Eugenics:

Why is the notion of genetic superiority and the promotion of it such a taboo? Having better tools to interact with the physical world means, that you simply are better at interacting with the physical world.

The Nazis ruined eugenics' reputation. Doesn't help that modern proponents of eugenics are often edgy. Basically it's a decent idea with had publicity.

Nazis? Halldol forcing psychiatrist didnt?

To be honest, I consider it is the way that one would 'measure' genetic superiority. It should be based on physical traits, rather, how well someone does within various fields.

I believe in eugenics yet sadly there is no humane way to do it.

Yes there is, we just lack the money. A very easy way would be to give grants to high-IQ couples so they can have kids earlier.

>Implying you, or anyone else is mentally capable of picking the right genes
>Implying it's even possible to make good predictions
>Implying it's a good thing to selectively breed humans

Many people are stupid, but people like you are extraordinarily stupid.

Are you into genetics purely because you know you won't get to reproduce otherwise?
There's a reason you remain a virgin, and unfortunately it's beyond your mental abilities.

>Implying that genetics doesn't matter.
>Implying you know anything about the poster.
>Attacking the person, rather than the argument.

I'm stupid? Re-read your post and re-evaluate your life.

because is moraly wrong and morality is what made the western world superior to brown people.

t. brown taco person.

>because is moraly wrong and morality is what made the western world superior to brown people.
What're you on about? Overt morality is what is destroying the Western world.

I don't mean modern SJW morality, but the one that made the western world great.
think of classical western values up until mid 19 century.

You mean the morality which supported eugenics? I see, your point foiled itself.

>thinking that only intelligence matters in eugenics
What about physical appearance and the lack of disabilities? Like autism which I have and would rather prefer it not exist.

Values are spooks, user. They aren't real.

wait, are we talking full genocide eugenics or simply not allowing to reproduce?

both are diferent.

Reproductive stratification.

Why would you breed humans like you would dogs? Have you seen what's happening to purebred dogs?

>Why would you breed humans like you would dogs?
Assuming the method I would promote.

>Have you seen what's happening to purebred dogs?
Assuming that humanity is at such, or would ever have such a genetic bottle neck and limit in biodiversity.

I would advise a system of reproductive stratification (as mentioned here: ). For instance, only allowing academics to reproduce with academics. To avoid genetic bottle necking, someone of a labouring class could become an academic and thus be eligible to reproduce within the academic category.

Not allowing to reproduce is not too different from genocide.

see .
It allows for movement between the categories.

let's be real.
simple marriage between couples could stadistically irrelevant when you have 7 billion people.

telling everyone on earth how to reproduce will mean literally a global north korea world goverment.

fucking retards.

Your fallacy today is:
>Hyperbole
and
>False dichotomy
This has been a public service announcement for the Ministry of Anonisafaggot.

how else are u going to make a profound impact over the world population without a totalitarian eugenic program?

see .

good luck convincing the democratic nations to give you power over it.

even communisn failed after two dictators.

It is something called social spheres, allowing for passive control.

>even communisn
Because communism is self-defeating.

how are u going to stop an smart guy fucking a dumb hot bimbo in some college party?

Social disgrace, or legislate to make the bastard child illegitimate.

>social disgrace
that still didn't stop breeding of whites with blacks in america in the apartheid.

>legislate
that would get votten out of human rights concerns.

You faggot need to understand most children are results of being drunk in some college party between two random people.

>that still didn't stop breeding of whites with blacks in america in the apartheid.
My system wouldn't discriminate based on race, rather ability within certain categories.

>that would get votten out of human rights concerns.
Considering there are several Western governments looking to overturn human rights legislation and there are many countries who do not adhere, your point is?

>You faggot need to understand most children are results of being drunk in some college party between two random people.
Citation?

>I would advise a system of reproductive stratification
Hi, Plato.

Χαῖρε!

most children aren't because you wanted a children.

most of the times is because:
some dumb teenager got pregnant because his older pedo couple fucked her.
some rape.
some dumb slut fucked random people in some college party.
some couple didn't use preservatives.

how are u going to control that shit?

what if some dumb bimbo gets pregnant over a high IQ alpha chad?

Via enforcing social stratification and gentrification of those within the 'higher stratum'.

that doesn't stop people from fucking other people even if the other person is from a lower social class.

I'm sure even indians fucked themselves among castes.

Yes, I always considered a selective genocide to be the way to go, but all this globalization and "muh feerings" are sadly getting in the way.

That may be true, however, if the majority of the 'higher stratum' are dissuaded from reproducing with the 'lower stratum' you can still enforce eugenics within those who are worthy of remaining within their stratum. Ergo, those who breed below their strata are less likely to have children within the 'higher stratum' of society.

Too true.

how are u going to convince alpha chads from fucking hot dumb bimbos?

again, you need to convince them your system is better.

imagine this.
your system gives you a really average and ugly girl and tells you to have offspring with her.

you love a dumb lower caste bimbo that is 9/10 at worst, she also loves you.

do you think he will support your system?

Eliminate the bimbos.

nice to see fellow r9k always making these threads about controlling female sexuality.

nice.

I really want to say death squads, but they're bad.

The point is, it doesn't matter if we lose a minority of such genetic information into a lower strata because of two things:

1) His children are less likely to return to his strata or any of the higher stratum.

2) If this current trend of universal acceptance has any merit. A combination of those lower stratum genetics may result in someone of superior genetics, who has proven to be so via entering a high enough level of whichever field to be considered higher stratum genetics.

In other words, the loss does not affect those in the higher stratum and that genetic information should be replaced by those of a lower stratum qualifying to enter a higher strata.

you haven't been telling me how are u going to make people change from our current system to yours.

keep in mind there's some shit called human rights.

here's the (you)

>average and ugly girl
those won't be among the higher caste, only smart hotties.

By making passive changes to alter the social mechanics of society. Just like liberals have been doing, most notably since the mid-1900s.

genetic diversity is better than a caste system.

also society need low paying jobs that are suited for the dumb people.

also society doesn't need more than some few percentage of the population becomming elite geniuses.

because their ideas are about having more freedom.
your ideas are about limiting freedom.

at least try to fuck random girls rather than being an angry virgin.

>more freedom
'Freedom'. Nice subjectivity.

>at least try to fuck random girls rather than being an angry virgin.
Projecting must be a defence mechanism.

>mocking non-racist people in this thread

Do you really think that such an opinion is the result of trolling? Are you really that deluded?
If you believe in eugenics you're retarded. It's that clear, and if you don't get it there's no hope for you.

>caste system
That would still need labourers labouring and so on; so that makes this point mute:
>also society need low paying jobs that are suited for the dumb people.

Virgin argument beats everything. Even a porn star.

you sound like a bitter r9k angry about chads stealing all the hot girls.

also you also seem unaware IQ is not 100% hereditable.

also you don't seem to understand there's high IQ black children in africa that are getting MIT grants.

the current system allow for dumb males to become truck drivers or police people.

smart people tend to gather in math, science, art, teology, philosophy.

the current system works pretty well.

we should be simply giving free grants to high IQ poor people from shitholes to move to the first world and help advance science.

you don't need all humans to become smarter.

I'm 130 IQ but I don't see the point on genociding dumb people.

>you sound like a bitter r9k angry about chads stealing all the hot girls.
No point, simply just an insult.

>also you also seem unaware IQ is not 100% hereditable.
But a large portion of intellect is based upon genetics and that is why the system allows for movement between stratification.

>also you don't seem to understand there's high IQ black children in africa that are getting MIT grants.
You clearly cannot read as I've said it isn't based on race, it is based upon how well they've done within certain fields. So those genius level children of African descent with degrees from MIT would be in the higher academic strata.

>the current system allow for dumb males to become truck drivers or police people.
So does mine, it also promotes the reproduction of the successful.

>smart people tend to gather in math, science, art, teology, philosophy.
No shit, well done, Sherlock. I seek to promote this.

>the current system works pretty well.
Citation?

>we should be simply giving free grants to high IQ poor people from shitholes to move to the first world and help advance science.
Well done, that would be an aspect of the system I am promoting.

>you don't need all humans to become smarter.
Based upon what? Your feels? Intellect is important in human innovation.

>I'm 130 IQ but I don't see the point on genociding dumb people.
Don't lie.

Because anyone who gave the field any serious study did so by jumping to conclusions about how the generations would turn out instead of running experiments and drawing their conclusions afterward. Its study methods have always been a mockery of the scientific method. It's no wonder the athletes Nazi Germany selected still lost to African contestants when they hosted the Olympics. Aryan superiority was never fairly tested in an environment that eliminated confirmation bias.

Even then, eugenics has already been practiced ad nauseum by royal families. Even when the children don't wind up weak and broken from inbreeding, the lower genetic diversity leads to a lower rate of disease immunity, slower and more divergent evolution from the mainland of humans, and eventual signs of inbreeding where there was none. There's a reason people descended from island nations like the UK and Japan are characterized by pale skin and fucked up teeth. We need the genetic diversity to maintain a healthy gene pool.

Still, as long as we do it by making experiments to inform our predictions instead of just making predictions, it's an area that could be worth studying. That just never seems to have happened.

>Preservatives
HAHA OH WOW MY SIDES.
Yes user, I want to make my dick erectile for an eternity

In the face of genetic engineering and augmentation, the diminishing returns of eugenics isn't worth the economic investment.

In a world where fucking misquotes who are a thousandth your size can literally throw down permanent disabilities (Zika, Malaria, etc.) that would take centuries upon centuries to produce biological protection from (with some retarded trade off) through eugenics why would you still believe in it?

Seriously I'm genuinely curious, I can some what understand the idea behind breeding the "undesirables" out or making a stronger "stock" but nature will literally blind side your ass for thinking you could game the system without suffering some penalty for it.

bro, read a book on economics.
your system will fail.

centralized shit usually fails pretty hard.
simply let the free market to fix it.

simply let the high IQ people to get into the best systems.

we don't need billions of math geniuses.
I'm sure if we only use the top 1% of people into STEM fields, there would be like 70 million scientists.

top 1% is like 140 IQ people.

there's no shortgage of smart people, even by simple math there's like 200 million black people with high IQ (over 120).

there's enough people for even the top fields to be filled with millions.

we need to help develop poor nations and let their elite people to work together to help build a more nice world.

"bro, read a book on economics.
your system will fail.

centralized shit usually fails pretty hard.
simply let the free market to fix it.

simply let the high IQ people to get into the best systems.

we don't need billions of math geniuses.
I'm sure if we only use the top 1% of people into STEM fields, there would be like 70 million scientists.

top 1% is like 140 IQ people.

there's no shortgage of smart people, even by simple math there's like 200 million black people with high IQ (over 120).

there's enough people for even the top fields to be filled with millions.

we need to help develop poor nations and let their elite people to work together to help build a more nice world."
It is almost as if you have no reading comprehension.

This is why I promote it upon this base, along with race neutrality based upon overt accomplishment: .

>art, teology, philosophy
>smart
kek

bro, nature already makes a better job than what some faggots at some central office can do.

there's millions of people even among the top 1% of people.

dismissal of other intelectual enterprises diferent than STEM is the mark of the mediocre intelectual.

>some central office
>Has no plan to do such a thing, something user would've discovered if he had reading comprehension.

>implying you know what traits are desirable at all times by everyone to deserve to exist
All genes are what they are. They are supposed to be there. The idea of trade offs and antagonistic pleuotrophies suggests that every trait is in place because it was exchanged or the gene shifted away from a less desirable trait. So there really are no "perfect" genotypes for all situations. Your "strong" human lines might have an IQ of 160 but because you had no idea what you're doing you bred individuals that possess deleterious mutations and their kids now die from a slight breeze. How often traits are expressed is often a result of epigenetic effects anyway. Are you going to find people with only certain methylation patterns that are heritable? Certain pathways that are enhanced for your "good traits"? The whole idea that you can do what nature does with humans on a broad scale is ridiculous we can't even get it right in most animals

>They are supposed to be there
Part of God's great plan? :^)

>Implying we shouldn't strive to combine successful genetics, ignoring the fact that attraction is based in the evolutionary purpose of finding 'good genes'.

Also, movement between stratification based upon successfulness, decreasing genetic bottle necking.

Example of a person who shouldnt be allowed to reproduce

Here's a meme.

Time to being diversity to Israel then.

>people descended from island nations like the UK and Japan are characterized by pale skin and fucked up teeth

>be from new zealand
>go to university in america and notice these things
>we have a higher instance of bigger foreheads and sunken eyes, too
Sheeeeeit.

Nice meme, I'd rate it 10/10.

I give this meme 14/88

stale meme

...

If someone doesn't even exist they can't be murdered, you idiot. Being murdered right now or not even being born in the first place: which one you think it hurts less?

By sterelizing the bimbo.

I don't get it.

How can you believe in genetic superiority, but be against race mixing? In every single living creature, genetic diversity is key to superiority. Then there's also the heterosis-effect where hybrids will turn out much morw superior than the sum of the best attributes of the parents.
Really, everyone should look for a partner of another race to breed humans with the most potential.

>some couple didn't use preservatives.
>preservatives.
Yes user I want my dick to be erect forever..

Probably for some of the same reasons people don't approve of breeding dogs to have certain traits. It could be detrimental to the group in the long run.
Natural selection works because it has no goal or intention. Artificial selection doesn't because it aims to specialize, which can be a hazard when adapting. Generalization is where it's at.

>high-IQ
>high-IQ
>high-IQ
Not even funny

>could be detrimental to the group
it could be not

Likely that user is not a native speaker of English and got confused by false friends.

Weigh the pros and the cons.
>"superior" genetically fit race
>inbred mentally unstable people

Samefag

You have no proof of that, you are just assuming we are going to do it wrong, which is scaremongering. Please go to /x/

...

Science:
>let's see how we can do eugenics without the shortcomings

/x/:
>WAAAH GENES ARE MAGIC, YOU CAN'T DO THAT, IT'S HAS TO BE ORGANIC, I ONLY EAT ORGANIC FOOD XD

Just putting my opinion out there, no need to turn me into a denialist hippy-dippy strawman.


Also this. Eugenics is the way of the past. Genetic engineering is where it's at

Eugenics and genetic engineering are synonyms.

Always thought eugenics meant allowing certain beings to breed, while sterilizing other with "unfit" genes.
Also this.

Maybe read the post? I typed that I would base it upon successfulness, not race: .

See this: .

See this, nothing to do with race: .

See this: .

If the system works, labouring class members should not be able to join into the academics since they are now running away brain-wise.

and now you tell him, that he shouldnt trust his friends. Not anons day

Indeed, however, as I can imagine, I would have some retard state the antithesis. Therefore, I am willing to make the allowance, should they be able to accomplish greater things than their genetics, good on them. A true flower from the rough.

that definition also fits genetic engineering is what user is telling you.

I think, think your fear of retards stating things on the internet marks you as a coward and an idiot. I wish you good look in your attempt to convince others of your ideas though.

'Fear of' because I grant inclusivity to the notion? Methinks the Philistine projects too much.

Genetic Engineering: the deliberate modification of the characteristics of an organism by manipulating its genetic material.

Eugenics: a set of beliefs and practices which aims at improving the genetic quality of the human population.

...

you made an allowance. You presented to impressionable children a vision of the world, that you tailored to retards in some way.