Eugenics

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#1
Evolution by natural selection is a brutal and ineffective process. Therefore it can be tempting to take shortcuts when it comes to breeding a more fit population, this however will however often end very badly, often worse than no selection at all.


This however does not mean eugenics cannot work, it just means we need to be patient and give it the time it needs.

 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#2
We already have artificial selection
We live in societies heavily controlled by incompetent government and their decisions will have a big impact on who is able to have the best reproductive success.

You putting your head in the sand will not make inintentiona eugenics/dysgenics go away. What happened to dogs (unintentional dysgenic breeding) may now be happening to humans.

Currently males are subjected to draconian selection pressure by females (female sexual selection) and this better work out well.

sciencenorway.no/childlessness-fathers-forskningno/a-quarter-of-norwegian-men-never-father-children/1401047
 

Creamer

Well-known member
#3
Forced breeding
One method of eugenics is to directly force people to have more children. The soft method is baby-quotas where females will be legally obigated to a certain number of children (or more).

A more aggressive approach is to outright reduce females to property and then have her be raped over and over again, this can continue until she has given birth 20 times. She will get physically punished and restrained if she tries to resist. No pain relief will be given during child-birth, she can just be restrained if some surgery (like C-section) is required.

This makes it less likely people with bad genetics will rebel against the system since they are not really impacted by these aggressive breeding methods. People that used to be genetically privileged will not be subjegated and raped (sometimes over 1000 times) being humiliated as people with worse genetics can live normal lives.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#4
How do you define genetically superior?
Individual survival of the fittest is about being better adapted for the environment.

Societal survival of the fittest is about having a population allowing you to build a strong society.

Can you give examples?
If you have democracy it's very important to have an intelligence population. You want the people that are allowed to vote to make good decisions in terms of building a strong society.

If the right to vote is restricted to an elite focus has to be on making said elite more fit to rule over time so they can maintain dominance and build a stronger society.

We also need a population that are able to be productive so we can build a strong military and expand our borders. We also need resources to raise the next generation well.

You may also want to have people who are able to move into other societies and gain influence there. Currently having attractive males is valuable to to heavy female sexual selection.
 

Creamer

Well-known member
#5
You may also want to have people who are able to move into other societies and gain influence there. Currently having attractive males is valuable to to heavy female sexual selection.
Chads are artificial parasites unable to survive without the support of cucks.
Like sports players singers and male models.

Tesla was an incel. Imagine if people had tesla genes.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#6
Plenty of good looking guys are very capable of surviving without relying on their looks.

If you are less attractive you will however have more pressure to compensate by being attractive in other ways, in most cases this is of course a failure and it's getting increasingly hard to be successful relying on only intelligence.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#7
Genetic clowns
People with genetics you do not want can to be born with can provide great entertainment value for other people, thus genes can be viewed as good even if you do not actually want to be born with them.

People with genetic conditions you don't want can create entertainment value for the rest of us, the fact that you do not want to be born with a certain condition does not mean said condition should be eliminated from the gene pool.

In general deviants can provide entertainment value for the rest of us.

Females with gender dysphoria could be humiliated by forced feminization and this would allow for other people to make fun of them, thus we may want to force them to reproduce so we can make fun of and humiliate their offspring too.

1602343913189.png
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#8
Why we need eugenics
The reason humanity as a whole need eugenics is that we cannot survive on earth forever, eventually the sun will become so hot it will try earth and all life on earth will die, moving to mars (assuming that would even be sustainable at all) would just buy us time, we need to more to other star systems in order to continue our lineage and civilization.

Futhermore societies that implement eugenics successfully will be at a disadvantage over societies that do not make the population more fit. This however will not be the same as what's ideal for conolizing other planet. What's ideal in terms of genetics always depend on environment.

https://vintologi.com/posts/3484

There is of course a lot of different methods that can be used for eugenics, it does not have to be a policy that is officially justified with eugenics. One example of this is baby quotas supposedly implemented for raising the fertility rate but then it's individualized to specifically target privileged individuals (forcing them to have and raise more children). We can justify this by saying "privileged people need to do their fair share in increasing the fertility rate" and also "we shouldn't force poor people to have children" and also make exceptions for people with genetic disabilities.

If eugenics is generally viewed as something bad then governments will have to figure out ways to do eugenics without the masses realizing the real purpose is eugenics. A policy can officially have some other purpose such as "supporting parents" or "keep people safe from dangerous people".
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#9
Regression to the mean and racemixing
The fact that someone got lucky and ended up with a particularly good combination of genes does not mean he (and a female who also ended up with a lucky combination) will have really good off-spring together, there will be a regression to the mean and this will be the case even if they are genetically close.

The only way to prevent regression to the mean is to clone yourself.

Having clans engaging in inbreeding could also work but the issue is that inbreeding is generally bad short term since then bad recessive traits will be expressed

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14618

In order for your population to keep improving genetically you need to add new genes to the gene-pool and racemixing is one way to do that. Otherwise you will have to resort to genetic engineering or wait for beneficial random mutations (which rarely happen, most mutations are bad).
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#10
Introducing new genes to the gene pool
Mixing with people who have overall bad genetics is often still beneficial long term if the selective pressure is there. It was beneficial for cro magnong to mix with the neanderthals.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4072735/?report=reader
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/030148v3
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4716682/?report=reader
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25963373/
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/9/e2026309118
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(18)31095-X

Mixing with denisovans was also beneficial.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4134395/?report=reader
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3677943/?report=reader

Today however what we really want to do is to create new genetically engineered humans with new genetics and then if it turns out well mix in these with us and thus introducing new genetics to the gene pool that no human on earth currently has or to introduce specific desireable genes without having to also introducing a lot of genes we don't want.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#11
Racemixing can theoretically be 'bad' short term
Of both parents have different beneficial resessive genes then these genes will not be expressed in the offspring but it will still be passed on so it can still be expressed in subsequent generations.

Let's take the following example

race0 = AACC
race1 = BBDD

Mixing that will create

race2 = ABCD

It's only in the generation after that (such as by mixing 2 individuals of race2) that a hybrid vigor can be created via natural breeding.

1/16: BBCC
1/16: AACC
1/16: BBDD
1/16: AADD
2/16: ABCC
2/16: BBCD
2/16: AACD
2/16: ABDD
4/16: ABCD

If you wanted the recessive genes B and C you have one chance of 16 for getting it by having 2 people of race2 having children together.

In reality however the bad genes you find remaining in the gene pool are typically recessive since dominant genes will be selected against more heavily if they are bad in the environment.
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#12
Africanized Honey bees
This illustrates how racemixing can result in the creation of a hybdrid vigors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africanized_bee

In areas of suitable temperate climate, the survival traits of Africanized honey bee colonies help them outperform European honey bee colonies. They also return later and basically work under conditions that often keep European honey bees hive-bound. This is the reason why they have gained a well-deserved reputation as superior honey producers, and those beekeepers who have learned to adapt their management techniques now seem to prefer them to their European counterparts. Studies show that in areas of Florida that contain Africanized honey bees, the honey production is higher than in areas in which they do not live.[46] It is also becoming apparent that Africanized honey bees have another advantage over European honey bees in that they seem to show a higher resistance to several health issues, including parasites such as Varroa destructor, some fungal diseases like chalkbrood and even the mysterious colony collapse disorder which is currently plaguing beekeepers. So despite all its negative factors, it is possible that the Africanized honey bee might actually end up being a boon to apiculture.

While Africanized bees have generally been more aggressive in the past this has changed in Puerto Rico

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-genomic-explores-evolution-gentle-killer.htmlto rico.

 
#13
Letting people die
Rather than actively killing/sterilizing people you can just let people die by not giving them any welfare.

This can be hastened by intentionally limiting food production or making it more expensive to buy food in other ways (such as high tariffs).
 

Admin

Administrator
Moderator
#14
Child-discardance
When you engage in crude traditional breeding you will end up with a lot of offspring that is not worth the effort it takes to properly rear to adulthood. So what do you do with all these children you do not want to raise?

It's simple, you export them to other countries and let them raise them, this is likely to lead to a lot of child-abuse obviously, pedophiles may buy them to use for sexual entertainment, etc. Since they are not raised in your country however them being abused is not really a problem for your society since their loss of productivity due to bad rearing will hurt the societies that bought them, not your society.
 
Top