Possible Support Of Eugenics [R]

[Grand Proudhonia]

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=471156&p=36146935#p36146935

Groups can be defined by things more noble than demographics...

You can't change the fact that tribalism just like traditionalism, drug addiction, gangs, socialism or video game addiction, is a typical lower class phenomenon.

Without what's essentially equivalent to fixing Detroit (that is, genetic engineering) it will always exist.

emphasis mine

Sounds like support for racial eugenics

[Grand Proudhonia]

Do you want to eliminate racism?

Fix Sub-Saharan Africa through genetic editing. If you want people to forget about race you need to make it truly irrelevant in predicting outcome. Right now people can't afford to forget about race even if they want to (yes this applies to me).

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=471156&p=36146935#p36146935

You can't change the fact that tribalism just like traditionalism, drug addiction, gangs, socialism or video game addiction, is a typical lower class phenomenon.

Without what's essentially equivalent to fixing Detroit (that is, genetic engineering) it will always exist.

emphasis mine

Sounds like support for racial eugenics

Ditto. One cannot "fix" (In this case removing all non-whites) Detroit without either forcefully sterilizing the Black population or encouraging natalist policies and the aforementioned "engineering", hence he is advocating eugenics.

[Neko-koku]

I'm advocating eugenics through genetic editing but clearly not genocide. I'm not really even sure why people think that they are equivalent.

Let mods decide.

I stand by my statements because I think they haven't violated any rules at all.

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

Another one here, this time a direct confession from Neko himself:

I definitely support eugenics, especially genetic editing. Without improving humans through genetic editing, transhumanism or making superhuman AI there can be hardly any progress.

You are either a traditionalist who simply do not want progress or a modernist who wants progress. If you want progress then you want to improve humans.

URL: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=471156&p=36146929#p36146929

[Neko-koku]

Another one here, this time a direct confession from Neko himself:

I definitely support eugenics, especially genetic editing. Without improving humans through genetic editing, transhumanism or making superhuman AI there can be hardly any progress.

You are either a traditionalist who simply do not want progress or a modernist who wants progress. If you want progress then you want to improve humans.

URL: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=471156&p=36146929#p36146929

Yes. I stand by that. Let mods decide whether they are kosher. I think so.

People need to get over the idea that genetic editing is something that inherently sucks....because....because...Nazis did something completely unrelated called gassing people.

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

I'm advocating eugenics through genetic editing but clearly not genocide. I'm not really even sure why people think that they are equivalent.

Let mods decide.

I stand by my statements because I think they haven't violated any rules at all.

Your post is most definitely not kosher:
"Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek εὐγενής eugenes 'well-born' from εὖ eu, 'good, well' and γένος genos, 'race, stock, kin')[2][3] is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population by excluding (through a variety of morally criticized means) certain genetic groups judged to be inferior, and promoting other genetic groups judged to be superior.[4][5] The definition of eugenics has been a matter of debate since the term was coined by Francis Galton in 1883. The concept predates the term; Plato suggested applying the principles of selective breeding to humans around 400 BC. Eugenics, in the modern understanding of the term, is seen as having close ties to white supremacism.[6]

While eugenic principles have been practiced as early as ancient Greece, the contemporary history of eugenics began in the early 20th century, when a popular eugenics movement emerged in the United Kingdom,[7] and then spread to many countries, including the United States, Canada,[8] and most European countries. In this period, eugenic ideas were espoused across the political spectrum. Consequently, many countries adopted eugenic policies, intended to improve the quality of their populations' genetic stock. Such programs included both positive measures, such as encouraging individuals deemed particularly "fit" to reproduce, and negative measures, such as marriage prohibitions and forced sterilization of people deemed unfit for reproduction. Those deemed "unfit to reproduce" often included people with mental or physical disabilities, people who scored in the low ranges on different IQ tests, criminals and "deviants," and members of disfavored minority groups.

The eugenics movement became associated with Nazi Germany and the Holocaust when many of the defendants at the Nuremberg trials attempted to justify their human rights abuses by claiming there was little difference between the Nazi eugenics programs and the U.S. eugenics programs.[9] In the decades following World War II, with more emphasis on human rights, many countries began to abandon eugenics policies, although some Western countries, including the United States, Canada, and Sweden among them, continued to carry out forced sterilizations.

Since the 1980s and 1990s, with new assisted reproductive technology procedures available, such as gestational surrogacy (available since 1985), preimplantation genetic diagnosis (available since 1989), and cytoplasmic transfer (first performed in 1996), concern has grown about the possible revival of a more potent form of eugenics after decades of promoting human rights.

A major criticism of eugenics policies is that, regardless of whether negative or positive policies are used, they are susceptible to abuse because the genetic selection criteria are determined by whichever group has political power at the time. Furthermore, negative eugenics in particular is criticized by many as a violation of basic human rights, which include the right to reproduce. Another criticism is that eugenics policies eventually lead to a loss of genetic diversity, thereby resulting in inbreeding depression due to a loss of genetic variation. Yet another criticism of contemporary eugenics policies is that they propose to permanently and artificially disrupt millions of years of evolution, and that attempting to create genetic lines "clean" of "disorders" can have far-reaching ancillary downstream effects in the genetic ecology, including negative effects on immunity and species resilience."

[Grand Proudhonia]

Czech, you are not a mod.... please leave this thread alone

[Neko-koku]

I'm advocating eugenics through genetic editing but clearly not genocide. I'm not really even sure why people think that they are equivalent.

Let mods decide.

I stand by my statements because I think they haven't violated any rules at all.

Your post is most definitely not kosher:
"Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek εὐγενής eugenes 'well-born' from εὖ eu, 'good, well' and γένος genos, 'race, stock, kin')[2][3] is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population by excluding (through a variety of morally criticized means) certain genetic groups judged to be inferior, and promoting other genetic groups judged to be superior.[4][5] The definition of eugenics has been a matter of debate since the term was coined by Francis Galton in 1883. The concept predates the term; Plato suggested applying the principles of selective breeding to humans around 400 BC. Eugenics, in the modern understanding of the term, is seen as having close ties to white supremacism.[6]

While eugenic principles have been practiced as early as ancient Greece, the contemporary history of eugenics began in the early 20th century, when a popular eugenics movement emerged in the United Kingdom,[7] and then spread to many countries, including the United States, Canada,[8] and most European countries. In this period, eugenic ideas were espoused across the political spectrum. Consequently, many countries adopted eugenic policies, intended to improve the quality of their populations' genetic stock. Such programs included both positive measures, such as encouraging individuals deemed particularly "fit" to reproduce, and negative measures, such as marriage prohibitions and forced sterilization of people deemed unfit for reproduction. Those deemed "unfit to reproduce" often included people with mental or physical disabilities, people who scored in the low ranges on different IQ tests, criminals and "deviants," and members of disfavored minority groups.

The eugenics movement became associated with Nazi Germany and the Holocaust when many of the defendants at the Nuremberg trials attempted to justify their human rights abuses by claiming there was little difference between the Nazi eugenics programs and the U.S. eugenics programs.[9] In the decades following World War II, with more emphasis on human rights, many countries began to abandon eugenics policies, although some Western countries, including the United States, Canada, and Sweden among them, continued to carry out forced sterilizations.

Since the 1980s and 1990s, with new assisted reproductive technology procedures available, such as gestational surrogacy (available since 1985), preimplantation genetic diagnosis (available since 1989), and cytoplasmic transfer (first performed in 1996), concern has grown about the possible revival of a more potent form of eugenics after decades of promoting human rights.

A major criticism of eugenics policies is that, regardless of whether negative or positive policies are used, they are susceptible to abuse because the genetic selection criteria are determined by whichever group has political power at the time. Furthermore, negative eugenics in particular is criticized by many as a violation of basic human rights, which include the right to reproduce. Another criticism is that eugenics policies eventually lead to a loss of genetic diversity, thereby resulting in inbreeding depression due to a loss of genetic variation. Yet another criticism of contemporary eugenics policies is that they propose to permanently and artificially disrupt millions of years of evolution, and that attempting to create genetic lines "clean" of "disorders" can have far-reaching ancillary downstream effects in the genetic ecology, including negative effects on immunity and species resilience."

You know that I'm not pushing for some mass sterilization scheme, let alone an extermination scheme. Instead you simply have problems with the word "eugenics".

Well, whatever. Mods can see what I actually mean by it.

[Grand Proudhonia]

Neko, my concern is the phrasing of "fix detroit" and "fix sub saharan africa" which (from my perspective) appear to be targeting only black populations as if they are something to be "fixed" through the use of racial eugenics

[Neko-koku]

Neko, my concern is the phrasing of "fix detroit" and "fix sub saharan africa" which (from my perspective) appear to be targeting only black populations as if they are something to be "fixed" through the use of racial eugenics

My "fix" isn't "kill" or "sterilize". In fact in my other threads I have explained what this "fixing" means:

1. Genetic editing (no it has nothing to do with skin color lol)
2. Nutrition & deworming
3. Education and cultural changes

Where is genocide?

Yes, I do have a nation that is actually genocidal IC..called EastKekistan. Yet I basically only use it for RP now and that this account always condemns East Kekistanism either IC or OOC.

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

Neko, my concern is the phrasing of "fix detroit" and "fix sub saharan africa" which (from my perspective) appear to be targeting only black populations as if they are something to be "fixed" through the use of racial eugenics

Indeed. Unless he specifically wishes to "improve" all humans and not merely disproportionately target black populations (Not to mention his a priori assumption that they are a "problem" needing to be "fixed") with his eugenic policies, then it is by definition an excuse for racially motivated repression.

[Neko-koku]

Neko, my concern is the phrasing of "fix detroit" and "fix sub saharan africa" which (from my perspective) appear to be targeting only black populations as if they are something to be "fixed" through the use of racial eugenics

Indeed. Unless he specifically wishes to "improve" all humans and not merely disproportionately target black populations (Not to mention his a priori assumption that they are a "problem" needing to be "fixed") with his eugenic policies, then it is by definition an excuse for racially motivated repression.

All humans need to be improved though. However we have to have priorities.

From my posts it is clear what I want. I want human -> transhuman -> superhuman AGI to work.

[Old Tyrannia]

This is moderation, not general. This debate does not belong here.

Regardless of whether or not Neko-koku is advocating eugenics, holding controversial views is not in and of itself forbidden under the site rules so long as they are expressed in a way that is not trolling. I do not see that as the case here. Nothing reported is actionable.