By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
VGPolyglot said:
StarDoor said:

1.) Can we please stop with the pedantry? What is your argument? "It's only Socialism if it's pure"? Even Wikipedia groups "Social Democracy" into the Socialism category.

2.) Alright, you're clearly being dense on purpose. Not only did I not say anything about race, I specifically said voluntary measures could be taken. You don't need to forcibly sterilize people to stop dysgenics. You could have income tax credits to intelligent people who have kids, maternal leave for women (or even discouraging intelligent women from wasting their limited window of fertility in the workforce), free contraception and abortions for poor people, etc.

Your "superior breeds" and "social darwinism" nonsense is just vapid emotional rhetoric. "Oooooh, Hitler existed, therefore we must pass on a worse genetic legacy with each generation!"

1. That's because many of the original social democrats saw that as a way to transition to socialism. The vast majority of social democrats these days do not want to transition to socialism

2. So basically, you want poor people to have less children. Do you know that ethnic minorities are generally poorer than whites? That's why I mentioned races: because certain will inevitably be targeted, intentionally or unintentionally.

If that's something you care about, there's nothing stopping anyone from implementing eugenic polices within each race. But that requires you to accept that most other races have, on average, lower genotypic IQs and less conscientious personalities than whites.