Good Immigration Policy as a Replacement for Eugenics

[JasonBlack]

Disclaimer: obviously, most of what makes you a good or bad person is not genetic. This goes without saying, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't focus on the part that is. 

So I hate all the racism, forced sterilization and other shit associated with Eugenics, but there are two fundamental truths we can't get around
1) If your society is full of shitty and useless people, no amount of good governance can make your people prosper 
2) A good amount of what makes you shitty and/or useless is genetic. There is no getting around that. 

From there though, I....really don't think it has much to do with race. The best thing we can do is have policies that encourage people like entrepreneurs, reputable investors and workers with advanced degrees/work experience to move to our country and contribute their expertise. We know that conscientiousness has some correlation with genetics (mild to moderate depending on the study) and intelligence has a greater correlation (moderate to substantial, depending on the study), which means that not only will you be getting intelligent, diligent workers, but those workers are also more likely to produce offspring which are also....intelligent and diligent. So you get more:
- conscientious, high IQ Guatamalans
- conscientious, high IQ Ethiopans
- conscientious, high IQ Taiwanese
- conscientious, high IQ Bengalis 
- conscientious, high IQ Estonians 


ie....it doesn't matter which race of people we attract more of. It matters that we attract the best people from all over the world, who contribute both their labor and their genes to make America great. To an extent, we've already been doing this for like 300 years, as we've tended to attract brave explorers, ambitious entrepreneurs and competent scientists, who in turn produce children which share some of these characteristics. The best part is that all of this can be accomplished without violence, racial supremacy, sterilization or any other more unethical means. It's completely voluntary and synergistic. In fact, it's something we're already doing....we just need to do more of it.

[Eric the Green]

(06-12-2022, 10:06 PM)JasonBlack Wrote: Disclaimer: obviously, most of what makes you a good or bad person is not genetic. This goes without saying, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't focus on the part that is. 

So I hate all the racism, forced sterilization and other shit associated with Eugenics, but there are two fundamental truths we can't get around
1) If your society is full of shitty and useless people, no amount of good governance can make your people prosper 
2) A good amount of what makes you shitty and/or useless is genetic. There is no getting around that. 

From there though, I....really don't think it has much to do with race. The best thing we can do is have policies that encourage people like entrepreneurs, reputable investors and workers with advanced degrees/work experience to move to our country and contribute their expertise. We know that conscientiousness has some correlation with genetics (mild to moderate depending on the study) and intelligence has a greater correlation (moderate to substantial, depending on the study), which means that not only will you be getting intelligent, diligent workers, but those workers are also more likely to produce offspring which are also....intelligent and diligent. So you get more:
- conscientious, high IQ Guatamalans
- conscientious, high IQ Ethiopans
- conscientious, high IQ Taiwanese
- conscientious, high IQ Bengalis 
- conscientious, high IQ Estonians 


ie....it doesn't matter which race of people we attract more of. It matters that we attract the best people from all over the world, who contribute both their labor and their genes to make America great. To an extent, we've already been doing this for like 300 years, as we've tended to attract brave explorers, ambitious entrepreneurs and competent scientists, who in turn produce children which share some of these characteristics. The best part is that all of this can be accomplished without violence, racial supremacy, sterilization or any other more unethical means. It's completely voluntary and synergistic. In fact, it's something we're already doing....we just need to do more of it.

Most immigration today comes from south of the border. Many of these immigrants are poor, and victims of drugs, guns and gangs, dictators and death squads, climate destruction, etc. But it is well to remember that their ethnic difference from most USA Americans is minor; indigenous (14,000-year ancestry Americans) plus European (Spanish and Portuguese rather than northern and eastern, but originally those were mostly all the same people).

Genetics is entirely over-rated. People are pretty much the same. Culture and economy is another matter, and the degree of exploitive history. In the past, the USA has attracted adventurous people who wanted a fresh start, and they have tended to be restless dreamers and poor people from countries with dictators and famine. Sort of like today, but northern and eastern European and later Asian instead of Latin America like today. In CA and WA, lots of Asians have come again, and some have settled in Texas too.

We used to accept refugees from tyranny, but we are not doing that today. Biden kept the border closed, and now the Court is keeping it closed. But Republicans still lie and complain. That's all they can f**king do.

[pbrower2a]

If it is culture -- Latin-Americans are people of Western culture. To be sure, many of the people fleeing the drug wars (financed by the blood money that American addicts so lavishly supply!) of Central America are heavily indigenous peoples... but they adapt rapidly.

America already has a well-entrenched and often-prosperous Mexican-American culture that can assimilate these people.

[Eric the Green]

(06-13-2022, 01:56 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: If it is culture -- Latin-Americans are people of Western culture. To be sure, many of the people fleeing the drug wars (financed by the blood money that American addicts so lavishly supply!) of Central America are heavily indigenous peoples... but they adapt rapidly.

America already has a well-entrenched and often-prosperous Mexican-American culture that can assimilate these people.

It's a good point. There is western background as well as indigenous that we share with them. It is the Latin pop culture that tends to repel me; the food and the popular music they like. But can I say much better about the dominant typical pop American culture, or its diet? Not really. At a deeper level, and deeper into the country, Mexico has interesting heritage. The Latino/latinx accents are not pleasant, but the Spanish language itself has a lot of Latin roots in common with English.

[JasonBlack]

(06-13-2022, 01:49 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Most immigration today comes from south of the border. Many of these immigrants are poor, and victims of drugs, guns and gangs, dictators and death squads, climate destruction, etc. But it is well to remember that their ethnic difference from most USA Americans is minor; indigenous (14,000-year ancestry Americans) plus European (Spanish and Portuguese rather than northern and eastern, but originally those were mostly all the same people).

Genetics is entirely over-rated. People are pretty much the same. Culture and economy is another matter, and the degree of exploitive history. In the past, the USA has attracted adventurous people who wanted a fresh start, and they have tended to be restless dreamers and poor people from countries with dictators and famine. Sort of like today, but northern and eastern European and later Asian instead of Latin America like today. In CA and WA, lots of Asians have come again, and some have settled in Texas too.

We used to accept refugees from tyranny, but we are not doing that today. Biden kept the border closed, and now the Court is keeping it closed. But Republicans still lie and complain. That's all they can f**king do.

Just because race doesn't matter doesn't mean genetics don't matter. If you want to look up something scary, there are several studies of men growing up to commit similarly heinous crimes as their criminal fathers....even though they were adopted at birth. Liberals don't want to hear this (including, to a lesser extent, myself), but....some people are just bad apples and even in the most supportive environment, society just doesn't have a place for them. The Anatomy of Violence by Adrian Raine has many chilling examples.

[David Horn]

(06-14-2022, 02:06 PM)JasonBlack Wrote: Just because race doesn't matter doesn't mean genetics don't matter. If you want to look up something scary, there are several studies of men growing up to commit similarly heinous crimes as their criminal fathers....even though they were adopted at birth. Liberals don't want to hear this (including, to a lesser extent, myself), but....some people are just bad apples and even in the most supportive environment, society just doesn't have a place for them. The Anatomy of Violence by Adrian Raine has many chilling examples.

This smacks of eugenics. Yes, there is a tie between generatoins though our genetic materiaol, but it's not common. Using that as a rule for determining admission to the country is disengenuous at best and cruel at worst.

[JasonBlack]

(06-15-2022, 10:21 AM)David Horn Wrote: This smacks of eugenics. Yes, there is a tie between generatoins though our genetic materiaol, but it's not common. Using that as a rule for determining admission to the country is disengenuous at best and cruel at worst.

Think about it like you would with your personal life. Do you want to associate with everyone, or do you only want to spend time with quality people whom have the ability to provide value, good conversation or something else that draws you to them? There's no reason we can't apply a few of these criteria to citizenship admissions. We want to be the best.

[pbrower2a]

(06-14-2022, 02:06 PM)JasonBlack Wrote:

(06-13-2022, 01:49 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Most immigration today comes from south of the border. Many of these immigrants are poor, and victims of drugs, guns and gangs, dictators and death squads, climate destruction, etc. But it is well to remember that their ethnic difference from most USA Americans is minor; indigenous (14,000-year ancestry Americans) plus European (Spanish and Portuguese rather than northern and eastern, but originally those were mostly all the same people).

Genetics is entirely over-rated. People are pretty much the same. Culture and economy is another matter, and the degree of exploitive history. In the past, the USA has attracted adventurous people who wanted a fresh start, and they have tended to be restless dreamers and poor people from countries with dictators and famine. Sort of like today, but northern and eastern European and later Asian instead of Latin America like today. In CA and WA, lots of Asians have come again, and some have settled in Texas too.

We used to accept refugees from tyranny, but we are not doing that today. Biden kept the border closed, and now the Court is keeping it closed. But Republicans still lie and complain. That's all they can f**king do.

Just because race doesn't matter doesn't mean genetics don't matter. If you want to look up something scary, there are several studies of men growing up to commit similarly heinous crimes as their criminal fathers....even though they were adopted at birth. Liberals don't want to hear this (including, to a lesser extent, myself), but....some people are just bad apples and even in the most supportive environment, society just doesn't have a place for them. The Anatomy of Violence by Adrian Raine has many chilling examples.

It this holds true, then this is one of the strongest cases for abortion rights that I can think of. Rapists and pedophiles are largely sociopaths and psychopaths. Should there be a link to evil behavior in which rapists and pedophiles transmit to their offspring, then aborting the offspring of such a creep, then aborting the fetus carrying those evil genes is a boon for our society through the subtraction of tigers in human form. 

But what if we end up destroying a talented, creative person? Well. Charles Manson was  on the borderline of having some commercially-valuable talent for music. Rodney Alcala had some talent for film-making  -- enough to impress Roman Polanski. 

Of course we have the nature-versus-nurture argument, but someone like Ted Bundy was very scary very early. Scott Peterson, who had a cunning plan to murder his pregnant wife, .came close to getting away with it. He was adopted, but his birth father was a petty Mafioso. Mafia-like groups are obviously full of sociopaths and psychopaths.

Is morality genetic? I dunno. Giving a sociopath or psychopath opportunity can be extremely destructive. Such people do sundry betrayals of organizations to which they owe loyalty. They are the brutal police and bribe-takers on the force. They are the spy chiefs who dal classified information to rival powers or betray foreign sources of spy data. They are the clergy who molest children. They are the people who get their companies in trouble with lawsuits for sexual harassment., They do plagiar4sm. They deal on insider information and cut deals that better serve them than their companies. )They get commissions as salesmen but give their companies headaches trying to make those deals work. If engineers they are the ones who bill expensively for good materials and components and then pull a bait-and-switch on their projects with substandard materials in return for bribes from an equally-corrupt supplier (obviously also a sociopath). They pad expense accounts and do fraudulent billings.

Did I saomehow forget large-scale embezzlement? That is simply too obvious. .

As for incest -- it usually borders on rape if it is not such. Incest is sexual madness that reflects crazy, indefensible ideas in personal life.

....this is before I even discuss the life and health (including the reproductive health) of the mother. I would guess that the typical female seeking an abortion for non-medical reasons is about to become a single mother. If a victim of rape she might have a difficult time raising the child, especially if that child fgrows up with sociopathic or psychopathic tendencies. Those in need of abortions for reasons of health may leave behind, if single mothers... orphans. Being an orphan may be less common than it used to be, as after the influenza epidemic around World War I, but it still isn't easy.

[David Horn]

(06-15-2022, 09:45 PM)JasonBlack Wrote:

(06-15-2022, 10:21 AM)David Horn Wrote: This smacks of eugenics.  Yes, there is a tie between generations though our genetic material, but it's not common.  Using that as a rule for determining admission to the country is disengenuous at best and cruel at worst.

Think about it like you would with your personal life. Do you want to associate with everyone, or do you only want to spend time with quality people whom have the ability to provide value, good conversation or something else that draws you to them? There's no reason we can't apply a few of these criteria to citizenship admissions. We want to be the best.

Your "idea" is no less arbitrary than choosing who gets to enter by lottery, except it punishes people for being who they are at the most primal level.  I doubt the improved accuracy due to DNA tracing would rise above 1%.

[Eric the Green]

(06-16-2022, 07:00 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-15-2022, 09:45 PM)JasonBlack Wrote:

(06-15-2022, 10:21 AM)David Horn Wrote: This smacks of eugenics.  Yes, there is a tie between generations though our genetic material, but it's not common.  Using that as a rule for determining admission to the country is disengenuous at best and cruel at worst.

Think about it like you would with your personal life. Do you want to associate with everyone, or do you only want to spend time with quality people whom have the ability to provide value, good conversation or something else that draws you to them? There's no reason we can't apply a few of these criteria to citizenship admissions. We want to be the best.

Your "idea" is no less arbitrary than choosing who gets to enter by lottery, except it punishes people for being who they are at the most primal level.  I doubt the improved accuracy due to DNA tracing would rise above 1%.

I don't think I agree with Jason's analogy. Admission to the country is not a personal preference. We don't have to associate with any of the people who come here.

I think some qualifications are good, if we can determine them. We don't want to admit people with criminal records or terrorists. Perhaps we want people who can hold a job, if they are of working age, and not victims of drugs or alcohol or mental illness. People who want to come here should be tested for covid or other diseases, and receive vaccinations (and no anti-vaxxers allowed). Beyond that, and perhaps not even then, I don't think we even know what someone is capable of. Certainly not by using genetics; to apply such a standard IS eugenics. People are more elastic and changeable than we can know.

We should remember too that refugees are not immigrants. This may be a temporary status of someone escaping from conditions that could cost them their lives where they came from. We should not impose conditions upon them that are little better than those from where they came from. People should be treated humanely by the USA, and not on the basis of race or ethnic group either.

[JasonBlack]

(06-16-2022, 12:55 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I don't think I agree with Jason's analogy. Admission to the country is not a personal preference. We don't have to associate with any of the people who come here.

I think some qualifications are good, if we can determine them. We don't want to admit people with criminal records or terrorists. Perhaps we want people who can hold a job, if they are of working age, and not victims of drugs or alcohol or mental illness. People who want to come here should be tested for covid or other diseases, and receive vaccinations (and no anti-vaxxers allowed). Beyond that, and perhaps not even then, I don't think we even know what someone is capable of. Certainly not by using genetics; to apply such a standard IS eugenics. People are more elastic and changeable than we can know.

We should remember too that refugees are not immigrants. This may be a temporary status of someone escaping from conditions that could cost them their lives where they came from. We should not impose conditions upon them that are little better than those from where they came from. People should be treated humanely by the USA, and not on the basis of race or ethnic group either.

I'm glad we at least agree on that. What I don't agree with is the premise that people are more or less equal, and that, in the long run, the most prosperous countries are going to be the ones who attract the most quality people to open up shop. Additionally, the question with refugees is still "are they a net benefit or a net hindrance?". This is a complicated, difficult to answer question in most instances, but imo, it's still the most fundamental one we need to answer. There is no reason why the basic principle of "people become happier when they associate with higher quality people" can't be expanded to the level of the nation state.

[Anthony '58]

Sometime between now and the 2024 election, the slogan will become: "Don't Compromise - Volckerize!"

And when that happens, both unemployment and inflation will be in double digits - which will touch off a vicious backlash against immigration which, among other things, will wipe out the modest recent gains that the Republicans have been making among Hispanic voters, and then some.