Would one global race solve humanities problems

Post Reply New Topic

I was thinking about the race supremacists, and was thinking that even if the worst were to happen in that one dominant race of humans became dominant and decided to do away with all other races.

Would that really solve humanities problems?

Sure, it would solve the race problems. But would the human race still have its problems.
Especially if the race that becomes dominant or the only race, holds a volatile nature.
That preys upon weakness, that uses manipulation and dishonest means to achieve their goals.
In a world that has no justice, can there every been righteousness or peace?

As once the war is over, are such people still not at war? War with themselves, eternally due to their own
contentious and dishonourable natures?

In a word no. Tutsis and Hutus are considered by most to be the same race and still killed each other. As were the French and the British who fought each other for 100 years. Etc. Etc.

Race much like religion is usually just an excuse for violence rather than the actual cause of it.

If there were only one race, people would just find another way to separate into different groups and hate each other. It seems to be human nature, sadly.

If a race war happened and one race exterminated all other races, I bet they'd start killing each other over one group being seen as more racially pure than the other.

No, what would happen as a necessity - new artificial groups would need to be peeled off and 'othered' (people who's assets are okay to blunder) and the choke-hold of social conformity would shift from being like a tight shirt collar to something closer to a garotte.

There was a babylon 5 episode where a group of space nazis created cyborg weapons that would eliminate anyone who didn't share their pure ideology. The weapons turned on them and killed them all because none of them lived up to a computer's definition of pure.

Maybe a cybernetic purity testing kit is what's needed to whip the left back into shape, ie. set it to intersectionality, watch the political bubble burst, and when everyone wakes up from the stupor they get their sites off each other's minor attributes and back on neoliberalism as their target for criticism.

Personally, if the pre ww2 brits and the ww2 nazis had continued their eugenics program and genetically engineered a race of physically perfect human beings.

I am sure that even then, due to the nazi's destructive ethos. The physically perfect humans would still find reasons to victimise people, even if they were physically and genetically identical. I believe this because of the volatile and destructive ethos that they proclaim to live by.

I mean, if you look at the psychology behind their values, you would see that the way they think inevitably will cause conflict. For example. "The weak are slaughtered, the strong survive".

Also, if Norse neo paganism (ritual sacrificial magick) is part of the new world order regime of the 3rd Reich which i imagine would be based on the Vikings belief set. Or the ritual sacrifice system of any other form of dark occultism.

I would imagine that the regular ritual sacrifices would cause disharmony among the relatives of the victims within society, as i don't think everyone wants to be sacrificed to Hitler / Odin / Satan etc.

Interestingly enough, one of the old civilisations, the Tibetans, that the nazi's traced the beginnings of the Aryan Race to. Had a different ethos, and during the time that the Tibetans practiced their hybrid of Buddhism and ancient Shamanism, there were few violent encounters among the people of Tibet and no murders.
The people were generally very happy and nice to each other.

What a contrast! I wonder if the Nazi's have the right answer or perhaps the volatile oppressive value system is just convenient ethos that fits their own arrogant, sadistic bullyish tendencies.

If there is little or no genetic diversity, extinction is the frequent result.

Think about the term "inbreeding."

Sure, Yes. do you think that the human race would end up becoming extinct, or do you think that the inbreeding
would create less perfect specimens.

I am not really sure what the Nazi party etc intended to do with their eugenic program.
Although possibly i guess the idea may be very "brave new world" in that the children would be grown in labs,
rather than created through procreation and womb grown.

In such a case, i guess they could make as many clones as they want.
I still think that nazi's problems with getting on with others would still be problematic,
unless of course the genetic engineers could include within the genetically engineered beings
some form of genetic programming that makes the individuals willing to be sacrificed if they
are ordered by their superiors or if they calculate that they are the "inferior" or weakest link.

Then i guess they may make peace.
I don't know if you have ever watched Logan's Run, but i guess a nazi "perfect world" could work like their world,
i.e. when people get to a certain age, they all get included in the human game of elimination and get honoured to be come the sacrifice for the month. (as the crystal on their hand changes from blue to red)...

Probably both.

Inbreeding can cause really grotesque-looking people. And people with developmental disabilities.

Lack of genetic diversity does tend to lead to extinction for species. Because individuals within that "lack of diversity" tend not to adapt well to adverse conditions. Sort of like spoiled children.

Sure. Interestingly enough, a number of centuries ago, Royal Families were known to practice such things.
In order to keep their power within their family, and also to prevent any one infiltrating their ring of power and taking cunningly taking their power away through underhanded means.

Going back to the idea of growing babies in the lab. I guess if the genetic engineers were advanced enough
they could make a human being to order, and may include an allowance for the problems that happen with inbreeding.

I guess if the science of genetic engineering gets advanced enough, anything is possible.
That is if the genetic engineering isn't replaced with augmentation of the human body with cyber implants,
or perhaps even a complete swap.

That would be interesting in itself. With just the brain being original. With recent scientific developments in science, where a neuroscience has been able to grow a mini brain from stem cells, and with the development in IT where it may be possible to upload ones own consciousness into a hard drive or computer.

Perhaps anything would be possible.

Outside the obvious arguments against this idea from creationists, i can see the benefit of genetic engineering perfect humans and getting rid of some genetic flaws such as disabilities.

I mean, having autism spectrum disorder is bad enough, but i really feel for us in the world who have horrific disfigurement and physical disabilities which make them bound to a wheel chair for life.

Knowing that they will never be married, have kids, or be able to the many normal things that we take for granted must be a real burden and in many ways worse than a prison.

Personally speaking, i think that having ASD is bad enough, while having perhaps some special skills that enhance my life. I would welcome getting rid of my many flaws if genetic engineering was able to do that.

But that is hypothetically speaking.

Just because somebody is born "perfect"----doesn't mean that person will die "perfect."

As someone who does genetic engineering on bacteria, the difference between being able to make a change to genetic code and accurately predicting what effect that will have on the organism is huge.

For all the hype about CRISPR babies and the Chinese scientist who did make an edit, we're a long way off from actual designer babies.