How should the Dissident Right handle technology?

submitted by YJaewedwqewqClerical Fascist from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

You need to study evolution some more. This is a very basic understanding.

Optimizing the population gene pool is 100% not going for the local maximum. If we want to optimize our gene pool, we need retards, schizos, etc.

The strength of a population is determined by how many divergent retards it can sustain. This might seem illogical, but one of these divergents might develop a trait that is beneficial in 1000 or 10000 years.
This is also why we want diversity and why we are against mixing races; mixing destroys diversity.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If we want to optimize our gene pool, we need retards, schizos, etc.

The strength of a population is determined by how many divergent retards it can sustain. This might seem illogical, but one of these divergents might develop a trait that is beneficial in 1000 or 10000 years.

Who told you this utter horseshit? Your Jewish university professor? We absolutely don't need retards and schizos in our gene pool. For tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years retards and schizos have been weeded out of the gene pool of what would eventually become the white race through natural selection, and for the better.

Ironically enough, a society that could sustain the most retards and schizos without collapsing would actually be one with a gene pool that consists of as little schizos and retards as possible, hence why making sure retards and schizos can't reproduce is essential to being able to take care of them sustainably and long-term.

.

This is also why we want diversity and why we are against mixing races; mixing destroys diversity.

No, we're against race-mixing because it further contributes to the decline of the white population, and dilutes the white population with non-white admixture, making it less white. More race-mixing would actually genuinely create more diversity, since it would result in thousands of unique mystery meat mixtures between all sorts of different races that would essentially form new little races of their own, but we don't want that because it harms the interests and the genetic integrity of the white race.

More diversity doesn't equal better: A world that's homogeneously inhabited by only whites and/or East-Asians would be infinitely better than a world that's inhabited by thousands of completely distinct little races that almost all are R-selected, sub-85 IQ, violent and high time preference.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You are simply wrong.

https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/82u0/eugenics/

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're moving the goalpost. First you said we specifically need retards and schizos, now you're saying we need "divergent" whites. There are plenty of "divergent" whites who don't have a low IQ or harmful mental illnesses, and there's no reason why the same type of potentially beneficial mutations couldn't also develop from them. Both harmful and beneficial mutatations will always keep arising within a population regardless of what eugenic programs you have, so whatver beneficial mutations will arise can simply be made more prominent through eugenics while discarding the harmful mutations (like the ones that cause mental illnesses). Not all types of "divergency" are equally valuable. No offense, but this all just seems like a big cope to me.