Should we promote eugenics, or not?

You'd think the dilemma is simple. But it isn't what any of you people in the mainstream would imagine it to be. I know you guys are out there, eager for some big shouting match on how eugenics is evil for one idiotic reason or another. "Sterilization is immoral!" "Eugenics is against human dignity!" "Racism is wrong!"

But there's no getting around it: These arguments are inept. You'd have to be retarded or insane to give credence to any of this drivel. Sterilization? Eugenics doesn't have to be about sterilization - duh - but if sterilization is so mean and nasty then why did you castrate your puppy last time you took him to the vet? And as for human dignity, don't you think it's germane to ask, "How is preserving civilization against our dignity?" What, would you people have us abandon civilization and all it entails (science, high art, toilets that flush) so that we can go back to living in filth and ignorance like dignified people? And of course the best part is the hysterical accusation of racism. Only a society twisted beyond all reasoning could confuse an admission of truth (that races differ in their average intelligence) with some horrible sin. Society could have done this with anything; people could have said that the sun is red, really, red red red, not yellow at all, only evil "yellowists" say the sun is yellow. Racism or yellowism, no matter how you slice it, race is real, the sun is yellow, and nuts is nuts.

But see, that's what the modern world is all about: Truth is evil. Falsity is good. Celebrate falsity. People talk about celebrating diversity as though they're getting ready for some holiday, but really what they mean when they say that is "celebrate falsity." Of course, every day is the same holiday if you work in America, and it gets a little old. Careful consideration has revealed that the best way to approach these celebrations is with lots of hard drugs. At the very least it's been my observation that anything which helps to erase rational thought will serve you in good stead at one of these parties, because the whole point is to indulge in fantasy, and definitely, absolutely, to forget reality. Forget that little Johnny can't read because he was born out of the shallow end of the gene pool. Forget that Linda's pregnant for the fifth time because she's too dense to grasp the concept of self restraint. Forget all of that. Lies are way better. Only icky people care about the truth. Really!

The more a sane, sensible person explores the issue of eugenics and discusses it with people in the mainstream, the more apparent it becomes to the sane, sensible person that the mainstream is just flat out nuts. Even when sane, sensible people explain to everyone else that eugenics isn't National Socialism - even when sane, sensible people explain that no, eugenics doesn't mean anyone has to get hurt - even when sane, sensible people can frame the issue in such simple terms that even the typical American, who fears statistics almost as much as fractions, can understand it - people still seem to have trouble understanding what all the fuss is about. On some level they just aren't interested. Why this is we can only speculate; some theorize that it's because they aren't smart enough, or that the consumerist culture of the West discourages thinking about the future. But the underlying reason shouldn't distract us from the basic fact that Westerners just can't be bothered by eugenic issues. Oh they sure seem to care a whole hell of a lot about the latest presidential election, or the current war in Iraq, and all of that. But just you try to explain that the present is a tiny blip compared to the future, and they give you this glazed expression and say something like "but I'll be dead then."

What? Americans run around trying to give relief to the thousands of victims of hurricane Katrina, but can't be bothered to think of the trillions of people who will be affected by dysgenesis? See, the fact that these hurricane victims are alive today makes no difference. You won't meet them any more than you'll meet the future victims of a civilizational brown out. Why care more about one set of people who you'll never meet than another set of people who you'll never meet?

Yes, I know, the hurricane victims are alive right now and that makes it seem really really important that we help them out right now. But a hundred years from now or so, there will be all kinds of terrible problems that dwarf Katrina and every other hurricane that ever hit this country, and in that day and age it will be right now, and there won't be anything anyone can do at all except wish that the people who were alive back then had done something back then, and guess what? Back then for them is right now for us. The descendants of this culture who have to live in a future state of stupification and savagery will be able to blame all of us for their misery in a way that the hurricane survivors can't. We aren't responsible for hurricane Katrina. We're responsible for the people who come after us.

And now we're getting close to the real question about whether we should really be promoting eugenics. You see, sane, sensible people are starting to say things like, "Why the hell should we share the blame for this? Why should we make ourselves unpopular trying to save a civilization that's dead-set on destroying itself? The modern West hates the truth. It doesn't just ignore it, it hates it. There's not much more despicable than a society that hates the truth. Shouldn't we be encouraging this senile old monster to poison itself to death if that's what it really wants? Instead of wasting our time saving something that was marred by monotheism to begin with, why not try to find some way to survive so that our descendants can set up something better?"

Did you see it? There it is. That's the real question right there. Are we as sane, sensible people going to try our best to save a civilization that hates us, hates eugenics, and hates the truth? Or are we going to take the plunge and separate ourselves as best we can, struggling to stick together in any way that we can, and hope that maybe those who come after us will be able to build something better? Either way, prospects aren't that great. Sane, sensible people don't have much power right now, and we may not be able to save this civilization if we tried. But if we give up on this civilization and try to start a new one, where's the guarantee that we won't get pulled under with everything else? There isn't one.

So that's the dilemma. Should we promote eugenics, or shouldn't we? It isn't a question of ideology, it's one of strategy and risk. Which would you rather bet on, an obstinate and decaying culture, or a newer society which might get squished when the old one falls on top of it?

Sensible people aren't sure. We're not sure of anything. But at least we're not nuts.