HW is trying to get a pro eugenics org up and running. Everyone's thoughts?

Nah the technology in Gattaca was not exclusive to people who have the means to it, remember that the protagonist's brother was a complete gene Chad. The underclass were people conceived the natural way, by accident.

Yeah, I'm not sure how in depth they went in describing who has what amount of access to the technology, if it's limited by what one can afford, or if it's evenly distributed to all people by the state (in whatever form it took) so long as they choose to. It's been a while since I've seen it, but I watched it a second time almost immediately after.

IIRC, that was a special case of the protagonist's parents to accentuate the class differences. Poor people can't afford gene therapy so they pass anti discrimination laws for naturally born people that do basically jack shit.

Not to mention. People who did not undergo gene therapy have a much harder time getting a decent job, whether it's due to capability or the notions people have about natural borns. They then have kids but can't afford gene therapy for them, thus expanding the lower class population.

I generally agree with the article he wrote for The Daily Stormer or whatever nazi rag it was. We should try to stop people with debilitating illness like his from reproducing. At least until we can do gene editing to fix that shit. He wants a "libertarian" solution, i.e. a tax deduction for cripples who get sterilized. To be honest, that's probably more effective than forced sterilization shit. People tend to rebel and hide when forced to do things.

I'm not so sure about sterilization though, because it's mostly irreversible. For women there are temporary options, and there's a temporary option for men caught up in getting approval (vasalgel). This would be better than permanent sterilization because with gene therapy, those people might be able to get their kids fixed in a decade or two.

On the other hand, gene editing with capitalism (especially free market healthcare) would even further class division. Rich fucks would be able to "perfect" their families' genes and start up that master race shit again. With accelerated selection in play, we might end up with bourgies and proles speciating. Imagine a world where social control reduces the proles to nearly mindless drones without a shred of dignity (we're pretty close as it is) while the bourgeoisie enjoy transhumanism and turn themselves into 8-foot tall übermenschen.

If technology like that really can exist in the near future, then it will exist under capitalism and will follow the market logic of being very scarce and exclusive at first, then banalized as the companies who offer it increase their capital. But that's still better than delaying it until public sector takes the initiative, develops it and offers it democratically, or to ban it and rob the companies out of the financial means to develop it

So frankly even if they were to have the effect of literally making the rich uberhuman for a generation or two, that's a cross we'd have to bear imo.

His genetically-enhanced brother also was, objectively superior to him.
Maybe the problem was that unenhanced people were allowed to be born.Bam! Problem gone, gene therapy for all.

A technology so powerful will not follow the "market logic", it will be held by the elite indefinitely.
Much like the elite successfully hold a monopoly on violence, despite the many cultural and technological changes that enable otherwise better solutions.
The market is only for things the elite don't mind the little people having.The market is a tool for the elite and exist at heir behest, relying on their ability to enforce private property.

Thing is that the political precedent such policies would set is horrifying.

Slippery slope to us being arrested for shitposting here.

I hear of a lot of people who have serious, life-impeding disorders having 4, 5 kids who all have that disorder.

I have nothing against someone having kids and passing onto them, say, a tendency for heart disease in their 60s, or perhaps mild depression, or even bipolar disorder.

But some of these diseases are EXTREMELY severe. I would command those people not have children but only in severe instances.

Bullshit. That would be going against the very logic of capitalism. And elites have monopoly of violence through mechanisms of the state, not by keeping commodities in a price so high that common people can't afford.

Strawman, I never said that the market is the means by which the elite keep their position.

The way you mention violence as an exception of capitalism and hold some "rules of capitalism" as natural law…

SPOTTED THE ANCAP

IMO society will be done with that AND the problem of people who can't properly raise kids for a number of reasons (like struggling in poverty and being absent) when we stop telling everyone that they need a family in order to be validated and when abortion is completely legal and offered by the state.

Any other process would be counter-productive and not worth the moral cost. If you put yourself in the shoes of someone who is genuinely struggling with deformations and diseases that are inheritable, to have a job and a family and carry on living and performing like a normal person is literally the only vindication you have. To tell them directly or indirectly that they shouldn't have families when society sell this as a standard is fucked up.

and I never said "this is what you said" I'm just explaining the difference to an idiot

did you just accuse me of strawmaning and then did some strawmaning yourself?

...

He needs to stop being sour grapes and go full anti-natalist.

I mean, think what you will with subjective matters such as ethics, but breeding isn't going away anytime soon, and its…difficult to measure something like the personal value of a life without being the person in question.

HW supporting something that could blow up in his face? That doesn't sound like him, I'm going to need some sources on this.

You can wish you were never born without hating your parents. They could have been acting with the best of intentions and even made the best decision given the information available to them at the time.

This is obsolete. With designer viruses it is now possible to augment the dna of living persons.

You can't just start turning on/off genes at any time, they evolved to turn on/off at certain rates under certain conditions, if those conditions aren't right then it would do more harm than good (for example you don't want a leg bone to start repairing itself when your leg is still twisted backwards). No amount of gene therapy is gonna turn Hotwheels into a normal person.

It's more humane and cheaper to just abort a crippled fetus and start over. It's like trying to find a way to make your car run without oil instead of just getting a fucking oil change.

Our understanding of genetics and human biology is far short of what would be required to fix every genetic disorder. Our current genetic engineering technology is roughly akin to trying to repair a damaged factory by sticking magnets to replacement parts and launching them at the windows with a trebuchet.

Give it 50 years and we might be able to actually fix some stuff with a sufficiently high degree of reliability.

good for him, maybe that what he gets for selling Holla Forums out to jim

why doesn't he kill himself? problem solved

Spooked as fuck
Eugenics is also top tier reactionary…
kill it with fire and gulag

Eugenics would be sensible if technology was stagnant and artificial selection was the only way to control the future of humanity.

In reality human genetics is going to be obsolete within a few hundred years - far less time than it would take to selectively breed some kind of master-race.

The only positive benefit of eugenics programs is that there would be fewer children born with serious genetic diseases, but that's a small benefit compared to the widespread suffering inflicted by most attempts to implement eugenics.

I can't wait to hear your non-spooky explanation for why we should allow deformed babies to be born.

you don't have to be aiming to breed a master race to use eugenics.

Well, if you're doing it just to alleviate the suffering of individuals then you have to be quite careful about how you implement it. Certainly the attempts under Nazi Germany and the US government are not good examples to follow. Hotwheels' proposal isn't too bad.

Abortions are kinda eugenics, you know that, right? If you're not aborting babies who will be born with some major deformities, I don't know what you're doing.

You mean it isn't?

Yeah I would only support this kind of program under a legitimately democratic socialism/communism on the way to gene therapy being perfected.

you mean it is