Will gene editing put an end to racism?

Amerindian superior genetics don't need eurangutans to populate America. Go back to europe subhumans.

Saying that science thinks some things are better or worse is a pathetic fallacy. The scientific difference between two genes is never that one is better than the other

>Saying that science thinks some things are better or worse is a pathetic fallacy. The scientific difference between two genes is never that one is better than the other
You are definitely right. I and I think I was saying exactly that.

So what you are saying is niggers have shitty genes and will be edited to have superior white genes.

No editing necessary.
youtu.be/tEwnMTaXTys

>reverse cuck

In 100 years when everyone is completely mixed and we're all global earth babies, then racism will dissolve.

Who's getting cucked here? I don't get it.

I hope so, although it may be unduly optimistic to think it would completely replace racial groups. Present racial groups may prefer disparate optimizations; particular optimization patterns may emerge as races in themselves.

No
Most racists are upset with cultural differences, not perceived genetic superiority. You have scientists editing genes, you'll still have skinheads complaining about Mohammad not speaking a lick of English, or the predominantly black/latino gangster culture that ruins entire generations and costs their country millions of dollars.

Black man is the cuck. Usually big chimplike niggers are the bull.

>Most racist-based movement all over the world are based on the idea that your "blood" or genetic code makes you different or worse than others.

Only that's true. Some races are inferior to other races. Some more so than others. That's a scientific fact. The hate for this comes not from that, but from difference. People who are different, in any manner at all are put into groups then the groups hate each other. This can be race, religion, video games, waifus, skub, etc. It stems from humanity's genetic traits for surviving with your clan/pack and family. Those who were different were from outside your clan/pack killed you or took your belongings or hunted/foraged your area of the forest taking food from your mouth.

Literally everyone is different than everyone. People find something to jerk off together over and stick with it. If that "something" can stop being skin color, we can end racism. With some exposure, you will find that many black people share your taste in waifus and video games. The exposure is the problem, especially with the historical segregation and oppression.

Why do you think racism is so bad? Besides having it shoved down your throat by liberal cucks.

not him but
>If that "something" can stop being skin color, we can end racism.
Racism has never been about skin color.
Skin color is just a very small (but easily recognizable) part of race.

>The exposure is the problem
Yes, diversity is the problem. Exposing blacks to white will lead to problems, there is already enough evidence to suggest that diversity is harmful to people and leads to friction.

so THAT's how they make big-dicked asians.

Because it's unfair to people of color. I think everyone should be treated fairly.

>there is already enough evidence to suggest that diversity is harmful to people and leads to friction.
Oh yes, thealternativehypothesis has taught you well.

>Because it's unfair to people of color. I think everyone should be treated fairly.
You are one of those brain washed cucks that thinks only white people can be racist.
>people of color
Racism doesn't only exist against people of color. Affirmative action is racist against whites.

The problem is that you think equality is when the outcome is equal. In actually, equality is when everyone has an equal opportunity.

>Oh yes, thealternativehypothesis has taught you well.
If you can disprove him (or provide anything debunking him) go ahead. I am open to counter arguments.

>Because it's unfair to people of color. I think everyone should be treated fairly.
Firstly it is wrong that blacks are the only ones being treated unfairly, the above mentioned "thealternativehypothesis" also talked about this in relation to college acceptance rates, where Jews, blacks and Hispanics are preferred over whites and Asians.
And I agree such a thing shouldn't happen, but the solution can not be to mix all these people together (known as "diversity") and then try to make racism stop through legislation. That simply can not end well.

I'm against anti-white racism too. I'm not a big fan of AA but I think it's a temporary necessary evil.
>In actually, equality is when everyone has an equal opportunity.
Agreed. That's why AA is necessary for the time being. There was literally systematic racism as little as 20 years ago, and racial inequalities still going on today (e.g. redlining).

Everyone is missing the point.
If we can edit genetic sequences, racial supremacy stops making any sense. "These (insert race here) are less intelligent than (insert other race here), and it's determined by race." Not ANYMORE. We can find
The part of the genetic code which determines your IQ if different from that part which determines your height and both are different from the part that determines your skin colour and so on. You can make perfect human beings in any ethnicity.

Blacks won't be able to afford this technology do they will be even more inferior.

Will white people edit their melanin gene to give themselves dark UV-protective skin? I doubt it.

>Will white people edit their melanin gene to give themselves dark UV-protective skin?
Light skin is superior in environments with less sun.
Skin color (if based on rational choice) will still depend on where you live.

China and India are already a step ahead in these fields we are pretty much too dumb to understand it is necessary so we will continue to live with blm and protests and nazis

youtube.com/watch?v=4d0uYfyzFhI

>change the races around
>now it's 'racist'

god damn can't people have a sense of humor for once?

A lot of people on /pol/ are freaked out that whites are gonna go extinct but it's pretty obvious when gene editing becomes big you're gonna see tons of people making designer babies with white features (blonde/red hair, colorful eyes, etc.)

/pol/ does not fear extinction, since they're well aware of gene editing and are giddy for it's arrival
The people spamming the nihilistic shit are TRS faggots attempting their "Tactical Blackpill" nonsense
It's quite annoying, since they come in waves and fuck up half the goddamn catalog

The calmness and true fun and joy of /mlpol/ was a miracle, and it is truly saddening that it will never return

>Most racist-based movement all over the world are based on the idea that your "blood" or genetic code makes you different or worse than others.

Actually that's a relatively recent phenomenon. The majority of racist movements is based on visual sensitive cues, infrastructure comparisons, cultural/religion practice and location vs. location/ similar traits aspect of tribalism.

>So, if we developed accurate, working gene-editing tools in the next 50 years (for example, with the CRISPR system) we could correct virtually any kind of genetic defect.

Except you're not trying to correct a genetic defect but even out the playing field by scaling down the differences and normalizing key gene ratios between all populations.

>The genes of this particular racial group are deficient and make them worse than the rest of us" Not anymore. No racial group would have "better" genes than others.

Let's say that this could be achieved, do you know what would happen? Racists would move the goal post to base superiority/ inferiority off of historical data to insult groups based on their ancestors lack of achievements (sins of the father or grandfathered discrimination). Populations like the Australian Aboriginals for example who have near virtually never achieved anything in math/science/arts (except for two individuals I believe) even if they went under heavy gene editing would be shammed constantly on historical data.

This happens a lot with African Americans even though they have made the largest strides in science/math/arts of any black African population in the world. And also are in many parts estranged from sub-sahara Africa culturally (even if they try to admit they're not) but are still discriminated against by utilizing their sub-sahara African origins to shame them. Invoking association fallacy through regional origin, akin to Nazi Germany's justification for superiority of Nordic whites compared to other white populations in Europe. How do you gene edit that away?

Gene editing won't do a thing in terms of prejudices, for reasons such as what said. It will probably add more though as a difference between rich who can afford editing/designer babies and those who can't, unless it gets so ridiculously easy and cheap to do that even lower-class can do it. But even then, it would probably be used to help with diseases.

Besides, prejudices are fine. It's when you act on them in a violent manner that they stop being fine.

Literally every great scientist, mathematician, and philosopher from before the 1960s was racist by today's standards.

How does it mean anything though?

Science literally affirms that the argument from authourity is invalid.

Also Amerindian superiority is a historical fact.

probably, however the potential dangers associated will make racism pale in compairson.

>Tfw I am equal with Mr potato Head who downloaded Google chromosome because science says so.
Also
>Implying evolution isn't scientific

Only if you make a completely new genotype that is sentient.
Then all aggression will naturally gravitate towards them.

CAT-GIRLS
A
T
B
O
Y
S

yes.

all these "muh high iq race" bs will end.

every race will be uplifted into 180+ iq so i won't be so alone anymore.

>u bois complain about black aggression when it was european civilization that is the most violent, destructive, genocidal, cruel to walk the earth.

Yes once our genetic knowledge will prove beyond any reasonable doubt that there are superior and inferior races, people will vote for the politic that remove the inferior breeds from the earth. Thus ending racism.

...

Except for the part where they were easily conquered. Some may call that an inferiority.

Hopefully the gene editing clinics will be right next to the check cashing business, Jamal.

We already have proved that. It didnt change much.

Overall everyone here is being retarded and is overestimating how well crispr will work, and how much we know about what specific genes cause what traits. It'll come down to the chinese making gsnerations of freaks trying to create the perfect ant person for their ant-hive of a society.

So what is the solution?

Not that guy, and professing ignorance here, but why is this basic statement of reality (beyond the fact that it's conflating racism with tribalism in general), associated with reddit? (More and more I'm thinking I'm going to have to visit that board to understand these accusations.)

Like says, I suspect it'd be adding new prejudices, rather than removing existing ones. I mean, unless we edit out the tribalism instinct - which might be a bad idea, given that it's what makes civilization possible to begin with.

>easily conquered
And europeans are voluntarily being replaced. How is this even a question?

Amerindian superior development rate is self-evident. Who is superior, a chimp with a gun or a genius? The same conclusion is applied with Ameirndians. Their higher advancement increment determines they are the epitome of Human civilization.

>being able to edit the genome is the same as understanding it
Holy shit everyone in this thread is clueless

>Amerindian superior development
Tell me more about this. I don't understand.

Simple.
Europeans settle on europe: 40000BC
Amerindians reached Canada: 25000BC; then after the deglaciation (10000 years later) populated the rest of the continent in 15000BC

European crops date from 10000BC.
Amerindian crops date from 6000BC.

Europeans getting the bronze from other culture in 3200BC.
Amerindians reached the bronze age in 500BC approximately.

Also as a great factor:
Horse domesticated in 3000BC approximately.

Knowing that the rests of all amerindian populations of 14000BC to 10000BC were pretty much paleolithical-tier and all lived as nomads, practiced some artistic manifestations as european paleo-populations. It's safe to assume they started again in the paleolithic and had to morph the environment of woods, jungles and coasts to their convenience, the same the europeans did with their environment for thousands of years before the Neolithic.

Then let's compare:
Europeans lurking around as nomads: 30000 years.
Amerindians lurking around as nomads: 9000 years.

Europeans reaching the bronze age from other cultures after the Neolithic stage: 6800 years.
Amerindians reaching the bronze age by themselves without the influence of a culture thousands of years ahead of development: 5500 years.

Let's check also how many years have humans modifyed the horse population and environment: 37000 years.
Let's check how many years have amerindians affected the camelids of South-America, when the spaniards came: 16500 years. They had less than half the time, yet they already domesticated diverse species for food and whool. Llamas can carry up to 50 Kg.

And I didn't mention the disadvantages such as continental isolation (north-south and east-west), Niño fenomena that destroys coastal villages, less cultures to trade with, and no naval technology, iron, horses, wheel, and writting from north-african nor anatolian cultures.

So, it's safe to affirm. Incas were superior to europeans. Their higher development rate was excellent compare to europeans.

It's just some autist from Veeky Forums with his epik troling routine

I was just making an observation about Amerindian superior development rate. It's easy to measure date/year achievements of civilization clusters, that's why the conclusion leads to their higher development rate. How is this even a question?

(You)

he just posts sometimes on his about incas on his

just because you dont agree with him doesn't make it a troll, stormcuck

Does having a choice in your religion prevent people from judging you by your religion?

Does having a free choice in any other aspect of life prevent people from judging your choice?

People will talk shit based on career choice, taste in music, taste in television, taste in literature, car you drive, clothes you wear, etc.

If anything, people might be more judgmental because there will be those that can afford the gene editing and those that cannot.

can you make people stop being niggers with gene editing? i don't think so