I've known a few, and a lot of them changed their ways (I'm referring to myself and my own circle of friends, here. We did crap, but we moved forward). There are certainly some hopeless cases, but this is a cultural argument, and people are capable of finding flaws within cultural influence if they have marginal intelligence.
I have a strong problem with transhumansim. It's utopian. It demands the same inhumanity of communism, libertarianism, or nazism. People are fucked. We need to focus on the foundation to minimalize the fuckage.
That's why I come to the genetic conclusion. You're not wrong. There is a whole pyramid of human behavior that we really only understand in the vaguest of senses.
Here's the thing. I have no desire to eliminate any group of people. If Western civilization annihilates itself in nuclear fire, Africa is that little place of hope. A lot of the population isn't fit for Western civilization, but that's okay. As long as that preserve persists, new civilizations should spawn from it. It might take thousands or tens of thousands of years, but I'm hopeful that it can spawn humanity again, even without Denisovan or Neanderthal influence.
Science gets overturned a fair bit, but we're in an age where it's overturned for non-scientific reasons. It's hard to take that seriously. James Watson is a non-persona in the scientific community, even though he's one of the most important people of the 20th century.
I understand that science finds new conclusions. My issue is that moralism overrrides science in modern academia.
And I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Jews participate disproportionately in this new fucked up moralism.
If you do that you'll see that a "disproportionate" number of our leading lights and most important creators
Disagree. I'm not a zionist or a neocon. Many of those who support the right aren't really on my side, even if they have some agreeable positions to entice support of their less desirable positions.
Not all with influence are bad, but how many support strong border control and non-interventionist policy? It's a pretty tiny group.
I've known a few, and a lot of them changed their ways (I'm referring to myself and my own circle of friends, here. We did crap, but we moved forward). There are certainly some hopeless cases, but this is a cultural argument, and people are capable of finding flaws within cultural influence if they have marginal intelligence.
I have a strong problem with transhumansim. It's utopian. It demands the same inhumanity of communism, libertarianism, or nazism. People are fucked. We need to focus on the foundation to minimalize the fuckage.
That's why I come to the genetic conclusion. You're not wrong. There is a whole pyramid of human behavior that we really only understand in the vaguest of senses.
Here's the thing. I have no desire to eliminate any group of people. If Western civilization annihilates itself in nuclear fire, Africa is that little place of hope. A lot of the population isn't fit for Western civilization, but that's okay. As long as that preserve persists, new civilizations should spawn from it. It might take thousands or tens of thousands of years, but I'm hopeful that it can spawn humanity again, even without Denisovan or Neanderthal influence.
Science gets overturned a fair bit, but we're in an age where it's overturned for non-scientific reasons. It's hard to take that seriously. James Watson is a non-persona in the scientific community, even though he's one of the most important people of the 20th century.
I understand that science finds new conclusions. My issue is that moralism overrrides science in modern academia.
And I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Jews participate disproportionately in this new fucked up moralism.
Disagree. I'm not a zionist or a neocon. Many of those who support the right aren't really on my side, even if they have some agreeable positions to entice support of their less desirable positions.
Not all with influence are bad, but how many support strong border control and non-interventionist policy? It's a pretty tiny group.
Prager, Shapiro, and Weiss are avowed Zionists. Any non-interventionism they speak of will quickly be discarded if Israel is the issue.
Rubin seems pretty well assimilated, though.