what is well known, if you have certain genes you are more likely to be successful. Trump never said in the clipped together quotes "losers" should be forced to or even discouraged from breeding or "winners" should be encouraged to breed. He did say that maybe scientists one day will learn how to make good genes but he doubts it. If you want to interpret that as a hidden eugenics agenda that is slipped out that is fair but Trump did not say anything close to saying he favors what is defined as eugenics. All I saw in that video was a person with an unusually high opinion of himself.

As for Donald his main traits associated with autism are lack of filter and inability to stay on message which could be indicative of low working memory associated with executive dysfunction common on the spectrum. Low working memory if that is what he has is common to many condiions. His ability to read and communicate with so many people is a strong indicator he is not autistic.

As for Barron, failure to complete a hand clap has become a well known autistic trait since his fathers victory speech (strong sarcasm). It could be indicative of lack of motor coordination. This is associated with Aspergers, but pretty common in very nervous 10 years olds up 6 hours past their bed time. The facts that we know about Barron are very minimal, not nearly enough to be mildly suspicious, never mind bieng near certain.

I didnt say that Trump is an outspoken eugenicist. but that he considers himself to have superior genes, he is also looking down on those who havent. People who emphasize a lot how superior they are compared to others, are very likely to embrace eugenic ideas, and more openly if they get more anxious for some reason. I also didnt say that Trump qualifies for an Asperger diagnosis, but wondered whether he and his wifes belong to the Broader Phenotype of Autism (what Tony Attwood also calls "Asperger personality type").

While Trump is not stupid, he thinks too highly of himself: He definitely does lack cognitive empathy, if not he could not be so offensive to quite a lot of people. The behavioral issues he had as a teen and that made his parents send him to the military academy, points to some emotional regulation problem (lack of cognitive empathy with oneself). He also clearly has a minority complex, if not a person has not this urge to build the highest building have this decor of ostentation,run down on others, chat up so many women - and talk about his good genes. In my NT opinion this complex comes less from his family, but from a more profound knowledge that he lacks something important. He misses the cognitive abilities associated with a more mature state of cognitive development.

So we agree pretty much. Pretty much everything we have seen points to a him having the emotional regulation typical of a preschooler. That much more then his issues and alleged racism, sexism etc is scaring the hell out of me

How about the other youtube video I had given you and Melania s parenting.com interview? Or the "young woman" that "works with Barron" (Donald) and who is not a nanny?

Yes, we agree pretty much. At a 9/11 event a Trump and his troops might even overreact worse than a George Bush, Rumsfield, Cheney &Co. And although racism, sexism and feeling of genetic superiority are somewhat secondary to emotional regulation issues, ideologic beliefs, in particular if they are strongly voiced and then voted for by the majority DO play a bigger role in the politics chosen.

But it is not scaring the hell out of me. What these people need (just like difficult kids do) is a firm stand from the society. We should take care that he (or they) will get it. I also feel that Trumps family could be worse (and even much so) and count on that. Then, Barron Trump s autism could turn out to be a blessing for America. It really all depends on how people treat their narcissistic governors.

Which proves autism, or that his parents are very very rich, in a bubble and do things beyond our comprehension for reasons we can not fathom just because she can. Her staying married to him and making and anti bullying her priority is hard to fathom. All it has done is made her an object of riducule and caused Barron to be labled by a bunch of amateur diagnosticians, which was predictable.

It scares me, you ever try and control a 4 year old having a tantrum, or tell a 4 year old not to do something?. It makes them more likely to do the thing you do not want them to do, and when they do what you want them to do they can not stick to it.

You think Trump will listen to his advisors saying if you do so and so it will have negative implications for him for any length of time? For the past 2 years he has consistently done things everybody has said would be his ruin and it either worked for him or he survived it and he went on to confound the naysayers one more time. That would overinflate the ego of the most stable person, never mind a person with such low emotional regulation.

Back to the subject at hand...

https://www.rt.com/uk/370166-children-t ... s-welfare/

Cognitive test developed in UK can supposedly determine which 3 year old children will grow up to be criminals and/or societal burdens-such things as overuse of welfare benefits and health care.

but at least in our disposable society where even humans are disposable, those poor kids will remain disposable, also. we'd rather throw stuff away than repair stuff.

Civilization lives from empathy for the distant, from neurodiversity and from some people that hold others back to drain their brains too much. The (s)lower-functioning of some can be still extremely functional for the system as a whole.
Why can people (in particular those with the biologic and evolutionist reasoning) not just let nature decide? After all a lot of babies are naturally aborted if they have too severe problems. (Google if you are not aware how many there are). Would you eradicate all plants just because they are smaller or grow slowly or have the less exuberant flowers? Have you never heard of anything like symbiosis?

I wish the world were a place that was more symbiotic; that accepted people for more than their contribution. But the world isn't like that.

Yes, it isnt. But it should be, and this is what counts.