Hypothesis: Only the elite class should breed.

Post Reply New Topic

Remember, mother nature does not care how we die. Therefore, it does not matter whether we die an early death without technology or a later death with technology.

And most people with serious genetic aliments (autism, dwarfism, Down syndrome) do not have offspring, or it is rare for offspring to have the traits, so on a whole it is not likely to pass on.



Mass killing is triggered in events of crisis such as famine and drought (which the balance of nature dictates). It is a way of controlling the population. More mass killings happen in resource dried places like Africa and Asia. Mass killings really do not happen in places like America or England where there are many resources.

Humans are not the only ones to engage in such behaviors. Most mammals (social and not) will kill each other when resources are scarce.



If the Earth had one exact climate that never changed then I would agree with you. However, the enviornment is what determines if an organism is fit or not. At the moment, the Earth has a diverse climate. The current human population has a diverse genetic code. The enviornment is diverse so it makes sense that humans are as well.

The reason we have different races is because of different climates. Why are Caucasian's pale? Becuase it absorbs heat to stay warm in colder climates. Why are Africans skin dark? Because it reflects heat to stay cool in warmer climates.

Saying which one is elite or not is entirely dependent on what climate they are in.

I agree with you over environmental diversity but your understanding of skin color needs a bit more research.
What one self designated expert decides is a favorable human factor is most likely so contorted with personal ego and twisted tradition that it is extremely unlikely to have any survival validity.

Right, but my point is that "natural selection" is just an anthropomorphism. You haven't said anything about whether the current selection process is ideal, only that one currently exists.


Right. Humans however will also kill off opposing tribes though, which is also not uncommon in the animal world.


Unless you are going to say that intelligence, ability to develop new technologies, better social skills, or all of these other traits are irrelevant, then I would have to say that this isn't just "climate". Frankly, we have a rough idea of the environment humans live in. We also have a rough idea about what is desirable for human society.

The most intelligent and powerful people in control of human civilization seem not to provide much confirmation of their value, considering the massive imminent catastrophes we are currently generating.

And what group would do better? People suck. (Note: I am not actually saying that there cannot be a better group, but rather rejecting the grounds of criticism given that there are always massive imminent catastrophes, and often they loom in a manner hard to stop.)

There is no way to determine optimum survival since natural forces incessantly present problems from wholly unexpected areas. And even when the expected problems can be foreseen the reactions of those with personal interests who wield the real power in human affairs are too short sighted to be competent in acting properly. Do not expect humanity to make much sense. Much of survival is dependent upon unknown resources, at least up to this point in human history.

I don't think the British royal family have much genetic diversity. Except perhaps for Prince Harry

Eugenics gets a bad rap because of it's potential for abuse. In principle, it has some good points.

Certainly, there should be rules about who is allowed to reproduce and who is not allowed to. Watch enough unfit parents and what they ultimately produce and you'd agree that reproduction should not be an inalienable right.

That said, I don't agree with only the "elite" being allowed to breed. They produce some of the biggest sickos in society...bred to believe they are above everyone else and that everything exists to serve them.

There has to be a happy medium between the extremes where only responsible parents (of all social and economic strata) are allowed to have kids.

Who should be allowed to reproduce and who should not?
The strongest? The meanest? The smartest?
The winners of some contest?
The ones who have the most patents?
The ones who grow the most/best food?
The ones who have the antidote to a disease they create

I'm curious about how to go about creating a list of reproducables.

Bear in mind, we can now harvest genetic material for storage in the event we guess wrong and need it later.

Perhaps the Chinese empires had the way of it - only eunuchs could be bureaucrats.

And the bureaucrats make the lists...

i think it is not possible to measure a parent's fitness prior to actually having children.

i know one person who loved kids (regularly babysat kids, even worked in a daycare for a while), had a good job and was well-adjusted. she was married in her late twenties and waited a couple of years to have children, until they had some financial stability. well, her kids behave horribly because of her inconsistent discipline, and she can hardly manage to keep them out of harms' way on a regular basis. she has difficulties with her temper and behaves somewhat erratically, which affects their moods and socialization.

that person's brother never liked kids and would have been happy to be sterilized. he babysat once and had an anxiety attack. he accidentally got a girl pregnant when he was a student at age 21. they lived in housing projects and he was not able to get a good steady job for nearly 10 years. he eventually declared bankruptcy, in fact. he smokes illicit substances on a regular basis. but his child is the centre of his world and he is a natural parent. his child is well-behaved and successful both socially and in school.

of course, in these stories, we know absolutely nothing about the other parents involved. but any eugenics project would not take the other parent into account, because individuals would be judged individually on their own merit. but even if couples were measured together as a viable breeding unit, the brother in the story would not be considered a good potential parent as he was not married or seeking to have children, ever.

i really don't think there is a way to accurately predict who will be a fit parent, except in some extreme cases.

Everyone should be allowed to breed except the elites.
I want this whole stupid civilization to collapse. FREEDOM!! ! UNABOMBER FOR PRESIDENT!! !

If they don't get the tards under control, that's exactly what will happen.

I hope they don't get the "tards" under control because I want civilization to collapse befor big brother finishes building his world dictatorship. Maybe the bougoise will someday decide they don't need the proletariat so they'll kill us off and replace us with robots, just as Unabomber predicted. Maybe those warmongering fools will destroy the world in a nuclear holocaust. Maybe they'll pump so much CO2 into the air that they'll recreate the Permian extinction. If the bougoise survive and the sysetem continues to "progress" then the people who will exist in 150 years will barely be human being at all, based on how I define humanity. They will be fully socialized and will be boring and incapable of independent thought.

The destruction of civilization and the industrio-technological system could save humanity from extinction.

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever."
-Nineteen Eighty-four

"Imagine a society that subjects people to conditions that make them terribly unhappy, then gives them the drugs to take away their unhappiness. Science fiction? It is already happening to some extent in our own society."
-Unabomber

Your own self-fulfilling prophesy. And not a realistic world view.

I would like a world where people recognise we are all primates made up of variable genes. Any superiority and inferiority is merely in our own heads.

I still say, weed out the evil degenerates and have them sterilized, or take their offspring away from them.