Eugenics

I was reading the horrific thread about people being crushed and maimed while trying to save money during holiday sales. Delet...'s comment about eugenics got me thinking about how eugenics would play a role in building/furthering the destruction of America. What are your ideas about this topic? Do you think people should be segregated based upon intellect? Who would decide? How would this decision be made (IQ tests, wealth, health)? Given other governments' experiments with Eugenics (Nazi Germany), what would we have to learn and how could these ideas be applied? Exactly what segment of society needs to be 'bred out' of the American gene pool? Would the right try to breed out the gays? Would the left try to breed out the Christ reflex? How could eugenics be used to control things like the guy in the next dorm over playing Andrew WK at 5am?

not the best drunk thread topic really

I think the first step would be breeding out breakcore artists

society wouldn't function if everyone was smart. think about it.

vsnares forum down

gotta keep the good work folks

Define the "True American" then work from there. In my view, the true American is an obese person with barely a high school education who has had sex with at least one family member.

Apart from that, why the hell are you bringing up eugenics? It is inhumane to think about it, "omg guys who do you want to kill off first?"

seriously

No, just no. Shut up.

  On 11/29/2010 at 11:00 AM, lumpenprol said:

I think the first step would be breeding out breakcore artists

lol.

  Quote

Sir Francis Galton systematized these ideas and practices according to new knowledge about the evolution of man and animals provided by the theory of his cousin Charles Darwin during the 1860s and 1870s. After reading Darwin's Origin of Species, Galton built upon Darwin's ideas, whereby the mechanisms of natural selection were potentially thwarted by human civilization. He reasoned that, since many human societies sought to protect the underprivileged and weak, those societies were at odds with the natural selection responsible for extinction of the weakest; and only by changing these social policies could society be saved from a "reversion towards mediocrity," a phrase he first coined in statistics and which later changed to the now common "regression towards the mean"

if you're fat you're out.

but they are the food industrys most lucrative target, or should i say victim

  On 11/29/2010 at 10:59 AM, holy said:

I was reading the horrific thread about people being crushed and maimed while trying to save money during holiday sales. Delet...'s comment about eugenics got me thinking about how eugenics would play a role in building/furthering the destruction of America. What are your ideas about this topic? Do you think people should be segregated based upon intellect? Who would decide? How would this decision be made (IQ tests, wealth, health)? Given other governments' experiments with Eugenics (Nazi Germany), what would we have to learn and how could these ideas be applied? Exactly what segment of society needs to be 'bred out' of the American gene pool? Would the right try to breed out the gays? Would the left try to breed out the Christ reflex? How could eugenics be used to control things like the guy in the next dorm over playing Andrew WK at 5am?

what i was going to add to my post but didn't bother with, as i found another way to wrap it up, was that you would find that the people in power who would implement a eugenics plan would themselves be some of those most in need of segregation for the benefit of mankind. Just look for example at the type of art that the rich throw immense sums to auction houses to purchase, this clearly illustrates their lack of any aesthetic sense, black mark one. I think if you were to break down the social worth of these individuals further, you would find that once you had stripped back all their inadequacies, all you would be left with of a quasi-value would be some kind of naked drive to succeed, this is presuming they hadn't inherited their power.

So you couldn't trust turning over this sort of plan to anyone, least of all the rich or their sublayer of 'intelligentsia'. It's better to do as we kind and right minded people have been doing and chip away in our daily encounters with the pleb masses, slowly changing public opinion over the generations. Be in it for the long game.

;-]

Clearly the fine moderating team here at WATMM should be the arbiters of any eugenics policy.

  On 11/29/2010 at 6:10 PM, chenGOD said:

Clearly the fine moderating team here at WATMM should be the arbiters of any eugenics policy.

haha, it's like a practise for the real thing., ;-] heil joyrex.

sorry but

eugenics

the problem with eugenics is that even smart, attractive people can have absolutely awful children, so the next generation after the murder machines have been deployed will pretty much return the population to normal levels of smart/dumb. also, killing people based on "intelligence" quickly turns into "lol let's kill poor people". i mean, generally, killing large groups of people based on generalizations is frowned upon, so let's not do that.

people should have to take a test to vote i think

None of this matters anyway, it's technological evolution from here on in. Man-machine sexfest.

make suicide legal ala futurama

and/or start poisoning ecstasy pills and bombing raves

all of the elitists are die hard eugenicists. they want a world run by themselves and only themselves, where 95% of all people have been eliminated, and the remaining few are enslaved like animals

in order to do this, they first need to set up a systematic method to eliminate everyone. if they began now, outrage from the people would stop them, and they know this. so, they decided to set a global government, an international body that oversees the policies, military, and economics of all countries. once this is set up, they are free to do what they want with all of us. and with their new found power, second to none, they will begin the depopulation, probably with weaponized viruses and economic sanctions and manipulations, or they also may trigger cataclysmic disasters, or start large scale wars, if not all of these things and more

what your seeing now in the airports is the future of mankinds "free" society. the future is incredibly technical and computerized, theyve been telling us that since weve been kids. what they didnt tell us though, is that this futuristic world of computerism, is going to be used to control, monitor, and enslave us

so eugenics is basically the death of you, everyone you know and love, and your fellow man. dont fall for this modern day outlook of eugenics, where they try to sell you a pretty version of it, where everyone is ultra intelligent and working towards the betterment of mankind. it doesnt work like that, theyve used psychology and sociology to socially engineer our once free society, into an orwellian nightmare of death

these are unruly, sick, sick, people, that make adolf hitler look like jesus christ

  On 11/29/2010 at 9:22 PM, ET said:

all of the elitists are die hard eugenicists. they want a world run by themselves and only themselves, where 95% of all people have been eliminated, and the remaining few are enslaved like animals

 

in order to do this, they first need to set up a systematic method to eliminate everyone. if they began now, outrage from the people would stop them, and they know this. so, they decided to set a global government, an international body that oversees the policies, military, and economics of all countries. once this is set up, they are free to do what they want with all of us. and with their new found power, second to none, they will begin the depopulation, probably with weaponized viruses and economic sanctions and manipulations, or they also may trigger cataclysmic disasters, or start large scale wars, if not all of these things and more

 

what your seeing now in the airports is the future of mankinds "free" society. the future is incredibly technical and computerized, theyve been telling us that since weve been kids. what they didnt tell us though, is that this futuristic world of computerism, is going to be used to control, monitor, and enslave us

 

so eugenics is basically the death of you, everyone you know and love, and your fellow man. dont fall for this modern day outlook of eugenics, where they try to sell you a pretty version of it, where everyone is ultra intelligent and working towards the betterment of mankind. it doesnt work like that, theyve used psychology and sociology to socially engineer our once free society, into an orwellian nightmare of death

 

these are unruly, sick, sick, people, that make adolf hitler look like jesus christ

ET you remind me so much of my little brother it makes me want to strike you very hard in the face and then plead with you to grow up and take the tin foil underwear off.

ET isnt COMPLETELY crazy.

remember the RFID chip? remember families going on TV to brag about how they implanted monitoring chips within their own bodies?

I honestly don't see this enslavement of humanity as fightable...we can delay the steps taken to achieve it, but thats about it....our society and structures therein are becoming increasingly indicative of a "hive mind" mentality...we are just perhaps afraid to admit it?

also, as much as I deplore the idea of what some of you speak of, its not as if we don't already have methods of population control, they are simply far more subtle (as in self imposed with the cultural backing and encouragements by institutions of power)

since I'm on a Foucault tangent, I think he explains it pretty well with his expounding upon "bio-politics".

but then again others think Foucault is worthless and a waste of time, so there you go.

Most western nations have been using aspects of Eugenics thought to form policy for the last century. Not a conspiracy, this is not me saying our world leaders are reptile people.

the United States openly practiced Eugenics based law until the 1930s. We as a nation revered Hitler's Germany until we decided to go to war with him. He was Time Magazine's person of the year at one point.

When i say the word eugenics i'm using it basically meaning social darwinism.

Margaret Sanger, the person who spearheaded the birth control movement was a huge eugenicist

  Quote

Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, a social philosophy which claims that human hereditary traits can be improved through social intervention. Sanger's eugenic policies ran to an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family-planning autonomy for the able-minded, and compulsory segregation or sterilization for the profoundly retarded. She expressly denounced euthanasia as a eugenics tool.

In A Plan for Peace (1932), for example, Sanger proposed a congressional department to:

Keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.[21]

And, following:

Apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.[21]

while i completely agree with abortion being legal and people's right to use birth control, it can't be denied that some of the biggest proponents of them early in the 20th century were Eugenicist thinkers who wanted them to prevent more 'feeble minded' people from procreating.

"What men want to learn from nature is how to use it in order to wholly dominate it and other men. This is the only aim. Technology is the essence of this knowledge"

Hi m8.

Adorno?

I'd have to reacquaint myself with his works before I make any solid critiques, but off the top of my head, what does he consider technology? Seems there would be a disconnect between his social theory/Weberian/Marxist critique works and his theories on aesthetics.

2nd edit:

Also, having never read any of his analysis on music or art in general, is music or art to him completely, or rather, capable of separation from the repression of popular culture? Or is it undeniably and irreversibly attached to it?