Pro eugenics

t. Inbred kike

>improving genetics is a meme

I dont even know what to say to something so retarded, if I was a nigger i'd be against eugenics because my genes would be quickly eliminated

>improving
Define the criteria for 'improvement'

spoken like a true, dye in the wool cathedralist

Intelligence, longevity, not-balding, well balanced symmetrical face, etc

I dont necessarily support forced eugenics, voluntary might be better

>Inb4 hurr duurr u cant prove its objectibly better!

If you ask somebody to prove why an intelligent good looking man is better than a dumb deformed hunchback you're being stupid and are having an absurd and unjust level of proof simply because you dont want to accept it

>More misogynistic than Schopenhauer

That's really not as hard as you seem to think.

Try reading the entirety of the infamous essay instead of whatever you've seen paraphrased on r9k and pol

Not that guy but humans could be more intelligent and more artistic and more healthy and more beautiful.

>intelligent
>good looking
And who would decide that?

People

Same way people decide how to build cars and design computer programs and how to pick the right person for the job. It only seems difficult to do because you are biased against it. IQ tests for example are a measure of intelligence (as the name suggests lol) and is very highly correlated with financial success, marital stability and even longevity, thats a nice place to start. Also, IQ is inversly correlated to violent crime... hmmm really makes me think!

As far as good looks go symmetry to a certain extent is objectvly attractive in that severly assymetrical people are always rated as unnatractive. People with heavily receding chins, facial deformities in general too I guess. These are just examples of what could be done

btw I can already tell what kind of person you are , you are the type to pretend to have incredibly high standards of proof... but only for the positions you disagree with. People od this so they can keep their self image of "non-biased intellectual" while basicilly still brushing off what they dont like

>the type to pretend to have incredibly high standards of proof... but only for the positions you disagree with. People od this so they can keep their self image of "non-biased intellectual" while basicilly still brushing off what they dont like
not him but that describes basically anyone with an IQ above 70

No, it doesnt. Why would you say that?

>All of that stuff applies to the left.
>racism
>antisemitism
>misogyny
>pro eugenics
>applies to the left.
Dude what are you smoking

because it does lol

The left is racialist and misogynistic though

>hint: they're misogynistic toward women who dont vote for them

ok buddy, enjoy being retarded

>>le right wing is evil meme xdxd

It is though

Ever met an SJW?

dude, like, the left is the REAL racist woman-haters!

t. Clueless Breitbart/Rebel Media watching lolbertarian

How in the world are SJWs racist, misogynist, pro eugenics?

i bet you think all your positions are well thought out an a result of solid evidence and not preconcieved notions

>Same way people decide how to build cars and design computer programs and how to pick the right person for the job.
Economics do that. Not very far sighted way to go about things, specially without any way back. We tried already with the earth and fucked the place up pretty bad.

>IQ tests for example are a measure of intelligence
To a very limited degree and only in the context of our current society. Other parts are even lesser known; and even with the assumption that we would understand it fully, there is still the entire side of consequences to understand. "Intelligent" people tend to have worse mental health than the average population for example if I remember right. Just as example.

>symmetry to a certain extent is objectvly attractive in that severly assymetrical people are always rated as unnatractive.
>to a certain extent
>severely
>always
Sounds rather vague on one side and silly certain on the other.

> People with heavily receding chins, facial deformities in general too I guess.
There are also people who are into it, and who knows some shit might turn advantageous.

>These are just examples of what could be done
Nobody asked for that though. The question was who will or even can reasonably make the decisions. (Let's even ignore the whole abuse potential for now)

>btw I can already tell what kind of person you are
Now that's an amazing gene you have there. Can you read palms too or do you prefer tarot cards? Do tell me more about myself, please!

They hate the white man
They deny that women belongs in the kitchen, i.e. are thwarting female potential for happines within the confines of the home, i.e. their natural place, in alignment with their nature.
They want to breed out the white race.

I dont watch either and am not libertarian

How is autism treating you?

Btw the left is extremly racialist they constantly talk about race and what it means.

AS far as mysoginism goes many of them have no problem with conservative women being called cunts and people joking about them being raped.

Personally idgaf about racism or mysogony but facts are facts, retard

A look, a Nazi appropriating Nietzsche by diluting the core essence of his philosophy to something reactionary and genetically deterministic. Just like Hitler did.

Hows this for a Nietzsche quote faggot?
>There are no facts, only interpretations.

>responding to retards

Lad, don't waste your energy

I am bored, nigga.

This. If you think is worth responding to, you need to read more books.

>They want to breed out the white race.
I want to breed out the white race by inseminating qt brown girls

>letting the masses decide everything because we all are of the same race/all have this specific color hair and facial structure, what could le go wrong
>letting those selected by the market have absolute power because muh QI even though they are an aspect of the decline
(((Alt-Right))), everyone.

You're deluded my friend

>They deny that women belongs in the kitchen, i.e. are thwarting female potential for happines within the confines of the home, i.e. their natural place, in alignment with their nature.

Kek, how's all that pussy you're not getting, Cheeto fingers?

>Say blacks blame everything on the white man

>Say feminists blame everything on the patriarchy

>Blame everything on the Jews

Why does /pol/ do this?

It's a convenient scapegoat in the face of complexity.

>projecting this hard

No im pretty sure im wrong about some things

>Economics do that.
economics does nothing it is a science not a physical entity. People do all of that, and the way they do that is described in the science of economics. This is an important distinction, people can do things without needing to be consciously aware of ever little bit of information and theory

>Not very far sighted way to go about things, specially without any way back. We tried already with the earth and fucked the place up pretty bad.
???

Not sure what this means. You can go back and idk what you mean by we tried it and the earth got fucked up...

Do you expect me to have a complete detailed plan of how eugenics should be implemented??
>To a very limited degree
Compared to what? Its the single best measurement of intelligence that we have. We dont need to know everything to have improvements and get started

>context of our current society. Other parts are even lesser known; and even with the assumption that we would understand it fully, there is still the entire side of consequences to understand. "Intelligent" people tend to have worse mental health than the average population for example if I remember right. Just as example.

Like I said we do not need to know everything to make improvements, no undertaking in mankind's history was as 100% consciously thought out.

I have the suspicion that you think eugenics always means some kind of constant extermination of people that are deemed bad by some random guy, it doesnt have to be that way. It can be flexible and even voluntary.

>Sounds rather vague on one side and silly certain on the other.
Im sorry but this is not a manual on eugenics, this is me giving my view. I cannot at this time tell you exact measurements and processes obviously... like I said previously I think you have an artificially high standard of evidence for this topic

>There are also people who are into it,
Does not matter. "Some people" are into scat porn and child rape.
>and who knows some shit might turn advantageous.
You could say literally anything "might turn advantageous", however eugenics has clear ways that prove to be advantageous.

Btw I dont really want to get caught up in the looks because that is by far the most subjective (outside of symmetry)

>Now that's an amazing gene you have there. Can you read palms too or do you prefer tarot cards? Do tell me more about myself, please!
I can see... that you are a fan of snarky sarcasm! Am I right?

>economics does nothing

...

>no arguments

>wild mischaracterization and strawman

wow u really got me, alr right btfo how will i recover

Whites did it to themselves, that is the true red pill.

The bad whites must be gassed first

im not projecting at all
ive accepted that you can never get rid of ideology
now i just insult people on this website

>he doesnt undertand that economics is a field of study and does not by itself act upon the world

Please think about what you just said, you are biased against me and so try to "refute" me in ridiculous ways

but you can get trips

>he watches le bald, spanking single mothers meme man

Repeating digits are the only things that give me pleasure anymore
Time to go back to /s4s/

this has to be a troll

Ugh, I guess I need to go with it now to get more readings into my personality.

>people can do things without needing to be consciously aware of ever little bit of information and theory
Which usually doesn't end too well.

>we tried it and the earth got fucked up...
Purely focus on economics factors and disregard for anything else lead to polluting the earth to ridiculous levels. Letting economic factors fully affect how we shape the next generation is beyond cray.

>We dont need to know everything to have improvements and get started
And what makes you think that attempting something so fucking big without enough information might be a good idea? Some things you personally see as vague improvements?

>It can be flexible and even voluntary.
Only temporary. History has enough examples that people who think that they are right about something deciding to push this tends to end up with a respectable bodycount and long-term consequences for society.

>no undertaking in mankind's history was as 100% consciously thought out.
Which showed. Besides, what other undertaking had such a high potential for permanent harm? (Sans climate change of course, which wasn't even expected)

>"Some people" are into scat porn and child rape.
We were perfectly fine with fucking children through majority of history, who knows if our current norms will be viewed just as fucked up in the future? Messing around with other humans based on temporary views isn't a good idea, bruv.

Besides something like scat porn is perfectly legal and why would you or me disliking it mean that it should disappear? (Like ugly people with eugenics)

>I think you have an artificially high standard of evidence for this topic
I never asked for evidence; only the means by which we'd would decide on it. Besides, obviously there needs to be damn high evidence for the positives before attempting something with permanent consequences. If you jump out of a window, you'd want to make sure before that the circumstances would allow you to survive the fall.

>I can see... that you are a fan of snarky sarcasm! Am I right?
Once again I am amazed by your insight! Anything else? (Please skip narcissism, that'd be too easy)

sounds like he's a conservative traditionalist

misogyny doesn't exist