Population control & scientfic breeding

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟70,740.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The below is an article by Brent Jessop on Population Control and the Scientific Breeding of Humans...

Population Control and the Scientific Breeding of Humans:The Impact of Science on Society Part 3
Brent Jessop
Knowledge Driven Revolution.com
Tuesday January 29, 2008
"If there is not to be an endless succession of wars, population will have to become stationary throughout the world, and this will probably have to be done, in many countries, as a result of governmental measures. This will require an extension of scientific technique into very intimate matters." - Bertrand Russell, 1952 (p38)​
Bertrand Russell in his 1952 book The Impact of Science on Society* describes a variety of methods that have been and could be used to reduce the population of the world to a more manageable size. Another very interrelated concept of a managed population size is the practice of eugenics. To be more precise, the practice of dysgenics for the commoners and eugenics for the aristocracy. Commoners will be bred to create a "submissive and docile disposition" while the aristocracy will be bred for much different qualities. "Gradually, by selective breeding the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species."

Bertrand Arthur William Russell, 3rd Earl Russell (1872-1970) was a renowned British philosopher and mathematician who was an adamant internationalist and worked extensively on the education of young children. He was the founder of the Pugwash movement which used the spectre of Cold War nuclear annihilation to push for world government. Among many other prizes, Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950 and UNESCO�s (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) Kalinga prize in 1957.

The first article in this series described how scientific technique centralizes power within a society. The second part examined the stability of a scientific society and Russell's belief in the need for a world government.​
(Article continues below)

Solutions to Overpopulation

From The Impact of Science on Society:​
"But bad times, you may say, are exceptional, and can be dealt with by exceptional methods. This has been more or less true unless the increase in population can be enormously diminished. At present the population of the world is increasing at about 58,000 per diem. War, so far, has had no very great effect on this increase, which continued throughout each of the world wars." [emphasis mine] - 115

"There are three ways of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and third that of general misery except for a powerful minority." - 117

"The nations which at present increase rapidly should be encouraged to adopt the methods by which, in the West, the increase of population has been checked. Educational propaganda, with government help, could achieve this result in a generation." [emphasis mine] - 116

"... a scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is a world government... unless there is a world government which secures universal birth control, there must from time to time be great wars, in which the penalty of defeat is widespread death by starvation... Unless, at some stage, one power or group of powers emerges victorious and proceeds to establish a single government of the world with a monopoly of armed forces, it is clear that the level of civilization must decline until scientific warfare becomes impossible - that is until science is extinct." [emphasis mine] - 117

"If raw materials are not to be used up too fast, there must not be free competition for their acquisition and use but an international authority to ration them in such quantities as may from time to time seem compatible with continued industrial prosperity. And similar considerations apply to soil conservation." [emphasis mine] - 124

"To deal with this problem [increasing population and decreasing food supplies] it will be necessary to find ways of preventing an increase in world population. If this is to be done otherwise than by wars, pestilence, and famines, it will demand a powerful international authority. This authority should deal out the world's food to the various nations in proportion to their population at the time of the establishment of the authority. If any nation subsequently increased its population it should not on that account receive any more food. The motive for not increasing population would therefore be very compelling. What method of preventing an increase might be preferred should be left to each state to decide." [emphasis mine] - 124​
Eugenics and Dysgenics - The Scientific Breeding of Humans
"biology, physiology and psychology are likely in the long run to affect human life quite as much as physics and chemistry." [emphasis mine] - 38

"In any case, it is pretty certain that scientific technique will very soon effect great improvements in the animals and plants that are useful to man.

When such methods of modifying the congenital character of animals and plants have been pursued long enough to make their success obvious, it is probable that there will be a powerful movement for applying scientific methods to human propagation. There would at first be strong religious and emotional obstacles to the adoption of such a policy. But suppose (say) Russia were able to overcome these obstacles and to breed a race stronger, more intelligent, and more resistant to disease than any race of men that has hitherto existed, and suppose the other nations perceived that unless they followed suit they would be defeated in war, then either the other nations would voluntarily forgo their prejudices, or, after defeat, they would be compelled to forgo them. Any scientific technique, however beastly, is bound to spread if it is useful in war - until such time as men decide that they have had enough of war and will henceforth live in peace. As that day does seem to be at hand, scientific breeding of human beings must be expected to come about." [emphasis mine] - 39

"Scientific societies are as yet in their infancy. It may be worthwhile to spend a few moments in speculating as to possible future developments of those that are oligarchies.

...Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.

A totalitarian government with a scientific bent might do things that to us would seem horrifying. The Nazis were more scientific than the present rulers of Russia, and were more inclined towards the sort of atrocities that I have in mind. They were said - I do not know with what truth - to use prisoners in concentration camps as material for all kinds of experiments, some involving death after much pain. If they had survived, they would probably have soon taken to scientific breeding. Any nation which adopts this practice will, within a generation, secure great military advantages. The system, one may surmise, will be something like this: except possibly in the governing aristocracy, all but 5 per cent of males and 30 per cent of females will be sterilised. The 30 per cent of females will be expected to spend the years from eighteen to forty in reproduction, in order to secure adequate cannon fodder. As a rule, artificial insemination will be preferred to the natural method. The unsterilised, if they desire the pleasures of love, will usually have to seek them with sterilised partners.

Sires will be chosen for various qualities, some for muscle others for brains. All will have to be healthy, and unless they are to be the fathers of oligarchs they will have to be of a submissive and docile disposition. Children will, as in Plato's Republic, be taken from their mothers and reared by professional nurses. Gradually, by selective breeding the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organised insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton. (The Aztecs kept a domesticated alien tribe for purposes of cannibalism. Their regime was totalitarian.)

To those accustomed to this system, the family as we know it would seem as queer as the tribal and totem organisation of Australian aborigines seems to us... The labouring class would have such long hours of work and so little to eat that their desires would hardly extend beyond sleep and food. The upper class, being deprived of the softer pleasures both by the abolition of the family and by the supreme duty of devotion to the State, would acquire the mentality of ascetics: they would care only for power, and in pursuit of it would not shrink from cruelty. By the practice of cruelty men would become hardened, so that worse and worse tortures would be required to give the spectators a thrill." [emphasis mine] - 61​
Conclusion

A very important auxiliary technique involved in creating the "submissive and docile disposition" is education. Bertrand Russell's views on education will be discussed in the following article, entitled Mass Psychology and Education.

*Quotes from Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (1952). ISBN0-415-10906-X

Note: I first heard about this book from talks given by Alan Watt at Cutting Through The Matrix.com, an individual well worth looking into.

***
Note: I, the poster, do not advocate population control or eugenics. I am merely making this information available for discussion.

 

Voegelin

Reactionary
Aug 18, 2003
20,145
1,430
Connecticut
✟26,726.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Looking at 20th century elites--Bertrand Russell, Harry H. Laughlin, John Dewey, Wickliffe Draper, Margaret Sanger, Clarence Gamble, Alan Guttmacher,George Bernard Shaw, Noble Prize winning physicist Robert Andrews Millikan, biologist Charles Davenport--all one can say is let's hope we never have another crew like that one (but of course we do).
 
Upvote 0

Harpuia

Oldie... very very oldie...
Nov 9, 2004
14,888
914
37
Undisclosed
✟27,603.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
As far as intelligence goes, how exactly do they plan to do with eugenics what can't be done with good parenting?

I guess this could also go for muscle, except instead of parenting, hitting the gym? I'd like to know, because intelligence-wise, some people tell me that with the IQ I have, they wonder why we need eugenics.

It's made me wonder that myself. If people just tried, in honesty, I don't think science could really do things that can't be done already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icedtea
Upvote 0

Harpuia

Oldie... very very oldie...
Nov 9, 2004
14,888
914
37
Undisclosed
✟27,603.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
Good point. Lately, I've been thinking and pondering; it sometimes does seem, when I look at certain families, if intelligence really isn't genetic.
Can it really be only parenting?
Food for thought.
I've taken three I.Q. tests in my life. I was recommended for two of them (kindergarten and last year) and I took my second one in middle school voluntarily.

I asked professors in my school about genetics, and if we're supposed to be able, through eugenics, to build smarter and stronger people. They told me that it is true, that it will be easier for them in a way, that you could build people with genius-level I.Q.s genetically, but very little of it has to do with genetics, and I'm pretty sure it has its limits. You have to be able to want to learn on your own.

My IQ was high, but I'm still a good step or two below the 200+ IQ geniuses like Einstein, von Goethe, Savant, Da Vinci and so on. Remember, no eugenics going on in there either.

Speaking of which, I was looking at Orion's Arm the other day, which is a science-fiction worldbuilder, talking about such IQ increases make people very smart and able to handle complex tasks at young ages in the beginning, but the lack of needing to try such simple tasks leaves them bored, and eventually, everyone else catches up to them while they find themselves unable to break a barrier where their super-high IQs (we're talking 400-500 here) would be needed.
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟70,740.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I have enough of a time reteaching my children half the nonsense they learn in public school social(ism) studies courses. ie China is our trading partner friend. They send us bicycles... Oddly there was no mention of their ICBM's pointed at us.
Unfortunately, here in Australia, there is a proposal for a national curriculum. In order words, the federal government would be teaching the kids the 'official' version of how things work and why things are the way they are. Of course, this is only my superficial perception of the matter.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel19

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2005
897
134
✟1,775.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
All of this is based on hard research, just in case you'd like to know. This isn't a joke, and it's not a game.

It is quite interesting when you find out that eugenicists were instrumental in forming the education system in the United States.

In the eyes of many of the individuals who formed public schooling, intellectual development should not be stressed. Instead, obedience and compliance. Industrialists of the 20th century like Rockefeller, Carnegie and others were some of the main players. Educated minds were a threat to domination and order in the workplace. Interestingly, these same families were instrumental in funding and promoting eugenics at the same time.

In fact, Woodrow Wilson stated that what we needed was a two tiered education system, one for the intellectual elite, and one for the genetically inferrior underclass who would be brought up to do menial tasks.

The term "moron" was coined by eugenicists as well.

Bertrand Russel himself stated that education, in the hands of the state, could accomplish more than troops with guns in hand in just a few years.

The scientific dictatorship, in the eyes of the elite, would be a utopia of sorts. Of course, this utopia would be sold as being for the benefit of the average man and woman. A genetically superior, technologically advanced elite would sit atop the mass of humanity, guiding them according to the "good will" of the overseers. We see this vision of the future from Aldous Huxley, H.G. Wells, Russel, and many others.

Science fiction seems to portray this vision of the future more often than not. A utopia of mechanization and a perfection of social order, while mankind is portrayed as lacking vital parts of their humanity underneath the weight of a great managerial system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icedtea
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Daniel19

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2005
897
134
✟1,775.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Parmenio,

Like I said in my previous post, this really isn't a joke.

Goodluck with the forced breeding, and with trying to actually get kids to learn.

Eugenics has transformed since the early days. You likely won't see a hard position like "forced breeding", but rather things like "cutting back baby emissions" to help the environment. China does still have Galton era eugenic laws on the books, however, in combination with one child policies. In the future, genetic selection of traits may become possible as well with advancing technology. Of course, this will be available only to those who can afford it.

Eugenicists were embarrassed by Hitler's actions and were force to re-name organizations and publications. Emphasis on population control and its relation to environment was stressed by eugenicists after WWII. Some of the key individuals in this transition from genes to environment so to speak were Frederick Osborn, Henry Fairfield Osborne, and William Vogt to name a few. This transition to environmentalism among eugenicists doesn't mean that belief in genetics and good breeding were abandoned all together. For example, Guy Burch and others believed that by emphasizing quantity control, quality control could be a secondary objective.

Since you brought up education...

You say that it is difficult to get children to learn. Children are more than ready to learn. They'll eat up everything you tell them. They're inquisitive, explorative... The problem is, the modern schooling system (there is a fundemental difference between "schooling" and true "education") does not allow for true education to take place. Children are taken from their natural communities and placed in the hands of a synthetic parent - the state. Schools don't teach the way children learn.

Think about this - how did Thomas Edison invent the lightbulb when he dropped out of school? Benjamin Franklin ran away from apprenticeships, and got into constant trouble yet became wildly successful. George Washington had all but 2 years of official "schooling". All these men managed to become some of the most influential characters of history without having much if any schooling.

That brings up something else... we don't have communities anymore, do we? In the past, the young learned tradition and were given gems of wisdom from the elderly. Now, the children are given a 12 year prison sentence in school and the elderly are warehoused in nursing homes.
 
Upvote 0

Harpuia

Oldie... very very oldie...
Nov 9, 2004
14,888
914
37
Undisclosed
✟27,603.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
All of this is based on hard research, just in case you'd like to know. This isn't a joke, and it's not a game.

It is quite interesting when you find out that eugenicists were instrumental in forming the education system in the United States.

In the eyes of many of the individuals who formed public schooling, intellectual development should not be stressed. Instead, obedience and compliance. Industrialists of the 20th century like Rockefeller, Carnegie and others were some of the main players. Educated minds were a threat to domination and order in the workplace. Interestingly, these same families were instrumental in funding and promoting eugenics at the same time.

In fact, Woodrow Wilson stated that what we needed was a two tiered education system, one for the intellectual elite, and one for the genetically inferrior underclass who would be brought up to do menial tasks.

The term "moron" was coined by eugenicists as well.

Bertrand Russel himself stated that education, in the hands of the state, could accomplish more than troops with guns in hand in just a few years.

The scientific dictatorship, in the eyes of the elite, would be a utopia of sorts. Of course, this utopia would be sold as being for the benefit of the average man and woman. A genetically superior, technologically advanced elite would sit atop the mass of humanity, guiding them according to the "good will" of the overseers. We see this vision of the future from Aldous Huxley, H.G. Wells, Russel, and many others.

Science fiction seems to portray this vision of the future more often than not. A utopia of mechanization and a perfection of social order, while mankind is portrayed as lacking vital parts of their humanity underneath the weight of a great managerial system.
You should watch the movie Idiocracy.

I did. It was hilarious. If this was the eugenicists idea of "population control", they're going to wish they never thought it up. :D
 
Upvote 0
S

Steezie

Guest
I have enough of a time reteaching my children half the nonsense they learn in public school social(ism) studies courses. ie China is our trading partner friend. They send us bicycles... Oddly there was no mention of their ICBM's pointed at us.
Ya know, if you're going to make up stuff you can atleast TRY to make it sound credible. Seriously, unless your kid is going to school in Bejing, you aint gonna hear that in any primary school in the US
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟70,740.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
All of this is based on hard research, just in case you'd like to know. This isn't a joke, and it's not a game.

It is quite interesting when you find out that eugenicists were instrumental in forming the education system in the United States.

In the eyes of many of the individuals who formed public schooling, intellectual development should not be stressed. Instead, obedience and compliance. Industrialists of the 20th century like Rockefeller, Carnegie and others were some of the main players. Educated minds were a threat to domination and order in the workplace. Interestingly, these same families were instrumental in funding and promoting eugenics at the same time.

In fact, Woodrow Wilson stated that what we needed was a two tiered education system, one for the intellectual elite, and one for the genetically inferrior underclass who would be brought up to do menial tasks.

The term "moron" was coined by eugenicists as well.

Bertrand Russel himself stated that education, in the hands of the state, could accomplish more than troops with guns in hand in just a few years.

The scientific dictatorship, in the eyes of the elite, would be a utopia of sorts. Of course, this utopia would be sold as being for the benefit of the average man and woman. A genetically superior, technologically advanced elite would sit atop the mass of humanity, guiding them according to the "good will" of the overseers. We see this vision of the future from Aldous Huxley, H.G. Wells, Russel, and many others.

Science fiction seems to portray this vision of the future more often than not. A utopia of mechanization and a perfection of social order, while mankind is portrayed as lacking vital parts of their humanity underneath the weight of a great managerial system.

It is a very serious issue indeed. I think that population control will be propagandized as necessary under the elusive and patriotic cloak of 'saving the planet.' Of course, though no one would say so directly, measures of population control would only be eugenics renamed in more acceptable language. I hope that no-where on the planet will free humanity tolerate such a breach of human rights.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel19

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2005
897
134
✟1,775.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Well, you're right, bjspurple.

Henry Fairfield Osborn, the nephew of Frederick Osborn (the former president of the Population Council and American Eugenics Society), wrote a book titled "Our Plundered Planet" in 1948. He was a firm eugenicist, and was, as I said before, instrumental in transforming the image of eugenics to population control.

He writes in "Our Plundered Planet",

"...the problem of the increasing populations - perhaps the greatest threat facing humanity - cannot be solved in a way consistent with humanity."​

Guy Burch, another eugenicist, wrote in Human breeding and survival in 1945 that,​

"In connection to sterilization, it appears that what the United Nations needs to do is to recommend to all nations the adoption of laws which will (a) actually lead to the sterilization of all persons who are inadequate, either biologically or socially, and (b) encourage the voluntary sterilization of normal persons who have had their share of children."​

Like I said before, eugenics, after WWII, cloaked itself underneath the veil of environmentalism and population control. "Quality control" was sought as a secondary objective to quantity control. We see today things like "cutting back baby emissions" and even de facto one child policies being promoted in western countries.​

It's interesting that Guy Burch, quoted above, was the founder of the Population Reference Bureau.​

Note to those reading: Please take the information that I'm giving you in this thread and spread it around. People need to know about these issues.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

EnemyPartyII

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2006
11,524
893
38
✟20,084.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
In Relationship
You should watch the movie Idiocracy.

I did. It was hilarious. If this was the eugenicists idea of "population control", they're going to wish they never thought it up. :D
it was funny and frightening at the same time
 
Upvote 0

EnemyPartyII

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2006
11,524
893
38
✟20,084.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
In Relationship
It is a very serious issue indeed. I think that population control will be propagandized as necessary under the elusive and patriotic cloak of 'saving the planet.' Of course, though no one would say so directly, measures of population control would only be eugenics renamed in more acceptable language. I hope that no-where on the planet will free humanity tolerate such a breach of human rights.
population control is NOT Eugenics, as population control does not attempt to alter the makeup of traits within the population.

However, in all seriousness, without SOME sort of eugenic breeding in the future, DYSgenics is a pending problem of great significance. But you never hear about it
 
Upvote 0