In stable countries, eugenics is the tool which can be used to change the general traits and abilities of the general population. It does this by selecting desirable individuals to become a majority rather than a minority.

It’s a fact that some people will always be better than others, in varying qualities, and if we are sane, we will remove the criminally stupid and replace them with higher quality individuals who we can trust not to wreck the biosphere with overpopulation and wasting of natural resources on mundane consumerism.

It’s evident there is a shortage of intelligent people in any country we observe, and an abundance of dim witted people who look human enough to be intelligent, but are nothing of the sort. If this was spoken to a population now, it would be suicide because it is simply not popular to tell stupid people they are stupid and must reduce their breeding, they would riot, smash and stampede.

So instead of declaring out-right genocide against the stupid, in stable regions that need to evolve, they can zone off areas for higher quality people who contribute toward civilization and leave the lesser to fend for themselves, to which they would only form a mob of starving, stupid peasants – after all, they have the “human right” to eat, drink and be merry, and they’ll kill to prove it, so why shouldn’t God just give it to them?

It’s cheaper to kill the huge distances between worthwhile people rather than the majority of people themselves, instead zoning them into their own territories, trying to keep out of reach, allowing naturalized selection to do all the work (post peak-oil, convergence of catastrophes, civil war, AIDS, etc). The zoned area would attain total self sufficiency, a seed for a better future.

Then it’s only a matter of helping nature by chipping off their numbers, piece by piece, carefully expanding the zone of the higher quality to enclose the whole country. Nature repeats this pattern, so should we.

Toward the next epoch of civilization.

Once a population of higher quality is concentrated, they could then begin to advance toward the next epoch of civilization itself. This involves a migration toward an extreme environment leaving the rotten population behind to die of its own incompetence, especially if it is too big to simply replace at the time.

There are new varieties of civilization possible, because civilization so far has been focused on soil based agriculture as the main support for it. This can be changed in the future with the use of Closed Environment Agriculture and Closed Environmental Life Support Systems. What’s more, is whatever is achieved with these will help space settlement needs and can be developed thoroughly before even leaving the planet, both allowing more compacted, higher civilizations.

These greater civilizations can be created in ‘transnatural niches’ for an advanced population – these are new settlements deep underground, in the oceans – on the bedrock and in floating cities, leaving flat land (for wilderness) in preference of mountainous land where biodiversity is generally lower and finally to thrive in ice deserts like Antarctica and Greenland, Svalbard, even the Sahara as an interesting contrast.

This benefits us in a number of ways:

  • It prototypes technology which can be vital for colonizing the entire solar system and beyond.
  • It provides many safe zones in the event of mass extinction or death of the biosphere.
  • It frees up territory which is rich in biodiversity for wildlife to exist undisturbed, reducing our weight onto the biosphere.
  • It uses our creative abilities to exploit regions that have little biodiversity and are difficult for life to survive in.
  • Your tribe/ race will gain the higher ground dimensionally and will have a survival advantage over those who are still dependent on standard agriculture.
  • There is more depth than surface area of land and so nations gain another dimension toward their borders, there is also more to the surface area of our planet than simply land. The “land carrying capacity” is just that, limited to the available soil of the land for standard agriculture.

Tags: ,

17 Responses to “Eugenics”

  1. crow says:

    Makes sense to me.
    The perennial problem with Eugenics is the one of deciding who should go, and then enforcing the decision. People rarely agree to eliminate themselves.
    I like the idea of Robinson Crusoe, on an industrial scale.
    Separation seems a viable alternative to conventional Eugenics.
    The entry fee would, alone, be a workable filter.
    I have often gone and lived in places where nobody else wanted to, or could.
    It takes a hardiness that most do not possess.

  2. Jim Necroslaughter says:

    Those are some really orignial ideas! More depth, than surface area – wow, never thought of that!

  3. annis says:

    the problem with that is that the children of really smart people never live up to the expectations.

    • Repair_Man_Jack says:

      It’s not just brains. It’s desire. Really smart people tend to give their children comfortable lives. Conan The X-Box Nerd never would have sucessfully beheaded Fulsa-Doom.

    • the problem with that is that the children of really smart people never live up to the expectations.

      My experience is the opposite, unless those really smart people are liberals, in which case they undermine their kids with neurosis.

  4. Baldur says:

    Who decides what is and is not desirable? This is what our elites want now: they want to breed a “higher race”, preferably part machine (look up transhumanism, which is supposed to be a “reality” by 2045).

    No thanks. Eugencis went out for a reason. Evolution is superior to anything mankind can concoct by his own mad choices. If we simply allowed evolution to take place without interference, we would not have all the problems we have. Sure you have to factor in social pressure, but overall we’d all be plenty healthy as a society without technology and man’s tinkering with medicine, etc.

    • Robert Martin says:

      This is sort of what I agree with. The way explained is simple, interested individuals move to a difficult location – that decides, the disinterest of the majority who don’t care is enough to filter worthwhile people from the herd.

      Technology makes the unnatural natural, it can bring more to nature or throw it away.

    • Evolution is superior to anything mankind can concoct by his own mad choices. If we simply allowed evolution to take place without interference, we would not have all the problems we have.

      Good point. I think we should also all read this for a broadening of perspective:

  5. Von List says:

    Martin, what is your stance on transhumanism in the sense of merging human bodies with computers/machines? I know that eugenics is a *type* of transhumanism in a way, but I would like to hear your views on the aforementioned form of it.

    To me, I’ve always felt uneasy about the concept. I can’t put my finger on it, but I suppose I just see it as “inorganic”.

    • Robert Martin says:

      I have never liked transhumanism, because it’s humanism and based on egalitarian ideology. It also believes in the elimination of all suffering, which is senseless and stupid. Instead, I believe in transnaturalism – the merging of creation with evolution.

  6. Shayne says:

    The facade of abundance is barely holding on as it is. When the effects of peak oil really hit home, and parts of the petro-chmical system begin to disappear for good, how can anyone expect to afford to colonize even the Moon, let alone the whole solar system?

    • Robert Martin says:

      I know, unfortunately no one is going to colonise space until the collapse has settled down. So the compromise – Earth still has so much to offer us, we don’t have civilizations in the oceans, ice deserts and deep underground, only small outposts here and there.

      This is the next step for post-peak oil space entrepreneurs, creating permanent settlements using CEA in extreme environments. It’s easier and cheaper for future generations to get into space once the type of civilization has been created beforehand.

  7. Repair_Man_Jack says:

    Margaret Sanger was just awesome at that….Dr. Gosnell is her intellectual heir.

  8. […] Review”Frank Azzurro – “Modern Child Rearing”Robert Martin – “Eugenics”An Unmarried Man – “My Affair at the End of the Ocean“, “The Sly […]

  9. Hami says:

    The problem with this is that good WOMEN are pulled down, held down, sabotaged, etc. by both bad men who want them for themselves and bad women who steal the good men. Good WOMEN are in the cesspool, where we are all held captive.

  10. rachel says:

    a “stable” country can “change general traits” and abilities”? Who decides what is “desirable”? WHO DECIDES THIS?? this is crazy and your opinion is SICK, in my opion; that is.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>