Any social darwinists around here?

[IlluSionS667]

I read a SF book, about 20 years ago about a perfect society. Sorry. I forgot the name and the author. I just kept on my mind the main idea. So, there is this society where nobody is in direct contact with nobody. The comunication was made by videocamera. Each member of the society worked at home. So, no sex between them. The reproduction was made in vitro and only for those members chosen by the society. No one had the right to have more than one child. And the child grow up as isolated from others as his genetic parents. Get the picture ?

Not exactly what I would call a perfect society For me, a perfect society is a society that resembles the tribal nation, combined with modern technology.

What I mean by this is that the problems in your country are most probably economically and not because of the presence of different races/cultures. Yoy have always the possibility to emigrate in another country.

We have social problems and economical problems. The economical problems are caused by a combination of many factors. Some of the social problems are caused by holes in the welfare system, and others are caused by frictions between ethnic groups.

Still, life is still rather good here. It just used to be better, and it's all heading in the wrong direction. Belgium is a rather complex country, and you need to have lived here to understand the social enviroment.

About your 1st link, I got frosen when I saw the symbol of swastica. No offence !

The symbol of the swastika means something different to me than it does to you. To me it doesn't stand for hate, but it stands for harmony, welfare and peace. This was the meaning Hitler gave it, and that meaning was deducted from the orriginal Nordic swastika (called fylfot, by the vikings). Just try to get past your bias and read the text.

As of cerebrating IlluSionS667's Germanic heritage, this give a bit of insight about difference between race and culture.

http://www.litespeedcomputers.com/12085.mpg

Hehe, funny stuff. Anyway, I do agree that people from one race can opt for a different culture. That's why I believe that seperation by culture is more important than seperation by race. People should be able to migrate to another country, if they wish to adopt another culture. However, very few people ever migrate for cultural reasons. Practically everyone migrates for economical reasons, and many people are very reluctant to give up the culture of their ancestors. That's what causes most conflicts between economical immigrants and the orriginal population of a country. By giving each culture economical independence and maintaining the economical prosperity of each nation, few people would even care about migrating. Then, seperation by culture and largely by race would by rather spontaneous.

And oh yeah, I'm not German but Flemish

You only have to look at the rich cultures of India to see what enormous benefits are generated from the mixing of different cultures. In India all "races" are mixed to different extents as can be seen when you go from North to South and from West to East.

I'm not familiar enough with the Indian cultures and the Indian caste system to comment on that. I am however familiar with another culture that's even much more mixed : the US. And there, I see a very shallow culture (if you can even call it a culture) that scares me because of it's lack of depth and it's love for kapitalism.

 

[alexa]

Not exactly what I would call a perfect society For me, a perfect society is a society that resembles the tribal nation, combined with modern technology.

There is no perfect society. That's why a wrote about the book. Even if you have the most sofistecated technology, we are still human beings and we do mistakes. That's the human nature.

I'll comment the rest of the message later, as I have no time left.

alexa

 

[IlluSionS667]

Not exactly what I would call a perfect society For me, a perfect society is a society that resembles the tribal nation, combined with modern technology.

There is no perfect society. That's why a wrote about the book.

Nothing is perfect. But that does not mean one can not have an idea of how a perfect society would look like. If only 75% of it would be achieved, the world would be a much better place.

Even if you have the most sofistecated technology, we are still human beings and we do mistakes. That's the human nature.

There are ways to prevent mistakes. We just need very capable persons in charge, who can imagine every possible result of a change, so mistakes can be prevented as much as possible.

 

[iBrian]

I'm actually more of the opinion that the different genotypes of humanity hold both important genetic strengths and weaknesses - therefore humanity should ideally look to mix the gene pool as much as possible, to confer the various benefits of our genetic expression, as well as allowing debilitating mutatations to be bred out.

The moment any genetic lineage starts to separate itself is the moment we end up with various mutations - which left to prosper in a closed gene pool can have a negative impact on the phenotypes of the population.

Although it can be argued that perhaps some of these mutations have postive consequences - genes for tolerance malaria, for example - ultimately it is better to mix the different genotypes and preserve the stronger more constructive expressions.

As for the banning of any member for their beliefs or ideas - that is not what this place is about. If forced to, I'm sure each of us can disagree with every other member about some particular detail. Diversity is our strength as a community.

However, a community we are indeed, and ultimately it is desirably to ensure that this community is allowed to function constructively as an interfaith forum.

Although I see no harm in discussing National Socialism, I should hope that this rather emotive subject does not attempt what CR is and focusses upon as a community.

Politics we can discuss - and I don't mind sabres being rattled a little, so long as they remain sheathed.

Ultimately, all that is asked is that we can remain civil is whatever agreements - and disagreements - that we may have.

 

[IlluSionS667]

I'm actually more of the opinion that the different genotypes of humanity hold both important genetic strengths and weaknesses - therefore humanity should ideally look to mix the gene pool as much as possible, to confer the various benefits of our genetic expression, as well as allowing debilitating mutatations to be bred out.

But aren't the differences between races part of the richess of the human race? Does it really matter of these differences are strenghts of weaknesses? They're a part of what we are, and it's a part of our identity. I do not like the idea of that diversity being destroyed in the creation of one world race.

The moment any genetic lineage starts to separate itself is the moment we end up with various mutations - which left to prosper in a closed gene pool can have a negative impact on the phenotypes of the population.

People will always mix with neighboring people. That way, certain races get sufficient new genes from other races not to degenerate. Also, the gene pool within a race is already pretty diverse.

And I'd just like to add that a friend of mine had lived for a while amongst the mixed people in South America (part hispanic, part native). According to him, these women are damn ugly, while pure native women are often very beautiful.

Although it can be argued that perhaps some of these mutations have postive consequences - genes for tolerance malaria, for example - ultimately it is better to mix the different genotypes and preserve the stronger more constructive expressions.

Ultimately, all that is asked is that we can remain civil is whatever agreements - and disagreements - that we may have.

Amen. Thank you for your respect. The respect from my side is more than mutual.

 

[alexa]

There are ways to prevent mistakes.

Exactly, prevention is a solution.

What do you mean by 'very capable persons in charge, who can imagine every possible result of a change' ?

 

[alexa]

I'm actually more of the opinion that the different genotypes of humanity hold both important genetic strengths and weaknesses - therefore humanity should ideally look to mix the gene pool as much as possible, to confer the various benefits of our genetic expression, as well as allowing debilitating mutatations to be bred out.

Nice lesson of genetic, Brian.

I have just a little problem. I canot look at my husband as a simply genotype. Well, I can try without telling him and laugh inside of me.

Mixed families exist, as love is blind and who cares about his/her mother-in-law from the beginning ? No many, that's for sure !

So, unless we accept the genetic engineering on people, the mix process will take generations. This is a touchy problem...

 

[IlluSionS667]

What do you mean by 'very capable persons in charge, who can imagine every possible result of a change' ?

The top 5% of the most intelligent people in the world (still about 300.000 people) are capable of thinking way beyond the capacities of the average man. With such people in charge, laws would make much more sense and would apply more to the wishes of the public.

 

[alexa]

With such people in charge, laws would make much more sense and would apply more to the wishes of the public.

Mhmm ...I have a low opinion of politicians

 

[IlluSionS667]

Mhmm ...I have a low opinion of politicians

That's because they're incompetent. In a technocracy you won't have that.

 

[alexa]

That's because they're incompetent. In a technocracy you won't have that.

O.K. IllusionS. So, you would like a technocracy and cultures separated from each other. What else for the future ?

 

[IlluSionS667]

O.K. IllusionS. So, you would like a technocracy and cultures separated from each other. What else for the future ?

Perhaps you could try reading the link I put in the first post?!

 

[alexa]

Perhaps you could try reading the link I put in the first post?!

Well, I did finally. And I found it A HUGE UTOPIE.

It doesn't work the comunism and don't try to convince me the contrary. I grow up in an ex comunist country and I don't want to go back there. In this kind of society, nobody cares about the goods of the state.

It prevents exploitation of the poor by the rich. Also, society is not based on consumption or profit any more, but on moral values. By working for the state, profits will not only go to the welfare of the state, but all people will feel like they’re helping their brethren. It creates a feeling of unity, where capitalism creates a feeling of aparhy

You can dream. I don't wanna say the capitalism is perfect, but if you think you have equal people in this kind of society, you don't know much about human nature and for sure you don't know how is to get up at 3 o'clock in the morning and wait for hours, even days to buy some milk and bread and meat. You don't know how is to see an orange once /year. You don't know how is to listen on TV only about peace and disarmament. You don't know how is to look back on your shoulder to be sure nobody can listen and tell to the authorities what you really think.

Yes, I agree at the beginning this theory seemed a good one. But we have to get back to the human nature. If we really want to change somenthing in the society, we have to begin deep inside of us. Everyone has the right to choose his own path. The end is the same for all of us.

 

[Vapour]

Hey, IlluSionS667. Let me recommend you a book. It's a SF about facist Utopia

"Starship Trooper" by Robert A. Heinlein

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_2/102-9576781-3807307?v=glance&s=books

There is a film adaptation as well. As always, you won't enjoy the film if you read the book first so you might want to watch the film first then read the book second.

Oh, alexa, to use quoate properly, you have to put / between ([) & (quote]).

 

[alexa]

Hey, IlluSionS667. Let me recommend you a book. It's a SF about facist Utopia

Hi Utopia,

IlluSionS is just young, so we have let him find his path. I don't wanna encourage him to a fascist Utopia, as I think (after checking around on this forum) he has the potential do something good with his life. One day, he'll think different about nazi.

Regards,

Alexa

 

[alexa]

oups, I didn't take my coffee yet. The previous message is for Vapour.

Sorry,


Alexa

 

[IlluSionS667]

In this kind of society, nobody cares about the goods of the state.

In Hitler's empire, people did. Those who were raised by the national socialist ideal, were the bravest fighters and the hardest workers. The welfare system was great, and the people loved their leader.

The Russian model failed for several reasons. One was a lack of competition between corporations. Another was that people weren't paid for the work they did but per hour of so. Then there was a lack of competence by the top. Also was there a lack of ideological foundation, as Marx's ideals differed a lot from the implementation. Then there was the need to compete with the US. etc....... It's not the cooperative state per se that failed. Hitler's Germany was going the right way until they were destroyed by their enemies, and the Inca society already have a complex but functional cooperative state with a strict hierarchy.

You can dream. I don't wanna say the capitalism is perfect, but if you think you have equal people in this kind of society, you don't know much about human nature

I do know about human nature. It's human nature which made me turn my back to anarchism. 'Social-democratic' kapitalism will never please me, as it is rotten in its core.

and for sure you don't know how is to get up at 3 o'clock in the morning and wait for hours, even days to buy some milk and bread and meat. You don't know how is to see an orange once /year. You don't know how is to listen on TV only about peace and disarmament. You don't know how is to look back on your shoulder to be sure nobody can listen and tell to the authorities what you really think.

That's because your leaders were incompetent. The incas had a wonderful economy, even though the land they lived in wasn't exactly thr most fertile land. Hitler's Germany was not a cooperative state yet, but they were working towards it slowly. And because of that, they also did not have these problems you mention.

A state needs leaders with much more capabilities than the average person. A technocracy is the only way to ensure this.

But we have to get back to the human nature. If we really want to change somenthing in the society, we have to begin deep inside of us.

We need to change the way people think. The education in Hitler's Germany succeeded in doing so. The Hitler jugend SS brigades, who are amongst the bravest soldiers ever (despite their young age) are a perfect example of how education can make a person put the common welfare before the individual welfare. They were fighting for a dream which got destroyed by England, Russia and the US.

Hey, IlluSionS667. Let me recommend you a book. It's a SF about facist Utopia

"Starship Trooper" by Robert A. Heinlein

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...=glance&s=books

There is a film adaptation as well. As always, you won't enjoy the film if you read the book first so you might want to watch the film first then read the book second.

Are there people on earth who haven't seen the movie yet? Oh well, I kinda liked the movie (I'm a sucker for sci-fi) and the political twist in the beginning, and I have heard that the book was much better and contained much more political insight.

This society indeed is not only fascist but also technocratic. I should read the book. Thank you for reminding me. Heinlein is a good author.

 

[alexa]

In Hitler's empire, people did. Those who were raised by the national socialist ideal, were the bravest fighters and the hardest workers. The welfare system was great, and the people loved their leader.

Well, you know you are strong on your position to defend Hitler's empire.

The problem is you haven't been even born during the war. So, how do you know they were the bravest fighters and the hardest workers ? Because somobody told you so, or you have read some books about it ? It seems more likely they had a brain wash.

Somebody who cannot think by himself and accepts blindely all kind of ideas is not very smart, you know.

The comunism failed also because some finallly wake up from the dream of equality between them. This doesn't mean there is no dreamer left. I saw people crying on the grave of Stalin and Ceausescu. They forgot about the famine and the cold in their appartements. All they think about is how good it was when they were not afraid to be fired and somebody took the decision for them.

Now, I'm curious about your motto : what makes you happy ?

alexa

 

[IlluSionS667]

The problem is you haven't been even born during the war. So, how do you know they were the bravest fighters and the hardest workers ?

It's common knowledge that the Hitler jugend SS troops were the bravest soldiers around, even though they were very young and inexperienced. I can not say with certainty however that those who did not go to the army did just as much effort for their country.

The comunism failed also because some finallly wake up from the dream of equality between them.

Communism failed because the Marxist ideal was never reached, and what came in place was a sorta left wing fascist state without ideological foundation and with terrible management.

I saw people crying on the grave of Stalin and Ceausescu.

I have a lot of respect and admiration for Lenin. But how can anyone like Stalin and Ceausescu? They did NOTHING for their people, as far as I know.

All they think about is how good it was when they were not afraid to be fired and somebody took the decision for them.

Just another proof that the masses really are stupid

Now, I'm curious about your motto : what makes you happy ?

My girlfriend

 

[IlluSionS667]

presumably you admire the work of that eminently respectable historian david irving.

I try to stay sceptical to all he says, but he does make some great points.

if the cap fits, you should stop being such a coward and wear it

As I said, I believe in national socialism. I'm not a racist, nor an anti-semite. I am someone who believes in the true meaning of national socialism : a right-wing socialist state based on natural law.

If the swastika was not related to hatred and anti-semitism these days, I would wear a swastika around my neck. However, as the orriginal meaning is lost, I cannot, as I do not want to associate myself with hatred and anti-semitism. I respect Hitler for who he was, and I'm disgusted about the filthy lies told about him.

I'm not a coward. The mere fact of me speaking out, dispitie the controversy proves otherwise. Don't try to put words in my mouth that are not mine.

I have had contacts with racist skinheads, who call themselves national socialists. Let me tell you that I've even been threatened by them for trying to ally with the ultra-left and for not hating people like you.

as you would expect me eventually to wear a yellow star as an enemy of your state.

National socialism is nothing but zionism for non-jews. I would support zionism, if Israel was located in Eastern Europe (where your people's ethic backgrounds are), if they did not opress other people and if they did not suck so much money out of the economy of other countries.

you disgust me.

I'm not the discriminating person here. You are. Think about that.