User Tag List

View Poll Results: Do you support eugenics?

Voters
38. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    8 21.05%
  • No

    30 78.95%
First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 200

  1. #21
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    I support eugenics as long as it´s applied to everyone except me and I get to decide who and how should be "eugenized". I guess most citizens with a tiny bit of common sense would feel the same. Thus I think eugenics can only be practiced in a form of dictatorship, in which case, again, I only support eugenics if I am the dictator.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  2. #22
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I support eugenics as long as it´s applied to everyone except me and I get to decide who and how should be "eugenized". I guess most citizens with a tiny bit of common sense would feel the same. Thus I think eugenics can only be practiced in a form of dictatorship, in which case, again, I only support eugenics if I am the dictator.
    As anyone who had read my extract would have realised, we already practice eugenics in a number of ways. I am just suggesting making it more active and directed.

    In my ideal world, paramilitary wouldn't be going around sterilising people - all that would happen is that is that you would need to prove your fitness, and that of your partner, to have recognised children. Reproduction is an investment on the part of society (who pays for maternity leave, and 5 years welfare?), so our interests need to be considered as well. I do not fear directed eugenics as long as it has the aim of reducing hereditary disease, and is strictly regulated. People should not be selected for or against on the basis of traits that won't affect the health of future generations.

    The license system would grant citizenship rights for any children and the resulting benefits that come from that. I would hope that the thought of having children without a nationality and any public support would be enough to deter people who fail the tests from going ahead.

  3. #23
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    As anyone who had read my extract would have realised, we already practice eugenics in a number of ways. I am just suggesting making it more active and directed.
    And that´s what my reply is about.

    In my ideal world, paramilitary wouldn't be going around sterilising people - all that would happen is that is that you would need to prove your fitness, and that of your partner, to have recognised children.
    Fitness is a vague concept which is not objectively measurable. I may think you´re not fit because you´re not athletic enough, you may think I´m not fit because I´m not white and rich enough. Who is right?

    You may argue similar limits exist f.e. for subsidied housing or government welfare, but neither shelter nor money are rights directly related to freely being able to use your own body, which is one of the tenants of modern liberal (in a personal rights sense) societies.

    Reproduction is an investment on the part of society (who pays for maternity leave, and 5 years welfare?), so our interests need to be considered as well.
    It´s more likely for society at large to zero on maternity leave rather than introduce large-scale eugenics projects. Barring extremely homogeneous societies of course, where basically there is no need for eugenics since everyone is more or less "the same".

    People should not be selected for or against on the basis of traits that won't affect the health of future generations.
    In a democracy, these parameters must be chosen from the population at large i.e. "what affects the health of future generations". If you are okay with such a completely arbitrary decisional process, great, but my prediction is that the largest majority of voters would not be okay.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  4. #24
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    For the record: I would be okay with something like - if you have more than 3 kids in a 5 years timespan and you don´t have any reliable income, you won´t get government support if you have a 4th kid.
    Just like you lose your welfare benefits if you don´t regularly apply for jobs.

    The main point being: people should be free to dispose of their body (having kids is part of that), and be free to deal with the consequences.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  5. #25
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    huh
    Posts
    67

    Default

    If we don't, the Chinese will (and are). We have many dysgenic practices and habbits destroying us such as multi-generation welfare families, a meaningless education system in general and lack of adherence to civic virtues. Another huge problem is if we put desirable traits onto paper you will find clear racial categories on the aggregate (demonstrating instances of superiority) and afterall we currently live in a far less ambitious and future-wary society.

  6. #26
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Fitness is a vague concept which is not objectively measurable. I may think you´re not fit because you´re not athletic enough, you may think I´m not fit because I´m not white and rich enough. Who is right?
    I defined it for everybody when I was asked earlier.

    I don't care how much money you make - and for the last bloody time, race is not related to skin colour. This has got to be one of the most persuasive myths around...

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    You may argue similar limits exist f.e. for subsidied housing or government welfare, but neither shelter nor money are rights directly related to freely being able to use your own body, which is one of the tenants of modern liberal (in a personal rights sense) societies.
    You are only free to use your own body in ways that do not implicate other people. Liberals are selfish hedonists who want to be able to do whatever the fuck they want, and have everybody else pick up the pieces.

    You are only free to have children under any conditions if you are prepared to forfeit any public support for them, which I doubt anybody will. Understand that I owe you nothing just for existing, so if you want something from me then my interests have to be considered as well. I want a good return on my investment. Why should I, or anybody else, should be forced to give money to genetically damaged couples any more than drug addicts or the morbidly obese?

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    It´s more likely for society at large to zero on maternity leave rather than introduce large-scale eugenics projects. Barring extremely homogeneous societies of course, where basically there is no need for eugenics since everyone is more or less "the same".
    Eugenics projects should take place regardless of the ethnic makeup of a country. I do not want any project to become associated with selecting for traits such as blue eyes. Eugenics should be about increasing the general health of the population, not tailoring a certain, stereotypical appearance. That is a strawman often used to attack the idea itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    In a democracy, these parameters must be chosen from the population at large i.e. "what affects the health of future generations". If you are okay with such a completely arbitrary decisional process, great, but my prediction is that the largest majority of voters would not be okay.
    I don't support democracy. Rule by the majority is the root cause of the constantly decreasing quality of government. Most people are stupid and uninformed - what proportion of the voting population know what the branches of government are, what form of government and law we have, and have even a very basic idea of how they operate? I would say maybe around 15%. This means that 85% of voters are open to political manipulation of various sorts.

    I don't care what "most voters" think when most of them can't even think for themselves. Democracy is responsible for a lot more besides the lack of a eugenics program.

  7. #27
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    I don't support democracy.
    Allright, then please take orders from me from now on because I´m stronger than you. Because that´s how non-democracy ends up being for the greatest majority of people.

    Btw, I also think you can´t think for yourself and should be banned from voting...and perhaps reproducing.

    The point being, that if you don´t support democracy then you must be thinking that you´re part of the "elite", and that´s an easy cop out. You should consider supporting non-democracy while being part of those not allowed to vote.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  8. #28
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    You are only free to have children under any conditions if you are prepared to forfeit any public support for them,
    That´s not eugenics and you know it.

    If you want to rewrite your proposal as: past the X-th child, you will lose government support if you don´t have enough menas to feed him/her on the medium term, be my guest. But it doesn´t seem like you´re willing, you´re looking for something more radical.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  9. #29
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Another article Nine-Year-Old Dies, Father Hides Death for Four Days about people having disabled child after disabled child has made me bang my head against a wall... Why doesn't somebody ask questions? Get involved? At least advise the couple to stop having children!

    I am a firm believer in some sort of negative eugenics. Many people seem to believe you have a "right" to procreate as much as you have a right to free speech or to own property. I disagree, because in many cases the taxpayers end up having to support women's decisions to let somebody shoot their diseased seed into them, sometimes when they are well aware of the risks. Something ceases to be a right when it harms other people in some way, whether immidiately or in the future. Liberty is not the same as licence.

    Anyway, I am interested to see what others' views are, and have also attached an extract on eugenics which explains the rationale well.

    The Daddy State (tm) doesn't help by incentivizing and subsidizing "families" that might not otherwise have happened were it not for these benefits.

    We are already moving towards soft eugenics. Ever watch that movie Gattaca? Gattaca (1997) - IMDb When I first heard about 23 and Me https://www.23andme.com/ I was reminded of that movie. In 20 years these tests will be the norm and it will start off voluntarily. I envision a day when it becomes a part of the mating ritual. In time though I foresee government getting involved and "mandating" via subsidies/incentives. They have been doing something similar with blood testing for decades Marriage License Laws Blood Test Requirements > by State

    A little more than 5 years ago these tests were a grand. Now they are down to $100. Heck you can buy a basic paternity test at Wal-Mart for $79. Unless you live in France where it's illegal, 1 year prison & 15k euro fine. Poor bastards.
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #30
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    The USA gave the world Eugenics and it was taken by the Germans and refined into the holocaust.

    And what? The gun toting Americans want to give us Eugenics again?

    What do you take us for?
    SilentMusings is not American.
    So America is not "giving anyone anything."


    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    In the 1930s countries besides the US and Germany practiced eugenics, and the idea actually originated in England with Francis Galton. You may to interested to know that Sweden, that bastion of socialism, had a eugenics program up until the 1970s. Ouch.

    I take you for a washed up former hippie who hasn't figured out that times have changed.

    Mole is Australian.
    Do they have hippies in Australia?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

Similar Threads

  1. [ESTJ] What do you think of ESTJs?
    By JediM05 in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 177
    Last Post: 11-15-2013, 11:18 PM
  2. [NT] NT rationals, a question! What do you think?
    By Viva_Hate in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-06-2008, 07:09 PM
  3. What do you think about?
    By proteanmix in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 04-06-2008, 01:48 AM
  4. Time to re-evaluate myself (again?) - what do you think I am/could be?
    By TenebrousReflection in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-18-2008, 07:22 AM
  5. So...what do you think?
    By Oberon in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-19-2007, 12:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO