Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

505

Good traits get amplified in the population, bad traits get reduced or eliminated.

There are many ways to go about it. A civilization automatically exerts a kind of genic stress on a population, some people have more kids and some don't reproduce at all.

You could just pay high IQ, non-psychopaths, that are healthy to have more kids.

You could sterilize people under a certain IQ and who have genetic diseases, something the USA used to do and the Jews objected to because they're actually a low IQ and genetically damaged group.

And there are lots of options in between like sterilizing people after a certain number of children depending on their IQ or other criteria.

The Jewish argument of eugenics is that it's inhumane somehow, but I think having people die because they're deformed or can't take care of themselves, or growing the numbers of defective people until society collapses is less humane.

Eugenics also nicely addresses the issue of unrestrained population growth and decline since you can match the number of births to the amount of people your civilization requires.

I also really want to see what humanity, or the White population since I don't like the idea of picking the direction other races go for them, can become with eugenics.

How smart can Whites become?

How fit can Whites become?

How attractive can Whites become?

How long can Whites come to live without medical assistance?

And I do realize that gene editting is just around the corner, assuming the West doesn't collapse in on itself because it can't handle the basics of what a country is and it screwed over the White Millennials and later Whites to the point they want to take everyone out with them. The idea of editing genomes and switching out body parts is a wonderful day dream that I hope becomes reality.

I also recognize there are problems with gene editing that might take time to resolve, incompatible combinations of genes that make editing a little more complicated than just switching out one gene for another.

It makes sense to start where we are with the tools we have available, and eugenics is something we can do right now.

Good traits get amplified in the population, bad traits get reduced or eliminated. There are many ways to go about it. A civilization automatically exerts a kind of genic stress on a population, some people have more kids and some don't reproduce at all. You could just pay high IQ, non-psychopaths, that are healthy to have more kids. You could sterilize people under a certain IQ and who have genetic diseases, something the USA used to do and the Jews objected to because they're actually a low IQ and genetically damaged group. And there are lots of options in between like sterilizing people after a certain number of children depending on their IQ or other criteria. The Jewish argument of eugenics is that it's inhumane somehow, but I think having people die because they're deformed or can't take care of themselves, or growing the numbers of defective people until society collapses is less humane. Eugenics also nicely addresses the issue of unrestrained population growth and decline since you can match the number of births to the amount of people your civilization requires. I also really want to see what humanity, or the White population since I don't like the idea of picking the direction other races go for them, can become with eugenics. How smart can Whites become? How fit can Whites become? How attractive can Whites become? How long can Whites come to live without medical assistance? And I do realize that gene editting is just around the corner, assuming the West doesn't collapse in on itself because it can't handle the basics of what a country is and it screwed over the White Millennials and later Whites to the point they want to take everyone out with them. The idea of editing genomes and switching out body parts is a wonderful day dream that I hope becomes reality. I also recognize there are problems with gene editing that might take time to resolve, incompatible combinations of genes that make editing a little more complicated than just switching out one gene for another. It makes sense to start where we are with the tools we have available, and eugenics is something we can do right now.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (77).
[–] • 14 pts

What, for humans, we call eugenics, for literally every other species whose breeding we control, it has been common sense for thousands of years.

I don't think we need tyrannous restrictions on anyone's ability to have children. But we'd benefit from incentivizing the smartest, most accomplished, wisest, strongest, and best of us to have more children. We certainly need to stop the dysgenics plan we're running now in the West, where children are a burden for most families, but we pay the weakest of us to have more kids through welfare.

[–] • 4 pts

I'm unlikely to have children as things are, but have a high IQ and have high aptitude for many things that are useful to this civilization.

If they said they would pay 1k a month per child if I married a high IQ woman, I would start having children and they'd have a new generation of engineers, doctors, planners, experts, etc..

I'd turn raising them into a full time occupation and produce as many children as my wife was willing and capable of having.

[–] • 5 pts

If you sneak into swedistan and claim to be a muzzie invader you can get just that.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

I would start having children and they'd have a new generation of engineers, doctors, planners, experts, etc..

Wish it worked like that. It is more likely your kids would largely be misfit for reasons you probably don't comprehend right now - the largest of which is, assuming your high intelligence claim is valid, intelligent people don't actually get along with each other, or work well with each other, etc. They are all loners, for many reasons.

Even people of normal intellect, which you probably are (remember we are far dumber than our forefathers, and IQ testing has been adjusted down over the centuries so the average moron remains a 100 - they call this 'renormalization' - your 'high score' is probably yesteryear's 'normal') have issues with this, which is where the old saying of 'some things skip a generation' comes from. In this case, I believe I've found the cause - it stems from child rejection of the parents (and anything they suggest, do, strive for, or want their kids to be), which itself stems from the jewish destruction of the role model early last century:

  • the first prong was substituting fake role models, aimed at males - the invention of comic books and Saturday morning cartoons had much to do with this (your Dad was no longer your role model, Superman/Gi Joe/etc. was)
  • the second prong was the 'corruption' of living role models, aimed at females - Madonna, Betty Boop, Britney Spears, every Disney child star, etc all started pure and virginal to gain their following, then have a 'turning' where they, as feminine role models, devolve into general jewish degeneracy or outright satanic worship.
[–] • 0 pt (edited )

The social problems for people with high IQs is due to isolation in an idiot dominated society.

Imagine if a society was dominated by literal retards and they were making decisions that affect you and as a group rejected your views as wrong because they were not the consensus.

Retards do not like being contradicted, they find it to be an assault on them. Since their views are based on heuristics, they will not even understand logical arguments. That might not be a problem after you become a adult, but as a high IQ child among retards they'll instil a kind of fear of others that turns you into a hermit.

If eugenics was implemented, or high IQ people simply were given their own state or city, that wouldn't be an issue and the currenly high IQ people wouldn't develop into hermits and losers.

[–] • 2 pts

That's the best way to think of it. Stop policy that disincentivizes responsible people from having kids while incentivizing children for the lowest tier of society.

[–] • 2 pts

You know what you get when you give free food to starving Ethiopians? More starving Ethiopians. Just cause those Ethiopians live in Detroit and Nashville doesn't make the statement false.

[–] • 0 pt

But we'd benefit from incentivizing the smartest, most accomplished, wisest, strongest, and best of us to have more children.

That's one reason why argue for having patent rights. That should be enough.

[–] • 0 pt

Just need white bitches to stay in the kitchen. No other fix necessary