However, the left is likely at some point to flip from opposing voluntary Galtonism to demanding mandatory re-engineering of human nature. Feminists, for example, will decide that instead of parents designing their daughters to appeal to men, the government should redesign men to better appreciate women like themselves. This logic will also revitalize collectivism. Socialism failed, in part, because it conflicts with essential human nature. So, why not change human nature to make Marxism possible? And what better response to the intractable fact of human biodiversity than to eliminate inequality at the genetic level? What could be more equal than a world of clones?
35 comments
I didn't know Monsanto was a leftist company...
Who the heck designs their daughters to appeal to men? To some men out there, all you really need to do to appeal to them is walking while having a vagina. I've even had come-ons at four in the morning, wearing a McDonald's uniform, smelling of hamburger grease and sweat from a hard night's work. But, as I was a breasty kind of person, maybe I could have saved them from the shame of going home alone. Didn't work though, as I was already seeing someone, and that level of desperation isn't really attractive, anyway...
Parents shouldn't raise daughters for men and they don't. Men should appreciate and respect women, understand they are equals, and not expect them to "appeal" to men folk. And that won't lead to governments redesigning people, Marxism, or clones.
Steve could use some psychotherapy, but he probably views that as a socialist plot to "reengineer" him, unfortunately.
I speak crazy. For your reading convenience I shall attempt translation:
Steve here believes that men are being conditioned against individualism, self-reliance, the desire to be the best and want the best in return. And that feminists are the source of this conditioning so that they (or their daughters) need not compete for the best man by making all men apathetic, opposed to competition, submissive to the demands of others, and willing to settle for whatever comes their way in financial and marital fields so that no woman will be left without a husband to leech from. Ambition for men and women will die because nobody is supposed to be more desirable than anyone else.
He believes this will result in a corruption of the gene pool, the excellent will intermingle with the ordinary and nobody will be born with natural talents such as strength, charisma, intelligence, or leadership. Since nobody will be left with the drive or ability to rise above the masses they will be inclined to support the group instead. Thus, communism will rise again and be more successful because everyone sucks now.
Whether he believes communism is the goal or byproduct of this plot is murky, but what is clear is that he prefers that women only concern themselves with being trophies for men that achieve greatness.
And just so everyone knows I don't agree with a single damned thing he's saying. I'm just disturbingly adept at peering into the abyss that is an insane mind.
In Steve's world one gender must always exist for the other. Because, as we all know, genders can never just exist as equals*... He still hasn't provided a reason why women should exist for men other than "I'm a man and I don't want to be a slave somebody better give me a living blow-up doll!"
*BS.
Cloning doesn't work that way you imbecile. Neither does genetic engineering. You can't select for personality traits, just physical ones, so even if you could create a child to specification, there would still be a lot of diversity in terms of personality. Same goes for cloning--just because I look exactly like my donor did when he was my age, does not mean I will act just like him.
I'm a left-winger. I support genegineering. I have few problems with human cloning (I see it as more pointless than anything else). And I have no interest is seeing the sort of Destiny Plan style "utopia" Steve here fears.
Whenever you see the "human nature" argument, you know that the person making the argument is saying something fallacious, and is usually in the grip of an ideology.
It's a caricature of socialism to say that it encourages uniformity. It's actually capitalism that does this.
So, Steve Sailer, how would you engineer hunting in the morning, fishing in the afternoon, rearing cattle in the evening and being a critic after dinner, as Marx wanted? I think you help your cause by using "eugenics" in place of Galtonism because people know what eugenics is. But then you would get in your attack on Darwin, who was Francis Galton's cousin, would you?
@ Wehpudicabok
Oh he's a racist too, but more than that he's a firm believer in the concept of the social pyramid. All glory to the gifted elite at the top, everyone under you exists to serve and support and never to drag you down. Nothing - not even your own life - is more important than clawing your way up the ranks.
Hooray, more evo-psychish bullshit. Sorry, ladies, but it isn't me, it's GENETIC, and wow, isn't it great that it worked out in my favour?
"Feminists, for example, will decide that instead of parents designing their daughters to appeal to men, the government should redesign men to better appreciate women like themselves."
A fun example of projection, just like when racists insist that black people are scheming to reinstitute slavery--slavery of WHITES, that is! Dun dun dunnn!
"So, why not change human nature to make Marxism possible?"
"Communism doesn't work because humans are genetically programmed to start their own business"[/sarcasm]
@ The Anonymous
It's a reference to Atlas Shrugged. It more or less means telling society, it's rules, it's governing bodies, any and all taxes, and every single aspect that fetters a sociopath to fuck themselves and becoming a recluse that still expects to exert influence over the civilization they so scorn by virtue of having money.
"Galtonism"
Look Steve FAILer, I know he, along with Simpson wrote classic comedy for radio & TV, specifically "Hancock's Half Hour" and "Steptoe & Son", but their OBEs are recognition enough, without the need for deifying them, at least the former! [/hyper-sarcasm]
@The Anonymous
"The fuck is Galtonism?"
A suggested above, it's the worship of comedy writer Ray Galton OBE. X3
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
