I’m all for it, let’s start today. I know three couples planning on having children that don’t have even 50 IQ points between the lot of them.
They are all self-serving, drunkards, and ethically corrupt as their only pursuit is “I gotsta get mines, screw you.”
Their children will become part of the system very quickly, and then left to rot until adulthood.
Personally, they should all be euthanised, with prejudice.
A very insightful observation.
And re stupidity, as is the case in what Mastriani just said, that’s something that’s on the rise. One of the main reasons I warned of dark times is because the “lower ranks” are, w.r.t. the higher ones: 1) more likely to breed, 2) have more children when they do, and 3) start breeding earlier. So whereas in olden times most people were breeding at roughly the same rate, now the lower proportion is rising. I believe it was Churchill who said that the middle classes should have more children.
It would be cheapest to pay people to get sterilized, or rewarded somehow. If they follow the law they get some sort of extra benefit. It would make things smoother. Bribery has its place.
Let percent spastics = i, and T = total population. Then (1-i/100)^n = T.
“Ask not for whom the n tolls…†or something like that. Who do we lose: Einstein, Van Gogh, Alexander, Forrest Gump,…,Ed3 you fill in the names. It is definitely a mistake to lose Forrest!!!
In my youth, if I set the measure, only good mathematicians, some physicists and precious few chemists would be left.
Social Darwinism is a very dangerous game to play.
First of all we don’t know what the most effective strategy is. A solid case can be made that a social pac animal, which values the individuals, i.e.humans, is the best strategy so far.
My comments are sans ethics, but if you consider us to be human, it appears to me that ethics is a built in defense mechanism.
Since it is Sunday, and because I will probably annoy the heck out of most ILP posters, I will quote scripture:
1st Corinthinians 12: 12:
“The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many , they form one body… Now the body is not made up of one part but of many. If the foot should say ‘Because I am a not a hand , I do not belong to the body,’ it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. And if the ear should say ‘Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,’ it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part where would the body be? As it is there are many parts, but one body.
[For the elitists] The eye can not say to the hand, ‘I do not need you!’ And the hand cannot say to the feet, ‘I do not need you!’ On the contary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the patrs that lacked it, so that there should be no divison in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.â€
I can let you substitute your favorite: Gia, Alah, mother nature…, or whatever, but hopefully you will get the point.
The consequesences, if ignored, can be tragic.
We’ve been playing “social darwinism” for about 10 - 12 centuries as the corrosion of conformity has laid its claws into the genome by those fearful of being “less than” … it’s called hierarchical society.
You’re right, it is dangerous, mostly to the longevity of a species confined to a singular environment from which there is no escape from if the ecosystem collapses.
They are already being seen, and the “trajedy” is extinction. That’s why we are proposing a change to the system that is ameliorating of the species. The current system has had its run, and proven to be a failure. That’s why change must occur, even if by force.
The way I see it we all have a simple choice we have to make-
either you are for the collective or you are for the individual-
i.e you think as the group and a mentaly handicapped person is a drain on this group or you think as the individual imagining yourself as the mentaly handicapped person.
I think this collective thinking is a very dangerous thing, I think it is a lazy and easy way out, a way to turn our backs on your responsibility to think, our greatest crime.