Translate

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

World population be damned! I need to make some babies

Alright, I have a mission for some of your reproductive systems... but first a little doctrine.

A few months ago Brohiem suggested the book "Starship Troopers" to me. Believe it or not, it is much more a political commentary than anything else. According to my interpretation, the book makes two main points. First, only those proven to be altruistic should be eligible to participate in the governing of humanity. Second, biologically it is imperative to expand your own population or you will be exterminated.

The first point, I will leave alone for now, the second I will explain the ultimate Catch-22.

Those of you that have ever had the thought, "Shit, the earth is way full of people, to many people in fact. Maybe I should make the world a better place and not make a bunch of babies that will over burden the planet." You are exactly who needs to produce babies! Let me explain. Any population that does not expand, eventually gets over run by ones that do. Right now, it seems to me that the ignorant and fanatical are breeding the crap out of the reasonable and enlightened(ish).

It is obvious that the world would be a better place with fewer people in it. There would be more resources available for everyone, higher standard of life would be more universally available, and an overall healthier planetary environment would be the result. So, many people after thinking these thoughts decide to do their part for humanity and only have enough children to replace themselves... or "better yet" have no kids at all! Initially this seems excellent! You are doing your part for the future of the world.

Now lets be realistic for a moment. Let's say that you decide not to have any kids for the good of future of humanity. Does this mean that the world's population will be any less in future generations? I say not at all! It will still be exactly the same only it will be without your genes in it. The genes that produce people that are rational and observant enough to come to the above conclusion will have now been removed from the gene pool. What does this leave us... the result is that it increases the percentage of irrational people that are capable of believing ludicrous things and decreases the percentage of the population that are observant rational people.

Humanity right now is choosing it's future. It is choosing it with it's reproductive choices every day. So, if you are having sex with ignorant, bigoted, stupid, or irrational people... stop! You are part of the problem... or at least use birth control! If you have thoughtfully come to the conclusion that there are to many people on the planet, consider yourself an enlightened observer of the universe, or if you have a PhD, it is your duty to the future of humanity to reproduce. If you don't someone else inevitably will!

How are we going to progress as life if we are selectively breading out the smartest, most rational, and most altruistic among us?

In conclusion... It is time to "ops check" your pluming, then go get a grad-student pregnant! Or if you are female, don't let your vagina become a clown car... make it into an egghead factory!

Anyone with questions, thoughts, or requests for sperm please leave a comment!

9 comments:

amateur.sophist said...

wow. Where to start...

Anyway, first, someone made a movie about this very same concept. It was called Idiocracy, was made by the guy who made Beavis and Butt Head and because you have no access to is, i will give you a run down: Dude wakes up in future and everyone is stupid because the stupid WAY out breed the smart. Not a great movie though.

Anyway, you seem to accept nature over nurture which is not a topic I'm ready to go one way or the other one. What if the smart people stopped breeding and started adopting the "other's" (be it enemies, idiots, or strippers) babies? I guess you would run the inevitable risk of them growing up and returning to the birth parents... Sounds like some shit the Mediterranean Gypsies would pull, embedding their young to be spies.

Anyway, I'm also not sure i buy the environmentalist stand-by that a smaller population would directly equate to better living. Its all about densities and distribution. I'm sure we could stand to trim some fat but the standard of living came about by having that man power and without it you're relying on technology being up to the task maintaining it. I'm not really sure where I'm going here. I think this require more data.

Anyway,

Broheim said...

Glad you liked the book. Other than that i have a few more to send, although im having a hard time finding books on Hadj suicide rituals, so you might have to do with just asking me some questions. on a side note popular rumor and the news seem to be fancying the idea that i might be coming to a theater near you. Its ok since ive seen the other shit hole and would enjoy dropping bombs and exterminating some lesser kinds that breed too much in a new shit hole. Although you should open yourself to the idea that not every "smart" person is an academic. I consider myself smart, but definately not academic, my GPA in college and my ability to survive 12+ hours a day walking iraqi streets for 15 months straight speaks to that. Let me look up a few more good reads. See if you can get your hands on Fields of Fire in the event you some day need to defend your base from ground attack. It was written by a young senator from Va some years ago. If not ill toss it in the mail here in a couple days.

Notorious said...

First of all, I was not meaning to say that only academics are smart. When I wrote the sentence, "if you have thoughtfully come to the conclusion that there are to many people on the planet, consider yourself an enlightened observer of the universe, or if you have a PhD, it is your duty to the future of humanity to reproduce." I meant that these are the type of people that are statistically much less likely to have children. It is in effect the people that decide not to have kids are the same people that it is best if they do. I was certainly not meaning to limit it to pure academics... though they in general seem much less likely to make new kids. What I am saying is that if you come to the conclusion that you shouldn't have kids for grand social reasons... you probably should. Where as if you want to have tons of kids because you just read the newest "QuiverFull" magazine and it made sense to you... you should definitely definitely not!

As for the Nature vs Nurture... I'd guess that it is a combination of both... but I am not sure that it is practical to take all the bigots and idiots babies away from them and try to raise their kids in an a more rational enlightened environment. I think it is much more practical to have the thinking rational people make more babies and raise their children to be as reasonable and conscience as possible.

Allison said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Allison said...

SAHD = Stay At Home Dad

An "ops check" is one thing. Changing diapers for a few years is entirely different.

Notorious said...

Do stay at home dads have time to build things in the garage? That would be fine then!

As much fun as it would be to just randomly distribute genetic material across the countryside into the future population, There might be something to raising a few of them yourself. Just incase it is the nuture over the nature that makes people the way they are. Molding minds for the future! It might be the way to go... Maybe elementary school teacher!

Notorious said...

Several of you have contacted me about this post in less public mediums. To my surprise they were not requests for personally delivered sperm samples. Though, some of the responses make me think there may be a little bit of confusion on a few points.

Let me clarify:

1. I am not saying in some totalitarian way that idiots, bigots, and those impeding the progress of human knowledge should be stopped in any way from reproducing. It is very impractical and better to hedge your bet. My point was that the people that are currently consciencely self-eliminating from the gene pool probably shouldn't.

2. And even if I was, Yes! As egotistical as it may sound, I indeed could be the judge of who is allowed to reproduce. I can think of nobody that is more qualified to identify imbeciles who should not breed! This would not at all be based on academic standards. In fact, I personally believe that formal education is the most significant destroyer of creativity in our culture today and anyone that makes it through with any shred of creativity and curiosity does so in spite of the education system. (but that's a different topic.) I just would hang out with you for a few days... and it would be obvious to me after a short while.

"But Notorious! Who are you to play god?"

"Who am I not to? Everyone else is... even God himself!"

...........

On a more serious note and slightly different topic, perhaps this ability of reason and understanding that we have evolved has given use the tools to direct our own evolution a.k.a. the next step! Now we have two methods of directing our own progress as a species... manipulating our own genes in a lab as well as the selective breeding that we have been participating in for millennium.

ΕΡΜΕΣ said...

all of this devolution was prophesied in the musical stylings of Devo! What were you doing in the 80's???

Anonymous said...

You make me laugh, when are you coming home? I've moved now and start back to work inprocessing tomorrow.

jr