Any communists who unironically support euthanasia and eugenics in general here? I get called a fascist for it a lot, but I think the mentally retarded / impaired, if unable to live a productive live unworthy of living, should be euthanized for their own good and for relief of society at large. Watch this video and tell me this person should not be involuntarily euthanized: youtu.be/j4PTf7LgsIE
If I had a child and knew it would be fucked up, I would have it aborted or euthanized. Certain conditions should also be subject to involuntary sterilization. What those would be would be left up to medical professionals. Others up for possible euthanasia would be brain dead, those in comas and those kept alive and suffering, living without truly living. At some point it just mercy. If I was a vegetable I’d want my family to put me down, just as I’d do the same to my parents
I do support it and not only for the retards. I think that anyone who has had enough of life should be granted assistance in suicide to pass away quickly, safely and painless.
Well, it depends on what you mean exactly by eugenics, I'm all for getting rid of hereditary diseases for instance.
Yeah this is what I support. Though not really a disease, just look at what Iceland has done with down syndrome: they’ve almost completely eradicated it through abortion and I think that is a great thing. Of course, Iceland has a small population and probably could carry it out faster than country like the US but I’d like to see something like that carried out on a large-scale
I don't know about you guys, but I considder taking care of the sick and elderly THE defining feature of civilization, and going by this logic that people need to be, by some arbitrary measure, beneficial to society to be allowed to live is disgusting to me. I mean, in the case of your video, yeah, I agree, everyone would be better off if this person died, but I would not want it to be coded into law that my family or anyone else have the right to decide if I should die for being an inconvenience to them.
Maybe it didn’t come across in my OP, but I think we should care for the elderly within reason. My post is more against keeping people in comas alive, keeping the severely demented alive and people who are completely brain-dead or have an overall shitty quality of life. In most of those cases the person in question should have some say over it if possible, of course. Regular old people with a good quality of life should be no problem to anyone sane.
Okay the braindead shouldn't be kept alive if they there is no way to fix them, I agree. This just infuriates me though. A shitty quality of life acording to whom? some say over it? Should I be afraid of being depressed around you in case you go and kill me for having a bad quality of life?
tankie = red fascist
Eh, I'm not against these things in principle but I think there should be a clear line on when and when not to allow it.
I'm in favor of voluntary eugenics, for example. What I mean is creating some fund that would pay people to get sterilized or something if they are known to have a heritable disease. Hotwheels, the guy who created Zig Forums, is actually in favor of things like this because it would have prevented his fucked up life with brittle bone disease. Also, I really would like it if we had less stupid people on this planet.
Euthanasia? Hmm… much trickier subject to me since it means extinguishing an already living human. In the case of someone suffering from a terminal disease who simply wants to end their suffering, I would always be in favor of it. But mostly on the basis of individual choice. Beyond that I don't think it would be wise to allow it.
The other argument for these measures is to prevent suffering.
Suicide is an option.
When I say “bad quality of life” I mean severely retarded (like the video in the OP), brain-dead, down syndrome, living in constant pain, stuff along those lines. I’m not talking about someone being “depressed”. That can be treated
These are not along the same lines though. I already conceded that brain dead people should not be kept alive artificially, but do you have any reason to believe people with downs syndrome have worse quality of life than "normal people"? Why do you now talk about people in constant pain? Are they not allowed to decide for themselves if the pain is worth it to be alive? And what about cases where depression cannot be treated due to some severe trauma or something? I am also almost convinced that depression is the "normal" state of mind
What does Zig Forums think of transhumanism, and is Eliezer Yudkowsky right about communists being defective transhumanists?
I do. communism is still ZOG Occupied Government thou
"Eugenics" implies some kind of state coercion over reproductive decisions, which sounds like an absolutely terrible idea in a capitalist system. You'd change the law (or constitution) to allow eugenics with social democrats or something in power, then be surprised when the far right declares arabs genetically defective next time they're in power?
Maybe in some future system people will agree to eradicate certain genetic diseases, for now it seems like a relatively minor issue where state action could easily go off the rails.
I donno about that. If someone is terminally ill and wants to die, they ought to be free to do so. If doctors find defects in a fetus, the mother primarily and father secondarily ought to be the ones to decide if there's an abortion. All infirm and unstable of society ought to be taken care of. At the same time as taking measures to prevent this sort of thing. Yes, I support "trans-humanism" in this respect.
I heard about a downs syndrome guy getting irate when he heard people talking about curing it. I had to give a little laugh. But your OP just sounds like you want to gas them all to bring "relief to society"
If you really want to relieve society, it's the sociopathic wealthy we ought to set our sights on.
I miss the days when eugenics was a progressive policy and associated with socialism, before 60s hippies and genetics denialism became popular among the radlibs.
Transhumanists are too often utopian and questionably informed about biology, neurology, medicine, and computer science even though the idea in its straightforward definition is perfectly sound and, really, inevitable.
Yudkowsky is a prime example of a crank transhumanist on the level of Kurzweil. Also its the inverse, transhumanists are often bizzaro accelerationist communists.
breeding humans like horses and dogs. Fuck no! At some point they will breed them to make them "cuter". Then we can frolic about disgusting genetic deformities.
Fuck you, catgirl production is actually existing communism
t elitest porky who thinks failing the SAT is “a genetic disorder worthy of involuntary sterilization” Fuck your hierarchies man
The only people who supported Eugenics and called themselves socialists ended up using a twisted deffiniton of socialism and murderd millions of Comrades.
epin benis fuck off lol
Reasonable take/synthesis: wouldn't be against it if it were voluntary
Pretty much this. A friendly, gentle, voluntary eugenics is the only real acceptable way to do it. Free sterilization for anyone who wants it. Financial rewards cannot be attached to this due to class dynamics which would hurt the working class. A lot of diseases and disabilities can be detected during pregnancy, and the mother should be allowed to abort the child if it has a disability or disease. Also previously mentioned ITT but voluntary suicide. If a person who is in a right state of mind chooses to end their life voluntarily, they should be allowed to after a waiting period has elapsed, similar to the process they do in Switzerland iirc. Lastly, socialised gene editing, wherein everyone receives the same (assuming they have been tested and proven to be safe) gene modifications, or modifications which lead to the same result. ie a modification to prevent a hereditary disease should only be done when applicable. These gene modifications will allow us to have smarter, stronger humans who will move our species forward like never before. These steps won't suddenly make the population perfect, but are fundamentally libertarian and allow you to receive 90-99% of the desired result with none of the tyrany that would be required.
The first step to creating "supermen" is allocating resources properly. Which means putting our best minds on this task… rather than inventing the next Doritos flavor or sexual orientation.
A voluntary eugenics is no eugenics at all. The goal is to create stronger, better, healthier people – all goals which will not be achieved on a voluntary basis. Dysgenics will stick around for much longer and possibly forever if you don’t implement it and enforce it through law. Creating a more physically active society is another less invasive method that will have to come hand-in-hand with measures such as discouraging (though not outlawing) harmful vices such as alcohol, tobacco and other drugs.
I support euthanasia for every single right winger on planet earth. They are all subhumans, obsessed with either licking Trump's nutsack or circlejerking about their white skin. None of them give a shit about the working class.
About eugenics… I couldn't care less. Disabled people or people with inheritable disabilities/unfavorable medical conditions must voluntarily convince themselves that they should not reproduce. It's a financial burden for them and an excruciating psychological torture for their offsprings. As long as the working class aren't forced to bear the economic burden, I'm indifferent towards eugenics.
Intelligent people spending time and resources on things like string theory is a marginal waste. The smartest people should instead turn their attention to AI alignment.
why are people who have enjoyed 70 years of adversity-free life entitled to even more spoonfeed? look up suicide rate by age, you are giving free handouts to whiny neurotypicals
GENOCIDE THE DEAF by giving them hearing implants planned reproduction is socialism though prob more technocratic, socialism leans too much towards democracy. maybe this could be a source of internal contradiction within a socialist or a communist society? the efficency and practical benefits of planned human reproduction, artificial wombs and so on vs. the freedom to have 'natural' children - and how they interact?
I hope that by "stronger humans" what you guys mean is just more resilient to illnesses and stuff because if you mean physically stronger as in "buffed" then there is a problem here where males would benefit from it but the girls would become uglier and disgusting losing their cuteness and natural curves. Also the smarter people get the less physical strength is needed as genetically enhanced geniuses would just create machines and robots to do all the physical tasks. Beauty >>>>>>>> Strength
Geez, I wrote that like a retard but I think it's understandable.
I wouldn't use term physical strength but instead use physical fitness which I guess is better term in this context and makes more sense. You don't have to be buff but you should be "fit" enough to avoid health issues, f.e. if you lack vitamins and nutrients, your are less immune to illnesses etc.
"I want to euthanize the mentally impaired"
"people with disabilities shouldn't have a voice in the revolution"
::proceeds to shill for feminism, blacks, gays, etc::
this is how I saw the left as a paleoconservative in the early 2000s. I see not much has changed.
I mean if two can play that game, I think gays should get the same treatment since they reduce the wellspring of the community by not making families and being a burden on the state themselves.
Eugenics became unsessicary after we discovered DNA could be modified
Discourage Alcohol and i’ll kill you.
You can just use retroviruses to do this, no need to cut off people’s nuts
Beauty is subjective, some people consider buff girls to be pretty others do not.
Why is everyone in this thread a brainlet?
It is bad, because they don't have any choices in the matter. Humans have ambitions and if you can turn them into catgirls, you can turn them into any genejacks for whom human rights don't apply. If you want 3D anime catgirls, use robots for that.
You're 100% right of course, breeding slave races is wrong, but on the other hand I'm very interested in uplifts and DNA reconstruction on the living. I wanna be a furry god damn it.
Eugenics will probs be unecssary under socialism. In regards to getting rid of reactionary races, we should simply apply the 'maygarization' process upon them, since everything to admire about Germany, and everything to despise about Russia, lies in its culture, not its genetics.
The think about uplifting is that there is no practical reason to do it.
Why not? Doesn't seem like we'll find aliens anytime soon so why not create our own multispecial federation? A diaspora of Earth's children. I would like to know what a dolphin or a raven or a dog would tell me about the world if it could talk.
The fact that gene editing exists and is a mundane part of medical and biological research has rendered any discussion of sterilization and selective breeding with regards to genetic enhancement pointless and unnecessary.
You are aware that the authors of that study have been exposed as cranks who have frequently been exposed as engaging in methodology so flawed it borders on fraud. They're far-right hacks who have a preconceived worldview that they're desperate to retroactively validate and promote through embarrassingly bad studies.
they would call you a human nigger and swim/fly/run away
it was a meme response. besides, gay men in particular are disloyal af and not only trade diseases but also cannot form pair bonds. lesbians, while not as bad, same gender households per capita produce disfunctional children that often end up in foster care, get molested, become criminals. this is especially true for fatherless households, the latter. the fact this comes up time and again on this board about how mentally disabled people should be killed off is disgusting, like people think retardation is contagious. no, AIDS is.
Because it’s A) A waste of resources B) Every plot of land that you give them, could be ours C) Could lead to “speciesism,” the last thing I want if literal nazfurs.
Wouldn’t be that interesting, because we only have ourselves as an example of intelligence, we’d have to make there brains very similar to ours. As such we wouldn’t get any “new perspectives.”
Severe mental retardation is a burden to everybody who has to live with the retard and it's a burden to the retard itself. Putting mentally ill people to sleep it's the most merciful thing to do.
I don't support eugenics. Nobody wants to marry my schizophrenic brother, even if he has recovered. It's sad, but that's life. I'm pretty sure he doesn't want children, either. The "problem" broadly solves itself, to a point.
So, I think natural selection does a better job of it, even for human beings. Politics and economy playing a more direct and much more arbitrary part in human evolution can only end badly. I don't want the genes responsible for making Donald Trump a satsuma to be passed on to a whole generation of orange men and women, it'd be terrible to see, and completely pointless - it wouldn't happen in nature, because it'd offer no benefit. Although, I suppose chimpanzees exist.
Always? Does it not matter what kind of vegetable you are, or what your quality of life is? If I were an eggplant, but I could still shitpost, I'd be happy to carry on.
What if your schizo brother recovered and put a bullet in your worthless leftist skull? I suppose you wouldn't feel so arrogant then, eh?
Imagine writing the most pointless incelpost of 2018. Congratulations.
Being a supporter of Eugenics has gotten me into a little bit of trouble IRL but it's pretty obvious to anyone with more than 2 brain cells how Natalism and forced-birth / "natural" birth fetishization are counter-progress. Every sane and de-spooked person is antinatalist
Eugenics to me means aborting a baby if it'll be born with Down's Syndrome or horribly crippled otherwise, or encouraging the severely mentally ill not to reproduce, encouraging the extremely poor not to reproduce, etc. The belief "everyone has the right to have as many kids as they want" is sick and wrong. There are so many unwanted children being born, they know they're unwanted, and it shapes their lives for the worse.
"be allowed" is the wrong language. cruel to the mother and cruel to the child. cruel to society.
gene editing SHOULD be done more, gene scanning should be mandatory. There's nothing evil about GMO babies unless we use GMO babies to create a race of slaves.
As it should
If two people want to conceive a child that’s there right, if you don’t think they should, then that’s not your business. t person with Autism Level 129
go on, explain how. you probably still believe in church-weddings and nuclear families and Onan
Eugenics definitely not, but why would supporting euthanasia (for people who want it) be fascist?
Pre birth screenings are probably the best way to go but idk if thats euthanasia
Devils advocate: do you really want a government database of everyone's DNA?
While he was a pretty nasty guy, he was also a giant coward. This also implies that I'd leave a gun accessible to him.
I dislike Trump, but I don't think that makes me a lefty. I try to be pragmatic. I would sit down and consider my views to find a label, but I think finding an appropriate label can influence people to act in maintenance of that label.