Serious An apology to Biowaste Removal

[Horatio Alger]

And yet you're incel. You wont pass on your genes and survive. So why do you care about some sexhavers hundreds of years in the future.

Idk about modelling morality and the purpose of life (if they even exist) on some primitive biological impulse.

The state surviving against who? We're no longer living in the age of conquest. The only party with that idea would be your totalitarian state. The result would be unnecessary suffering for its populace as well a every other.



Thats probably the worst way as history has shown. It will just get wiped out.



All of this still doesn't answer why *you* support any of this. Your answer just circles back to the the survival of state for survivals sake and the benefit of a handful of people somewhere down the line.

When you say "a total state" do you mean its not necessarily your in-group? idk how that would mesh with your first point

So what if I'm incel? I still have family members reproducing that share most of my genes

It's simply my morals

Great Power Competition still exists you know. The US is concerned about China's growing military capabilities (if China achieves hegemony in East Asia, they'll be free to wander out of the neighborhood to cause trouble in the Western hemisphere, like how Austria stationed forces in Mexico during the American civil war, or how the USSR attempted to station missiles in Cuba) not to mention the existence and sovereignty of states is threatened all the time even in the current era (such as Ukraine and Palestine)

A state with an average IQ of 145 would easily be able to make a play at world domination without getting wiped out. In the past, even states with only a difference of 15 IQ points and a small technological gap were able to easily subdue the other (Spain and the Aztecs + Inca). A state with a +45 IQ difference and a much faster rate of technological advancement would either be able to develop a first strike nuclear capability, or the ability to quantum hack every other country on the planet. How can a state get wiped out if it is the only state left? Only way would be by alien invasion or by global catastrophe (which will be better coordinated against by a global Singleton)

Suffering is just a state of mind that we evolved to ensure survival. Survival should be the only imperative (if it causes our primitive minds suffering, so be it)

So what if it's circular reasoning? LIfe exists solely to exist

A total state that dominates the world would have the entirety of our species as an in group

 

[Horatio Alger]

Hey, 4,500 posts!!!

 

[justuseless]

So what if I'm incel? I still have family members reproducing that share most of my genes

It's simply my morals

Great Power Competition still exists you know. The US is concerned about China's growing military capabilities (if China achieves hegemony in East Asia, they'll be free to wander out of the neighborhood to cause trouble in the Western hemisphere, like how Austria stationed forces in Mexico during the American civil war, or how the USSR attempted to station missiles in Cuba) not to mention the existence and sovereignty of states is threatened all the time even in the current era (such as Ukraine and Palestine)

So you want some of your genes to pass on through your relatives just for the sake of it? Ok

Wars still happen but not the all or nothing types that would concern your state. Countries at the top are way too economically tied up and powerful to go to wars of that nature with each other. Not saying it cant happen but its unlikely compared to the past.

How can a state get wiped out if it is the only state left? Only way would be by alien invasion or by global catastrophe (which will be better coordinated against by a global Singleton)

To become the only state left it would have to wipe out every other state and thats highly unlikely.

Suffering is just a state of mind that we evolved to ensure survival. Survival should be the only imperative (if it causes our primitive minds suffering, so be it)

So what if it's circular reasoning? LIfe exists solely to exist

A total state that dominates the world would have the entirety of our species as an in group

Life exists. Thats it. Purpose is something we give it based on our experiences with causal reasoning.

Survival of superior specimens (ie chads) you mean. You'll long be a heap of bones when your chad utopia comes to fruition. Yet you still care. I just find it irrational.

 

[Blacksmith]

All your linguistical acrobacy aside, you have delivered neither MORAL, nor EVIDENTIAL facts justifying the totalitarian state.
Every observable attempt has failed, after unfathomable suffering and devastation.
Another reflection is that socialism/communism in its nature will always migrate towards totalitarianism. It is simply in its flawed concept, as it willfully ignores the human nature and condition.

 

[Horatio Alger]

Wars still happen but not the all or nothing types that would concern your state. Countries at the top are way too economically tied up and powerful to go to wars of that nature with each other. Not saying it cant happen but its unlikely compared to the past.

To become the only state left it would have to wipe out every other state and thats highly unlikely.

Life exists. Thats it. Purpose is something we give it based on our experiences with causal reasoning.

Survival of superior specimens (ie chads) you mean. You'll long be a heap of bones when your chad utopia comes to fruition. Yet you still care. I just find it irrational.

There has been a study that showed economic ties do nothing to deter war. Plus Europe pre WW1 was economically interconnected.

If Spain was able to conquer and wipe out the Aztecs and Inca with a mere 15 IQ point gap and horses + gunpowder, a total state with a 45 IQ point gap will be able to develop superior technologies such as first strike nuclear capability or quantum hacking to subdue the rest of the world.

Superior specimens are high IQ geniuses, not chads. Correlation between IQ and facial attractiveness is moderate to non-existent depending on the study

 

[Horatio Alger]

All your linguistical acrobacy aside, you have delivered neither MORAL, nor EVIDENTIAL facts justifying the totalitarian state.
Every observable attempt has failed, after unfathomable suffering and devastation.
Another reflection is that socialism/communism in its nature will always migrate towards totalitarianism. It is simply in its flawed concept, as it willfully ignores the human nature and condition.

Fascist totalitarian states were wiped out before the Information Age due to circumstantial factors such as the existence of a liberal, hostile superpower (U.S.), + China's Xinjiang Autonomous region has features of a 1984 style surveillance regime with no noticeable drag on economic growth compared to other Chinese provinces

The authoritarian trade‐off: A synthetic control analysis of development and social coercion in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region​

 

[Horatio Alger]

All your linguistical acrobacy aside, you have delivered neither MORAL, nor EVIDENTIAL facts justifying the totalitarian state.
Every observable attempt has failed, after unfathomable suffering and devastation.
Another reflection is that socialism/communism in its nature will always migrate towards totalitarianism. It is simply in its flawed concept, as it willfully ignores the human nature and condition.

Human nature and conditions can be changed with eugenics and new technologies

Suffering and devastation didn't produce a noticable drag on economic growth rates nor innovation in Nazi Germany nor Imperial Japan and her colonies

Economic growth and innovation is important while suffering is immaterial

+ Why do you mention only Communism? I am referring to fascist states

 

[Horatio Alger]

All your linguistical acrobacy aside, you have delivered neither MORAL, nor EVIDENTIAL facts justifying the totalitarian state.
Every observable attempt has failed, after unfathomable suffering and devastation.
Another reflection is that socialism/communism in its nature will always migrate towards totalitarianism. It is simply in its flawed concept, as it willfully ignores the human nature and condition.

I also provided a moral reason to support a totalitarian state that practices eugenics + a plethora of sources and examples to back up my assertion that political repression does not completely halt scientific progress and economic growth in fascist and authoritarian states

That is, if you bothered reading all the replies where I provided academic sources in this thread

 

[justuseless]

There has been a study that showed economic ties do nothing to deter war. Plus Europe pre WW1 was economically interconnected.

Yeah but they had colonies to fall back on for resources. Now they need to rely on trade.

If Spain was able to conquer and wipe out the Aztecs and Inca with a mere 15 IQ point gap and horses + gunpowder, a total state with a 45 IQ point gap will be able to develop superior technologies such as first strike nuclear capability or quantum hacking to subdue the rest of the world.

Spain won because the mesoamericans worshipped their rulers and once captured could be used to control the masses.

If say china started creating a high IQ Society through eugenics then everyone else will do the same.

Superior specimens are high IQ geniuses, not chads.

Sorry but this is cope

Also geniuses are more likely to be mentally ill and have auto immune diseases. Selecting for IQ alone wont be efficient to achieving your states goals. Ultimately it will result in intelligent chads and stacies.

But still who cares. You'll be long dead with zero consciousness.

 

[Horatio Alger]

Yeah but they had colonies to fall back on for resources. Now they need to rely on trade.

Spain won because the mesoamericans worshipped their rulers and once captured could be used to control the masses.

If say china started creating a high IQ Society through eugenics then everyone else will do the same.

Sorry but this is cope

Also geniuses are more likely to be mentally ill and have auto immune diseases. Selecting for IQ alone wont be efficient to achieving your states goals. Ultimately it will result in intelligent chads and stacies.

But still who cares. You'll be long dead with zero consciousness.

Imperial Germany, Italy, and Russia had no major overseas colonies to fall back on, plus Imperial Japan in WW2 was economically dependent on US and overseas imports, which arguably prompted war. Modern China is willing to risk enormous economic damage to prevent Taiwanese independence

Spain wouldn't have been able to so easily capture their ruler without the technological gap. Plus they were able to subdue revolts even after Moctuezma died and they were kicked out of Tenochtitlan

Also, eugenics is a generational process that will take a while to see noticeable benefits, giving no discernable advantage in the initial stage and not prompting similar actions in other states in, plus the West would have to change their entire political structure to mandate forced eugenics on everyone, which will take a while and put them further behind early adopters

There is a negative correlation between IQ and mental illness, a positive correlation between IQ and health, and a moderate to no correlation between IQ and looks

 

[justuseless]

Imperial Germany, Italy, and Russia had no overseas colonies to fall back on, plus Imperial Japan in WW2 was economically dependent on US and overseas imports, which arguably prompted war. Modern China is willing to risk enormous economic damage to prevent Taiwanese independence

Italy and germany had colonies in africa. Russia technically didn't only cause its borders were contiguous.

How did it turn out for japan? Pretty shit right.

Institutions exist now that didn't exist back then to stop these kinds of resource driven wars breaking out. We've learned from past experiences thankfully.

Spain wouldn't have been able to so easily capture their ruler without the technological gap

They actually used deceit by pretending to want negotiations and then taking the ruler hostage. Because the ruler was typically seen as divine it was enough to suppress resistance

Also, eugenics is a generational process that will take a while to see noticeable benefits, plus the West would have to change their entire political structure to mandate forced eugenics on everyone, which will take a while and put them further behind early adopters

There is a negative correlation between IQ and mental illness, a positive correlation between IQ and health, and a moderate to no correlation between IQ and looks

Idk if the tech gap between early adopters and semi late adopters will be so great the former can so easily neutralise the latter

Not for geniuses though just above or high IQ people

 

[Horatio Alger]

Italy and germany had colonies in africa. Russia technically didn't only cause its borders were contiguous.

How did it turn out for japan? Pretty shit right.

Institutions exist now that didn't exist back then to stop these kinds of resource driven wars breaking out. We've learned from past experiences thankfully.

They actually used deceit by pretending to want negotiations and then taking the ruler hostage. Because the ruler was typically seen as divine it was enough to suppress resistance

Idk if the tech gap between early adopters and semi late adopters will be so great the former can so easily neutralise the latter

Not for geniuses though just above or high IQ people

If you call those tiny holdings major "colonies", I don't know what to say. They were no British Raj or even Canada

Most of Siberian Russia was a desolate wasteland that only became industrialized after the 1930s (long after WW1)

Well, economic ties didn't deter war in that case, which was the point I was making. Don't change the subject

The UN lacks effective power over great powers that are sovereign states since they have no hard power to police their actions

Doesn't explain how the Spanish was easily able to reconquer the Aztecs after their "divine" ruler died and they were kicked out of the capital city

Well, I'm not a 100% sure either on that front. I think it's possible since in the past, Great Britain was able to industrialize and surpassed the rest of Western Europe combined until the late 1870s (head start lasted 70 years)

What makes you think Geniuses are all chads? Dolf Lungren was the exception to the rule. People with IQs 3 to 4 SD above the mean look like MTNs or below (look at Chris Langan, Terrance Tao, and Bill Gates), which means IQ looks correlation is moderate to nonexistent even at the high ends

 

[justuseless]

If you call those tiny holdings major "colonies", I don't know what to say. They were no British Raj or even Canada

Just say you dont know what colony means.

Most of Siberian Russia was a desolate wasteland that only became industrialized after the 1930s (long after WW1)

Didn't mention siberia or industry. That being said siberia was an important source of raw materials. The caucasus made russia a global oil supplier. Central asia made them independent of US cotton imports. Ukraine was their breadbasket. If they hadn't shared borders with Russia they would be colonies.

Well, economic ties didn't deter war in that case, which was the point I was making. Don't change the subject

The UN lacks effective power over great powers that are sovereign states since they have no hard power to police their actions

They weren't tied up the way they are now with globalisation. There weren't complex value chains in multiple different independent states. There werent multilateral free trade agreements, at best you had regional pacts. Stock exchanges werent linked globally like they are now and were way slower. In the past you didnt get global synchronised recession from a partial baking collapse for one major player because financial markets werent anywhere near as interconnected. Its a very different world today.

Doesn't explain how the Spanish was easily able to reconquer the Aztecs after their "divine" ruler died and they were kicked out of the capital city

They had 200,000 native allies who hated the Aztecs

Well, I'm not a 100% sure either on that front. I think it's possible since in the past, Great Britain was able to industrialize and surpassed the rest of Western Europe combined until the late 1870s (head start lasted 70 years)

What makes you think Geniuses are all chads? Dolf Lungren was the exception to the rule. People with IQs 3 to 4 SD above the mean look like MTNs or below (look at Chris Langan, Terrance Tao, and Bill Gates), which means IQ looks correlation is moderate to nonexistent even at the high ends

Another strawman. I said you can't select for genius level IQ alone because it will lead to neglect of other traits which wouldn't benefit the state maximally. Ultimately you'll end up with MTN/chads as the ideal human.

 

[Horatio Alger]

Just say you dont know what colony means.

Didn't mention siberia or industry. That being said siberia was an important source of raw materials. The caucasus made russia a global oil supplier. Central asia made them independent of US cotton imports. Ukraine was their breadbasket. If they hadn't shared borders with Russia they would be colonies.

They weren't tied up the way they are now with globalisation. There weren't complex value chains in multiple different independent states. There werent multilateral free trade agreements, at best you had regional pacts. Stock exchanges werent linked globally like they are now and were way slower. In the past you didnt get global synchronised recession from a partial baking collapse in one major player because financial markets werent anywhere near as interconnected. Its a very different world today.

They had 200,000 native allies who hated the Aztecs

Another strawman. I said you can't select for genius level IQ alone because it will lead to neglect of other traits which wouldn't benefit the state maximally. Ultimately you'll end up with MTN/chads as the ideal human.

If you consider Italian Libya, Eritrea, and Somalia as major colonies that helped provide a meaningful amount of resources to the Metropole, then you're delusional

Similarly, tiny African shitholes (German West Africa, German East Africa, and German Southwest Africa) were arguably a waste of resources to colonize that would have been better spent domestically

Russia didn't reap major benefits from natural resources such as oil and raw materials until after WW1 due to lack of major infrastructure (Russian natural oil exploitation only intensified during the 1970s) and Ukraine wasn't a colony. We are exclusively talking about the period before and during WW1, don't change the goalposts. Since Russia didn't have a massive amount of resources to fall back on during WW1, they had to rely on trade (which was cut off by the Ottomans in the Black Sea and the Germans in the Baltic Sea)

I already mentioned increased trade and economic interconnections didn't decrease the likelihood of war according to a major study (I can't recall the title at this moment)

The only reason they bandwagoned was since they knew the Spanish had the capability to wreck the Aztecs

How will the neglect of other traits aside from IQ hurt the state? If other traits such as academic TIE were held constant while only IQ increased (since I don't recall a correlation existing), it will still reap massive benefits to society since there will be higher population of potential geniuses possessing ideal personal traits conducive to success.

Perhaps Academic TIE should also be selected for alongside Genius level IQ to ensure maximum benefit to the state, but I don't understand why you think looks are a prerequisite in creating ideal humans

 

[Ibrahim997]

Apologies.is

Having-empathy.IS

 

[justuseless]

If you consider Italian Libya, Eritrea, and Somalia as major colonies that helped provide a meaningful amount of resources to the Metropole, then your delusional

Similarly, tiny African shitholes (German West Africa, German East Africa, and German Southwest Africa) were arguably a waste of resources to colonize

Germany didn't need them as they had enough resources from occupied European countries

Russia didn't reap major benefits from natural resources such as oil and raw materials until after WW1 due to lack of major infrastructure and Ukraine wasn't a colony. We are exclusively talking about the period before and during WW1, don't change the goalposts

The Russian empire produced around half of the worlds oil supply by 1901. Look up the Baku oil fields. The Rotschilds among others invested heavily. Ukraine like all the other territory both russia and germany conquered in their immediate environs were functional colonies. You're arguing semantics.

I already mentioned increased trade and economic interconnections didn't decrease the likelihood of war according to a major study (I can't recall the title at this moment)

I'm talking about global war or wars of conquests we saw in the preceding century.

The only reason they bandeagoned was since they knew the Spanish had the capability to wreck the Aztecs

Yeah you dont have enough knowledge on the topic clearly

How will the neglect of other traits aside from IQ hurt the state?

I'd say physical traits are pretty important for soldiers. Even if you bring up robots they're likely to be still needed due to electronic and cyber warfare. Weaker constitutions also result in proneness to injury, auto immune disorders, lower survivability. Theres also mental conditions.

 

[Horatio Alger]

Germany didn't need them as they had enough resources from occupied European countries

The Russian empire produced around half of the worlds oil supply by 1901. Look up the Baku oil fields. The Rotschilds among others invested heavily. Ukraine like all the other territory both russia and germany conquered in their immediate environs were functional colonies. You're arguing semantics.

I'm talking about global war or wars of conquests we saw in the preceding century.

Yeah you dont have enough knowledge on the topic clearly

I'd say physical traits are pretty important for soldiers. Even if you bring up robots they're likely to be still needed due to electronic and cyber warfare. Weaker constitutions also result in proneness to injury, auto immune disorders, lower survivability. Theres also mental conditions.

Germany didn't need resources from occupied European countries either since they possessed an industrial strength equivalent to 40% of all 6 European Great Powers combined

Oil wasn't as important as it was in future decades. Grinding wars of attrition involving soldiers armed with rifles supplied by train or horse buggies didn't require much oil. Plus the resources afforded to Russia from her colonies just barely put her on the same industrial strength as France and Austria Hungary, not particularly noteworthy for their economic prowess

A global war is unlikely in this era since Russia does not possess either the military or economic wherewithal to seriously threaten most of Europe, and a war with China would mostly be fought either on tiny islands (Taiwan and islands in the South China Sea) and not over land. However, if Europe has an unbalanced multipolar system like in the past without the American security umbrella, rest assured wars of conquest would be more frequent even with an integrated economy (since political survival trumps prosperity).

Well, it should have been apparent to the oppressed subjects of the Aztecs that the Spanish, with their massive cannons, gunpowder, and steel, could easily lay siege on Tenochtitlan by blockading the city with ships full of cannons, and rapidly destroy the lynchpin of the triple alliance.


If average IQ of America was 145, we would have such a plentiful supply of scientists who would be able to develop super technologies (grey goo, first strike nuclear capability, quantum hacking to name a few) that could bring the entire world to heel even without a massive standing army. Also, no need to worry about physical or mental illness since those are all negatively correlated with IQ (no reason to presume those correlations reverse beyond +3-4 SD)

 

[justuseless]

Germany didn't need resources from occupied European countries either since they possessed an industrial strength equivalent to 40% of all 6 European Great Powers combined

They needed belgium and poland since they relied on imports for around of their 30% for their food needs. They also used Belgium for coal and steel. I dont think that 40% figure is accurate.

A global war is unlikely in this era since Russia does not possess either the military or economic wherewithal to seriously threaten most of Europe, and a war with China would mostly be fought either on tiny islands (Taiwan and islands in the South China Sea) and not over land. However, if Europe has an unbalanced multipolar system like in the past without the American security umbrella, rest assured wars of conquest would be more frequent even with an integrated economy (since political survival trumps prosperity)

You're going off tangent. The whole point of this is to show how unlikely it is your totalitarian regime which you support for no good reason will face a battle for survival. You've kind of agreed with me here.

If average IQ of America was 145, we would have such a plentiful supply of scientists who would be able to develop super technologies (grey goo, first strike nuclear capability, quantum hacking) that could bring the entire world to heel even without a massive standing army. Also, no need to worry about physical or mental illness since those are all negatively correlated with IQ (no reason to presume those correlations reverse beyond +3-4 SD)

This assumes China, Russia and other countries wouldn't do the same thing.

You'll just end up with a bunch of low T autists who dont know how to work together and are suboptimal for wars

 

[Horatio Alger]

They needed belgium and poland since they relied on imports for around of their 30% for their food needs. They also used Belgium for coal and steel. I dont think that 40% figure is accurate.



You're going off tangent. The whole point of this is to show how unlikely it is your totalitarian regime which you support for no good reason will face a battle for survival. You've kind of agreed with me here.



This assumes China, Russia and other countries wouldn't do the same thing.

You'll just end up with a bunch of low T autists who dont know how to work together and are suboptimal for wars

What makes you think High IQ would correlate with autism? Low T is arguably good for social cohesion

Also, a totalitarian regime that cultivates a 145 IQ population that scores high on Academic TIE would dominate the world. The Ashkenazi Jews rose to dominance in the West with a mere +5-10 IQ point difference between them and white gentiles. Said hypothetical regime would have a +45 IQ difference in its favor before any democratic or semiauthoritarian state could catch up

The 40% figure is accurate since Mearsheimer calculated that figure by determining the total amount of iron/steel production and energy consumption of all European Great powers (Germany, Great Britain, France, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Italy) in 1913, and calculated the percentage of the total accounted for both iron/steel and energy respectively by Germany

 

[justuseless]

What makes you think High IQ would correlate with autism? Low T is arguably good for social cohesion

Also, a totalitarian regime that cultivates a 145 IQ population that scores high on Academic TIE would dominate the world. The Ashkenazi Jews rose to dominance in the West with a mere +5-10 IQ point difference between them and white gentiles. Said hypothetical regime would have a +45 IQ difference in its favor before any democratic or semiauthoritarian state could catch up

The 40% figure is accurate since Mearsheimer calculated that figure by determining the total amount of iron/steel production and energy consumption of all European Great powers (Germany, Great Britain, France, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Italy) in 1913, and calculated the percentage of the total accounted for both iron/steel and energy respectively by Germany

Ashkenazi domination is overstated tbh

Why do you think other countries wont do the same?

Also why do you think low t correlates with social cohesion

Would you agree empathy is a factor and if so would such individuals have empathy?

 

[Blacksmith]

@Horatio Alger What is the point in rambling on and on about superior IQ? That is one of the highest correlated factors for individual success, I am the first to agree with you there. There is only about one SD gap between former Jugoslavia and ethnic Scandinavians, but the societies are vastly different. Balkan is violent, poorer, much less innovative, less safe, less creative in arts, less trustworthy and honest.

But those differences pale in comparison to North Korea vs South Korea. Let us assume the IQ of North Korea has not fallen too much yet (or look at the differences 20 years ago).
Then look at quality of life in those countries! Is there anything that is better in your beloved, totalitarian North Korea.
And even compared to relatively lower IQ Balkan area, North Korea falls short.

The next step down the ladder of quality of life would be the middle east or north africa, with Balkan level IQ around 85 or so + totalitarian state = chaos, massive corruption, public executions, no stable infrastructure, low trust society, klans running black markets etc.

If you have one iota of honesty in your person, reply to my above post, and present at least one successful totalitarian state in our world today. You know, peace, truth, trust, prosperous, balance with nature etc.

 

[Horatio Alger]

@Horatio Alger What is the point in rambling on and on about superior IQ? That is one of the highest correlated factors for individual success, I am the first to agree with you there. There is only about one SD gap between former Jugoslavia and ethnic Scandinavians, but the societies are vastly different. Balkan is violent, poorer, much less innovative, less safe, less creative in arts, less trustworthy and honest.

But those differences pale in comparison to North Korea vs South Korea. Let us assume the IQ of North Korea has not fallen too much yet (or look at the differences 20 years ago).
Then look at quality of life in those countries! Is there anything that is better in your beloved, totalitarian North Korea.
And even compared to relatively lower IQ Balkan area, North Korea falls short.

The next step down the ladder of quality of life would be the middle east or north africa, with Balkan level IQ around 85 or so + totalitarian state = chaos, massive corruption, public executions, no stable infrastructure, low trust society, klans running black markets etc.

If you have one iota of honesty in your person, reply to my above post, and present at least one successful totalitarian state in our world today. You know, peace, truth, trust, prosperous, balance with nature etc.

North Korea has an inefficient economic structure due to a legacy of top down economic planning propped up by subsidies from the former USSR. South Korea was also a dictatorship until very recently, the primary reason the government didn't crack down on protests more severely was because they feared it would irreparably damage relations with the US

The fascist totalitarian states with state capitalist economies were wiped out at the conclusion of WW2, and the only totalitarian states left were communist regimes. However, there are good reasons to believe the fascist state of Germany and authoritarian Imperial Japan would have been viable even in the information age.

If you read any of the sources I cited, from Peter Liberman to Azar Gat, you would at least acknowledge the possibility of fascist states being able to economically and technologically compete against the Western Technologies even in the information Age, and present an alternate, viable model of modernity. Pre-fascist institutions such as the Kaiser Wilheim society were able to continue much of their Noble Prize winning works even at the height of the Nazi Regime, plus Nazi Germany had a relatively high GDP per capita compared to most of Europe. Capitalists in Nazi occupied Western Europe collaborated eagerly with the occupiers, so totalitarian states can possess economic systems other than communism. The surveillance potential of information technology plus the politically neutral nature of most of the hard sciences are also additional reasons to suspect that such fields wouldn't be repressed. There is also additional evidence that the Nazi Regime was willing to drop its ideological hatred of "Jewish" science in order to not fall behind militarily. Imperial Japan also perfected its state planning model funded by the Zaibatsu in its colonial possessions, which would serve as the basis of the Post-war Japanese miracle

The rest of the countries you cite are populated by genetically inferior races

If the sample size of economically failed totalitarian states were all Marxist-Leninist regimes with top-down central planning, how can you say all totalitarian regimes, even the authoritarian capitalist states, are failed experiments?

 

[Horatio Alger]

Ashkenazi domination is overstated tbh

Why do you think other countries wont do the same?

Also why do you think low t correlates with social cohesion

Would you agree empathy is a factor and if so would such individuals have empathy?

Ashkenazi are 36% of the 400 richest Americans, and 50% of America's most influential pundits according to PP

The IQ gap between Ashkenazi Jews and White Gentiles is a mere 5-10 points

The 3 types of American elites

To oversimplify, there are three types of people who rule America. The politically powerful, the intelligentsia, and the rich. They represent three types of power: the ability to win hearts, the ab…

pumpkinperson.com

Also, when Revolutionary France implemented the nation-in-arms concept and fundamentally modernized its army, greatly enlarging it with a corps of extremely patriotic citizens ready to fight and die for the nation and implementing merit as the primary criterian for officer selection + promotion, none of the Great Powers with the exception of Prussia adopted similar reforms since they were afraid it would destabilize the Ancien Regime

If a totalitarian state implemented forceful eugenics to raise the average IQ by 3 standard deviations, it's safe to say most other states wouldn't be willing to radically alter their political systems for the sake of implementing such a coercive program similar to the reactionary Great Powers in the Napoleonic Wars

High T would cause too much aggression and competition in my opinion, and would undermine the collaboration required for scientific breakthroughs

I agree having some empathy is important. But such empathy shouldn't be spared for those who would willingly defy the state

 

[justuseless]

Ashkenazi are 36% of the 400 richest Americans, and 50% of America's most influential pundits according to PP

The IQ gap between Ashkenazi Jews and White Gentiles is a mere 5-10 points

The 3 types of American elites

To oversimplify, there are three types of people who rule America. The politically powerful, the intelligentsia, and the rich. They represent three types of power: the ability to win hearts, the ab…

pumpkinperson.com

Also, when Revolutionary France implemented the nation-in-arms concept and fundamentally modernized its army, greatly enlarging it with a corps of extremely patriotic citizens ready to fight and die for the nation and implementing merit as the primary criterian for officer selection + promotion, none of the Great Powers with the exception of Prussia adopted similar reforms since they were afraid it would destabilize the Ancien Regime

If a totalitarian state implemented forceful eugenics to raise the average IQ by 3 standard deviations, it's safe to say most other states wouldn't be willing to radically alter their political systems for the sake of implementing such a coercive program similar to the reactionary Great Powers in the Napoleonic Wars

High T would cause too much aggression and competition in my opinion, and would undermine the collaboration required for scientific breakthroughs

I agree having some empathy is important. But such empathy shouldn't be spared for those who would willingly defy the state

Despite that israel isnt scientifically or technologically outpacing the US, europe or east asia.

Re; adoption of better systems thats because as you alluded to most powers were absolutist/extractive. Now they're meritocratic, prioritising progress and innovation. New technologies and ideas are constantly being adopted. China was late to embracing capitalist markets but its now closing the gap with the US.

Without competition you'll get stagnation. Military units show some of the strongest levels of cohesion and they're hardly low T. Weird you'd want low T fags to dominate a militaristic totalitarian state inspired by the Wehrstaat.

You're shifting goalposts. First it was low IQ and disabled people. Now its just intractables.

 

[Horatio Alger]

Despite that israel isnt scientifically or technologically outpacing the US, europe or east asia.

Re; adoption of better systems thats because as you alluded to most powers were absolutist/extractive. Now they're meritocratic, prioritising progress and innovation. New technologies and ideas are constantly being adopted. China was late to embracing capitalist markets but its now closing the gap with the US.

Without competition you'll get stagnation. Military units show some of the strongest levels of cohesion and they're hardly low T. Weird you'd want low T fags to dominate a militaristic totalitarian state inspired by the Wehrstaat.

You're shifting goalposts. First it was low IQ and disabled people. Now its just intractables.

That's because

1. there are more Ashkenazi Jews living in America

2. The Jewish diaspora in the US are the cognitive elite (110 IQ) even next to Israeli Ashkenazis (105 IQ)

3. Israel is not exclusively populated by Ashkenazi Jews, which lowers their average IQ to 95


It took almost half a century from the Communist takeover for their government to enact economic reforms, and it took another half century for them to attain a GDP per capita approx. 1/2 of Japan's despite decades of free trade with the US (that only ebbed post 2016). They still have yet to reach military parity with the US. Any totalitarian regime that implements forceful eugenics to raise IQ by 3 standard deviations will enjoy such a decisive advantage for a long enough time they'll easily subdue other states (Napoleonic France and Imperial Japan almost gained hegemony over Europe and Northeast Asia respectively despite enjoying only a moderate economic and military advantage over their rivals). Compared to a state where the average IQ is 145, the average citizen of other states will be considered mentally retarded. The Jews bought out the entirety of Congress and enslaved whites in the name of Israel with an IQ gap of 5-10 points

I never said low T is ideal for social cohesion, I said high T is bad. Too much competition will result in a polycratic regime where collaboration between various branches of the state towards a common good will be downright impossible. You'll basically end up as a tinpot African dictatorship

I said the primary goal should be to raise IQ and academic TIE, while most other personality traits are held constant to the normal human baseline. That means traits like empathy will neither decrease nor increase substantially for the population as a whole. Getting rid of the disabled and low IQ will help raise IQ

Why do you keep debating me? It's obviously pointless since neither of us will change our minds + I'm not a NEET anymore with virtually unlimited free time