Many have written on the dangers of biotech over the years, but I like Reed’s comment here:
Just now of course no one knows very well what genes control what behavior, or whether all behavior is genetically determined, but this won’t last. Then what? Almost certainly resistance to manipulation will fade as it becomes possible to edit out diseases of genetic origin. This having worked, it will be hard to resist amplifying intelligence. Then…if there are genes for psychopathy, well…I mean, do we really need Ted Bundys? And we are off and running.
Reed is highlighting how it’s a slippery slope. First small changes will be made, then greater changes.
Currently man is becoming increasingly more reliant upon [non-genetic] technology, which can cure all manner of problems, enabling those to reproduce who might not have previously. This is what some call “dysgenics” (also see Idiocracy for IQ concerns). If a society were set up to resist biotech, it would need to consider just how this decline could be balanced without the use of biotech. Perhaps simply talking about it would lead to a voluntary correction, free choice by citizens. My focus tends to be on resisting biotech, not on promoting eugenics.
Conservatives have generally feared eugenics, with good reason. Biotech is seen by some as a sort of humane eugenics, especially now since transhumanists today tend to put their hopes in corporations, not governments.
So, why is it bad? Well, I recommend the reader complete Reed’s article, linked above. Then you’ll more readily follow how the threat is perfect and permanent moral relativity. It’s the completion of the French Revolution, the perfection of a faith of Reason. For a conservative, such is a nightmare. For a liberal, it’s a dream where all of the horrors of the past can be destroyed, forgotten, to make way for a new utopia: Man can finally replace God.
We already see how Darwinism is widely embraced; Creationism is seen almost on par with Flat Earth. So, I don’t really expect understanding on the threat.
But I am glad to see a thoughtful article by Reed on the matter.
Mel Gibson’s latest movie, “Hacksaw Ridge”, premiered on the 4th. It’s apparently about Desmond Thomas Doss: A pacifist serving as a medic in WWII, on the front lines. And it’s based on a true story.
Doss has a wikipedia article:
“He was a Corporal (Private First Class at the time of his Medal of Honor heroics) in the U.S. Army assigned to the Medical Detachment, 307th Infantry, 77th Infantry Division.”
This latest film fits neatly into a Gibson trilogy: Passion, Apocalypto, Hacksaw. All three share deeply Christian themes.
Stonehenge is now thought to be a site of past ancestor worship.
It is believed to have begun as a Welsh tomb, until its relocation. Presumably the people living in Wales moved, took their ancestors with them.
I wonder if this new theory will dampen New Age religious celebrations at the tombs, since they tend to be more cosmopolitan.
“Where are the dead? The simple answer is Stonehenge, because what we hadn’t realised was that Stonehenge is the largest cemetery of the entire 3rd millennium BC in Britain,” added Prof Parker Pearson.
“Most of those remains are cremated. Just burnt fragments. There were several hundred people buried.”
Note: This is not a new theory, but it’s a recent article. Our betters would prefer we only talked of Stonehenge as astrological in nature.
The Wave is a Norwegian catastrophe film (English subtitles) which I like for revealing the delicacy of modern society. Moderns tend to obsess over the near-term, disregarding risk. And we tend to believe in our absolute mastery over nature.
What’s most enjoyable is how the film is free from propaganda: Parents protect their children, and men behave as men.
It’s also pleasant to see a community act as a unit, rather than as a collection of modern asocial consumers who happen to temporarily reside in the same location.
Sverissaga, the Saga of King Sverri of Norway, can be read here.
In the saga, a body is thrown down a particular well, to ruin the well. Inquisitive archaeologists dug to check whether a body truly was there, and a skeleton was indeed found.
If oil proves unprofitable for Norway, perhaps it can employ its young men in the testing of more sagas. I would also love to see a test of Heyerdahl’s reed ship, since Heyerdahl has been quite forgotten.
In other news, Norway built a wall to keep out migrants. Building walls is of course impossible, as Hillary’s supporters well know. It is believed the Norwegians discovered some dark pagan art to complete theirs.
Phyllis Schlafly’s final book is to be published on the 6th, according to Amazon. Pat Buchanan writes on this, at VDARE.
Justin Raimondo tweets:
Phyllis Schlafly was against the Kosovo war: link, because she opposed “interventionist escapades.”
Unlike the neocons, Phyllis Schafly predicted US could be “bogged down” in Iraq “for the next 50 years.” https://t.co/tuk9jkYkaQ
Alan Tonelson tweets:
Whatever you think of #Phyllis #Schlafly on social issues, she was a staunch friend of US #workers on #trade & immigration issues. #tcot”
I’m glad Schlafly didn’t go down as a CruzBot but instead fought for America until the very end. Trump has continued to live up to Coulter’s and Schlafly’s high expectations.