What do you think of National Transhumanism?

are you saying things like Juche is a bad thing?

...

obviously. i get it best korean hate americans, they have every reason to - after that war, but how was it a good idea to rebuild nation from scratch in isolation and waste more resources on military research and leader hubris than actual infrastructure and base needs?

Transhumanism is retarded, until we have a full grasp of the human brain we are hopeless to simulate it. Imitate it maybe.

But the whole mind body transference seems farfetched to me, and something only Silicon Valley retards would invest in. I hope one day one of these fucks try it and ends up in a psychic hellscape of torment he's unaware of existing.

Forgot my trip

Throughout the world there will be different genetic ideals, you can't expect Asians and Europeans to have the same ideal genetics in mind. Thus, National Transhumanism simply is the adoption of this genetic ideal within the various cultures.

Transhumanism is more than just techno-utopian dreams, already genetic engineering tests are being conducted on human embryos. If you could offer a treatment that would cut out genes that stifle cognition and add in genes that enhance it, would that not be beneficial?

That conflict comes much later

...

hoochie is that really you
were have you been

What the fuck are you talking about? The intelligentsia was tightly controlled and held very little power under nominally socialist states. Mao and his Red Guards in particular went to extreme lengths regarding schools and academia, they were flat-out anti-intellectualists not unlike Fascists.

Immediately? No. We've had this medical technology for a while in stem cells but because people are squeamish about aborted fetuses we can't have medical breakthroughs.

I don't trust what sidesteps the process. It's too risky. I trust Silicon Valley even less.

The only thing I'm interested in is cloning.

No one will be any race in the future, we'll be cyborgs.

On this board, pretending to be different people sometimes. I've been posting more than usual lately. Just having a fun time.

I might as well just pull the trip out again, even if it somehow changed.

Induced pluripotent stem cells!!! As soon as we work out the cancer issues, of course, though it solves everything

I find this risky as well. The moral implications of sawing off an arm to buy a better one has not only ethical implications that things like stem cells can solve, but also really, how that gets into self harm territory.

But most of all it cannot be capitalist. If some Deus Ex scenario happened, there would be problems brought up in that game. People wouldn't be able to afford to constantly upkeep and upgrade what they have, and it would put non-augmented laborers in a shitty situation. Forcing them to cut off a limb for capital.

It's still a Silicon Valley pipe dream, it would be neet to have a hand with dental equipment in it for dentists, but at the end of the day it would force people to lose limbs to keep a job.

There would be too many health hazards, labor issues, and medical rights issues, associated with so many Americans consensually having their arms sawed off that it wouldn't be worth it.

Capitalism and cybernetics just do not mix unless you're already an amputee

I should have wrote cognitive elites instead. In that sense, the solution to deal with anti-intellectualism is not making it something is exclusionary based on cognitive capability.

Wasn't Marx himself a technological determinist? Yet, did he envision the capability for us to modify our own genes? Furthermore, unlike the ideologies criticized, my form of ethno-nationalism is one in which a person of any genetic background can apply to. They simply need to adopt the national ideal in their assimilation. Frankly, the "post-racial cyborg" would operate in a similar manner, it's simply a difference in what the national ideal is.

I don't think when Capitalism ends there will be the technology to create what you want. We have to prepare for the possibility we are just what we are and Silicon Valley cannot save us or save shit besides the affluent.

I agree with your criticisms of cybernetics, especially in regards to any cognitive enhancement done through cybernetics. If I put a brain-chip in my brain, I may become smarter, but nothing is stopping someone from embedding a kill-switch in it.

Materialist inequalities extend to the genes people are born with. Even if there is a proletarian revolution, without cognitive enhancement are they not destined to be dominated by cognitive elites who subvert it for their own ends? I think what I suggest is what Silicon Valley fears, I don't advocate a form of immortality, I simply want the gift of cognition that some are blessed with available to the masses. As I said I want to seize the genes of the cognitive elites (not violently, just a copy of their genome) and then have it available to everyone else.

If a person desires to have the cognitive capabilities of say Stephen Hawking, they should be able to get it.

how does that work

There is more to transhumanism than that and personally I'd like GitS style prosthetics over actual brain uploading. Not that I think any of this is feasible in the near future. No matter how cool I think it is we are talking about science fiction for now.

Take a population and ask them a question.
Culture will certainly have an impact on such a question, you cannot expect people to answer it uniformly. You can generally expect those who ascribe to one culture to coalesce around one ideal state and those of another culture to coalesce onto another state. Some posters have already mentioned their ideal would include some cyborgization. In a nutshell, throughout the world groups will form united through a common view of what is the most ideal form of existence.

What is considered perfection is relative.

Don't get me wrong I agree, I just think the banal reality is things are far more complicated than that, and the world sucks, and right now we're as cyberpunk as we're gonna get until we clone a mammoth

are you implying that EVERY culture strives for perfection?

Fuck no, I'd be a komodo dragon. FUCK your "master race", I wanna be the master species.

Yeah, there is a reason few transhumanists have spent any amount of time coding or working with computers. The things they want are mostly distant future. We got the worst cyberpunk future. All tablets and phones with none of the cool 80s cyberpunk aesthetic or prosthetics.

okay buddy

How could giving people absolute control over their offspring to an extent unprecedented in human history ever succeed in producing more freedom of any sort? Sounds like the express route to the totalitarian nightmare of a genetic caste system. Besides, nerds are easy to beat up. If they ever try to form a new ruling class after communism is achieved, the people's militia will bully them into submission. It sounds to me that what you're really worried about is a vanguard movement gradually becoming more and more hostile to the working class and morphing into an ossified bureaucratic state, as happened to the USSR under Khrushchev and Brezhnev. The solution to this problem is not to mess around with the human genome, but simply to not have a monolithic, hierarchical vanguard party in control of everything. Keep in mind that when all hierarchies have been eliminated, there are no hierarchies for particularly cunning individuals to climb to the top of.

We already have a genetic caste system. The genes you are born with will always result in a hierarchy of some sort. By offering people the capability to change their genes, it frees them from this caste system.
Impossible unless humans are free to change the genes they're born with.

That's not even cyberpunk. That's fucking star trek the next generation bullshit.

Evolution by natural selection favors traits which increase the extent to which one can reproduce. Further, genetic and chemical modification is not nearly so simple as you seem to believe. Alterations to organisms are always trade offs. Would it be possible to modify human embryos so that everyone would have myostatin related muscle hypertrophy and could squat 500 pounds? It might be. However, next time there is a famine the descendants of modified individuals might have a difficult time surviving, since very low levels of body fat mean correspondingly low levels of fat soluble vitamins, and catabolizing muscle for energy places much more of a strain on the kidneys than consuming fat for energy. You read too much science fiction.

You assume that some people being stronger, smarter, or more sociable than others will cause hierarchies to emerge and that everyone needs to be equal to live in an egalitarian way, but this is demonstrably false. For tens of thousands of years, people lived as hunter gatherers without property or hierarchy beyond children and parents. Similar forms of social organization can be observed in some of the world's surviving populations of hunter-gatherers. All you've done is restate the muh human nature objection to leftist politics and the argument that all you need to be successful is a pair of bootstraps to pull yourself up with in a techno-fetishist way. On the contrary, widespread access to genetic modification technologies, if it comes about under the conditions of capitalism and they can be applied as successfully as you believe they can, will make the class system of the moment into a permanent fact of human existence between then and the end of time.

And in a world where everyone is completely equal, why would people stop organizing their societies along hierarchical lines? Over the course of history, highly arbitrary patterns of organization have been established and survived by appealing to concepts like god, nation, or property and rights. Just as genetic variety doesn't make communism impossible, genetic uniformity doesn't rule out the existence of classes.

It's not coercion, it's cultural assimilation. Furthermore, a free market lets the individuals choose what genes they want to adopt. By blaming hierarchy and offering an abstract platitude that cannot be implemented, you solve nothing. Hierarchies naturally arise because of one type of inequality that cannot be solved and that is time. There exists no human that can master everything, so they depend on others to master what they cannot.

Now read , he states…
Is this not clearly a form of cognitive elitism? If acquiring certain types of knowledge requires time, then by extension you can expect some people to be able to acquire it faster and others slower. These cognitive inequalities will then naturally result in a hierarchy where the slow ones delegate the decision making to the fast ones. This creates a dependency that unscrupulous individuals can abuse for their own ends.

Thus, those who are born with genes that make them slow learners are destined to become subservient to those born with genes that make them fast learners. I don't claim that my ideas will get rid of hierarchy, but it will free the slow ones and allow them to raise their own cognitive abilities to that of the fast ones.

No it doesn't. If you don't adopt the genes which the bourgeois demands you adopt in order to be employable, you starve to death. It would be like trying to hold down a job without using a telephone or computer at home.
Why does division of labor necessitate hierarchy?
Is the people who use tools and resources owned by others to earn their living expropriating those tools and resources so that they can enter into communal ownership really that abstract? And are you sure it's so much less feasible than modifying the human species? Keep in mind that aside from a few circulating cell populations, there is no way to genetically modify anyone besides an embryo. You can fuss around with a cell or two and inject it back into an adult, but the majority of the cells will remain the same, and modifying every single cell and replacing it in the person is impossible. Maybe you could invent some sort of nanotechnology to do it in 10,000 years, but if you were able to do that then you would be living in a post-scarcity society anyway.

You've refuted your own argument. As you just stated, hierarchies form between parents and children and that is exactly because of the "time" component I discussed

You've misinterpreted me, I do not claim that I will get rid of class, but rather communism is indeed impossible without genetic manipulation. Furthermore, even these primitive tribes you've described had their own specializations. Many I'm sure had a religious specialization such as a Shaman. Specialization always leads to class based social structures, as human societies get more complex the necessity of classes rises as no one can be responsible for everything. There cannot be a classess society, but only societies where one can switch between classes easily.

Specialization =/= domination
If John works mining coal and Sue packages meat, who is dominating who? One of the largest flaws in your argument is your failure to explain the link between division of labor and hierarchy. Why does one necessitate the other?
Because children start out not being able to walk, talk, or provide for themselves in any way. Do you want women to give birth to fully mature people? I don't imagine many vaginas can dilate far enough to permit a 150 pound person to pass through. You could be advocating for the abolition of the family here, but I'm guessing that isn't something you'd be into.
Please explain your definition of class, because I'm starting to doubt that we're working off of the same one.

Please provide an example of how you see this playing out.

Transhumanism is a plot to create literal eternal hell on earth. Technology is cancer.

Sorry to double post like this. The general populace doesn't trust "experts" so much these days. My mother and her friends express a partially unfounded skepticism for the medical profession and academic science which drives me up the wall. The only people I can see falling prey to your intellectual elite here are people who are both very, very trusting and have mental disabilities. You can't rise to power by forming an army of retards.

I prefer not dying before my 5th birthday.

What is this libertarian bullshit and why are you missrepresenting fascism OP?

Basic medicine is not the infinitely malevolent chronophage you're duped into doing the dirty work for in the name of le noble cause

So you want to abandon industrial technology all together instead of using it's fruits for the common good?

There is nothing stopping them from ignoring employers and establishing their own communes and businesses that incorporate profit sharing. Or join any other type of collective group that already does this.

Exactly, this is a time component that results in hierarchies. Specialization too requires time, one does not become a master in anything immediately. This creates the demand for education which is hierarchical, as there is a dependency by those who do not know on those who do know. In the distant past this was done through apprenticeships where a novice was subordinate to a master of a trade. Cognitive inequalities exacerbate this, as some become locked out of certain specializations.

All societies are divided into classes, these classes represent the superset of all specializations and the taxonomy of such specializations. In all of these specializations there are those with the most experience and those with the least. Those with little experience tend to be subordinate to those with more.

You can look at Christianity as a good example, most people were not able to read the Bible, so priests were delegated as the people responsible for telling them what the Bible was all about. Of course, the printing press revealed them to be liars. They were still smart people who learned to read Latin, but they simply lied about the contents of the Bible. If a type of analysis requires a lot of cognitive capability, then those who think doing their own analysis uses up to much of their own time, they will end up delegating the analysis to someone else, this someone else can lie to them influencing their behavior.

You're a fucking dullard and you don't belong here.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006322315004369

Look up Oxytocin and how it can regulates human behavior. What facilitates both tribalism and altruism is intertwined.

Are you using taxonomy to imply a shit about human behaviorism hahahahahahahaha

Yes there is. In a market economy, producers must produce goods at or below socially necessary labor time. If they do not, they will be out competed and employees must find another form of subsistence. If genetic enhancement works and makes people more productive, they will be forced to get them if they like eating and don't own property.
The Prussian model of education is hierarchical, but you only need to look at the Socratic dialogues for an example of student and teacher conversing as equals.
If you define class in such a bizarre way, then I agree with you completely. You cannot abolish class as you define it (which no one else on this board does) unless you achieve individual self sufficiency with a cabin in the woods or by making everyone a brain surgeon, quantum physicist, and rocket scientist. However, the goal of communism is not and never has been to stop people from having different jobs.
Breaking news, you can manipulate people with religion! Would you care to investigate the system of productive relations which allowed this to happen or the historically contingent circumstances which placed the Church into such a dominant position, or are you just going to blame a whole bunch of malevolent smart people who tricked peasants into tithing? You're blaming individuals for societal problems.

marxists.org/glossary/terms/c/l.htm

As Marx says, within a subgroup of specialization laborers work together. Of those classes there are those who know most about the specialization, i.e. are the most experienced and those who just started. Those who just started are dependent on those who are experienced. Thus, classes represent the superset of those who labor in their own fields of specialization, whether the labor is physical or cognitive.

The dependency remains the same, the student must trust the teacher for the student does not know what the teacher knows.

Ok, how about this example. In your anarchist state, the meat collective runs all the stuff related to processing meat. They decide to replace meat items with different types of meat while distributing the higher quality meat to themselves. Now for one that knows little about meat, how exactly can they know they are being lied to? To prove such a thing would require a genetic test of some sort, however, what if these genetic testers have been getting some of this high quality meat as well? Well then, with these two specializations controlled, all other specializations cannot know they're being cheated when they provide their services and goods to them.

The biggest flaw in Marx's logic is the idea that the "worker" class is one single class. No, all labor falls into it's own distinctions and group of specialization. All classes are interconnected with one another. While unions help each other fight the bourgeoisie, once the bourgeoisie go away the unions still remain. The unions remain because each field of specialization is a class itself. Thus, the fundamental premise of communism is flawed, because it assumes there will not be class conflict between these various classes.

hahahahahha holy shit is this the argument "BUT PEOPLE ARE IN POWER IN COMMUNISM" rephrased

If there is no private property, then those who know how to use a means of production hold power over those who don't. This results in a hierarchy within specializations, which is based on seniority (experience). These hierarchies result in various classes that represent all fields of labor who have specialized knowledge that all other classes do not. How can you claim this will not lead to class conflict?

You can't dream if you get what you want.

The fact you used taxonomy as a rational for human behavior shows you as the little psued boy you are, but this takes the cake

So do you not have an answer? Taxomony is simply a word to describe the vast array of fields and specializations that one can labor in.

Taxonomy as you brought it up was biological taxonomy. You compared that to labor.

You have no Earthly clue on what you're talking about and you've never even set foot on a community college

...

No you still don't understand why I'm criticizing you. You're confusing the classification of life on Earth with the working class. Not even a community college educated Holla Forums poster would do that

If I'm being generous

"those who know how to use a means of production" HAVE to socialize the knowledge that they have. Else what will happen when they die? We just stop making meat? Also there is plenty of public knowledge even in capitalism about basic labour. Those who "don't know how to use a means of production" can simply open their laptops and goog-i mean duckduckgo that shit.

Also "each field of specialization is a class itself"? What? You mean the people in farms and slaughterhouses dominate society? That's just plain wrong you fucking retard. We don't only depend on the people making our food, we also depend on the people building our houses, distributing our gas, throwing out our trash, researching to make our jobs easier, making entertainment so we can take a load off every now and then, the people cooking our food, maintaining our factories, etc. A hierarchy cannot form among these people because society depends on all of them in a similar amount.

oh shit shes back

According to who? Who forces someone to communicate their specialized knowledge to people? Certainly there is communication between those new to the field and those who are experienced, but communication outside the field? That is an assumption you're making, a dependent on that what is published on the net is all that there is to the field.

Is this really true? Do you think all specializations are equal?

Oh, I understand, I'm simply a blasphemer who questions the basic premise that class goes away when there is no private property.

Actually we want direct democracy

Rule by the media class?

The issue here is that you're still assuming that the Aryan race is superior, while you're equating "Aryan" to "white", which is completely false, and by that fact you're disproving your own belief. You're also assuming that anyone feels envy towards your skin colour.

No, people naturally want their children to be a better version of them, that is, like them except better. That's natural behaviour. Nobody except other Holla Forumsack retards envy white people.

also here's the classical

Just fuck right off with your white master race bullshit, it's been proven false many times. Willfully creating a master race would be another question that I would consider, but thinking somehow everyone choosing to buy synthetic white children will fill the world with a master race is worse than retarded.

Yes I took the bait.

National Transhumanism is silly, National Accelerationism is where is at fam