Cometk wrote:you're essentially saying this is a post-scarcity society but the only method you outline to achieve this is a fascist one
better way to improve the median intelligence would be to implement methods to end poverty, which could be accomplished through things like, as you say, funding public education... but you rather just kill all the poor people. well ok
Funding public education does not solve overpopulation though. Maybe even the opposite, what many Americans tend to call "Socialist Countries" (Scandinavia) all have free education and I believe they all have a higher life expectancy than US for example.
Maybe only purge 10% in order to only get rid of those that do not contribute (from a financial perspective) to the nation.
You'd be so much worse off, businesses wouldn't have people to sell stuff to or to employ, and you would need to keep retraining people because your previous employees were purged. Also you would have constant attempts at uprisings when people's families were killed
fightinfrenchman wrote:You'd be so much worse off, businesses wouldn't have people to sell stuff to or to employ, and you would need to keep retraining people because your previous employees were purged. Also you would have constant attempts at uprisings when people's families were killed
I don't think this would be the case, not to that extent at least.
Say the population level was set to 100m, the initial purge may be very drastic, but after that it'd be quite marginal year to year. Society would adjust to its new size quite quickly.
great idea, we should also have military rallies in public spaces, and oblige citizens to deliver empowered salutes to civil servants and politicians. I can see this social experiment turning out very well.
Many of these jobs can't really be just replaced by automated machines. There is a reason why many of those jobs still exist. Capitalists surely have the money to buy new machines, but if instead of buyng new machines they move the factories to third world countries, then it probably means that labor is more convenient than machines.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
You are assuming that people wouldn't do what they always do: find ways to play the system. Doesn't matter if it's 5% or 50%, the ones ending up dead would be the ones who have other things to do or aren't able to play the system, which means the poor as someone already said, whatever currency this society would be using.
On a side note, you seem like an angry teenager, @site. Are you? I don't really buy the sosiopathy thingy you got going.
you'd probably fail the EQ test which would get you executed too
"Prestige is like a powerful magnet that warps even your beliefs about what you enjoy. If you want to make ambitious people waste their time on errands, bait the hook with prestige." - Paul Graham
fungu wrote:You are assuming that people wouldn't do what they always do: find ways to play the system. Doesn't matter if it's 5% or 50%, the ones ending up dead would be the ones who have other things to do or aren't able to play the system, which means the poor as someone already said, whatever currency this society would be using.
On a side note, you seem like an angry teenager, @site. Are you? I don't really buy the sosiopathy thingy you got going.
Well yes, this hypothetical scenario is based on a perfect simulation where we don't have abuse or fraud and there is a "perfect" Test. In application, there would need to be measures to prevent the aforementioned abuse.
With that being said, no - I am not angry, nor a teenager.
site wrote:Not just the poor people, but the mentally feeble, the disabled, those who don't apply themselves.
Wow. Hitler did this and I am not a big fan of this guy.
Hitler did something wrong!
Every year we should set up a census to determine who supports straight up murdering half the population for not being smart enough and then purge those people.
The purge can be ok in some cases and given percentages, with given the changed norms. (for example in nazi germany: old people with no function killed, lower races slaveryed. My history teacher told me north america capitalists wanted to abolish slavery in order to get cheap work force lol.) but purge is to harsh, you miss the concept what is the aim of a nation. If you prevent video games,television: basically abondaning every luxury for people and control poeple over new cultural norms(sex, food, discipline based) you can create an immerse growth on anything. Human capacity is enourmous if forced to something, so its better to use/educate people gonna be purged. Thus nation can be better, but... For what purpose? To let next generation live better? Lol why not live now? Thats whats happening today, balance between now/future regulated by state. Contrary to future invesment If you take loans and make people more free, you can satisfy a generation, but next will be disaster: so its about balance. Last but not least i think you think less intelligecent people are useless which is funny. I got my highschool degree on a 130 iq special school and i can tell (in terms of academic) succesful people were worse in social skills. If they formed a company i am sure they will fail to manage it, doing task work is today less irrevelant due to tech. Creativety and social skills worth more for community. Finally i dont think it is possible to test people's 'intelligecent' in a test. It is a subjective concept itself, you cant make objective tests. I would even argue willpower is more important than your subjective smartness test.
@j_t_kirk Not in the sense that I think HUMMAN is saying , that's why I asked. In fact the particular term 'special school' is kinda pejorative and used mainly in the context of the other end of the spectrum here.
Here it is for some reason acceptable to separate out 'low I.Q' people but not 'High I.Q' people in terms of education.
I'm just curious on a social level what the view is in turkey.
We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men and women created by the you know, you know the thing.
Just watch the movies called the purge. Similar idea. Theyre not great but they do get some things right.
Also the reason many things in the world are fucked up is not only due to ignorance, and trust me, many intelligent people are very ignorant, but more so due to a lack of shared ties/perspective/empathy or however you want to call it, as a consequence of that ignorance. When intelligent people are ignorant and apathic, the consequences are often far scarier.
One look at Cambodia shows that your plan is doomed to fail. People will not accept the killing of their own for an extended period of time. Most will accept the killing/sacrfice/exploitation of outsiders, and many will estrange from periphery relations under pressure of ideology and consider them outsiders. But i doubt what you propose would last, if ever implemented or imposed like that.
Your idea that people will accept it and be motivated by personal survival also shows gross ignorance of the motivation behind most of the world's innovation and (social) progress. Perhaps you don't care for your family (either the one youre born into, or the one you created) but most other people do.
I think most people here would pass the test. People in the real world (i.e. non-internet-fanatics) are generally more stupid and ignorant, but of course a lot more socially skilled, which is a core attribute of humanity. Intellectual intelligence is overrated nowadays, probably due to our socially deprived western society which has come to be regarded as normal.
Gendarme wrote:I think most people here would pass the test. People in the real world (i.e. non-internet-fanatics) are generally more stupid and ignorant, but of course a lot more socially skilled, which is a core attribute of humanity. Intellectual intelligence is too overrated nowadays, probably due to our socially deprived western society which has come to be regarded as normal.
Yeah people on ESOC are generally known for being intelligent and well-read.
1- I guess you just watched 3% and think thats a good idea? for those not familiarized with the show, its a distopian future governed by HR professionals.
2-
site wrote:For the purpose of the poll, assume that the Test was a completely unbiased and objective measure of an individuals intellect and knowledge amongst a wide array of relevant subjects.
I have a problem with this one. It looks something impossible to do in practice, whatever the means you chose to test those people, you are selecting the ones suited to do those tests, and not the "best ones". Your selection test would just kill of the poor as some others aready pointed out.
[spoiler=3-Bonus]Diferent places have diferent selection methods for universities, in Brazil, you have to do a test. no interview, no recomendations or whatever, just do a test "to prove you are worth it of receaving free high level education, since ressources are limited". what happens is that "high level super expensive the best pritave schools" instead of teaching stuff in the last years of school, they teach you how to do THE TEST.[/spoiler]
Guys I was just wondering. Do you think Poland would be better off economically and/or culturally today if Germany had won the war? Same thing for the rest of eastern Europe and Russia, or just Europe in general really. I'm not saying that they should have won, the Nazis were obviously very bad and did horrible things, but they also manage to turn a bankrupt nation into the best country in the world in 10 years so they must have been doing something right. I'm just thinking from a purely practical point of view, which is completely different, that maybe Europe would have been better off if they had won and brought their program of modernization, social unity and eugenics to the more backwards rac *ahem* NATIONS of Europe. Any thoughts?
Probably if the war would stop with nazis still in power, which seems unlikely. It would probably be the case that most of the world would be hostile towards them even if the war ended (subversion and/or sanctions) and they'd never have an opportunity to build a great nation. Otherwise I think yes; it's hard to get much worse than we're headed right now (WW3 in the near future wouldn't surprise me).
Jam wrote:Guys I was just wondering. Do you think Poland would be better off economically and/or culturally today if Germany had won the war? Same thing for the rest of eastern Europe and Russia, or just Europe in general really. I'm not saying that they should have won, the Nazis were obviously very bad and did horrible things, but they also manage to turn a bankrupt nation into the best country in the world in 10 years so they must have been doing something right. I'm just thinking from a purely practical point of view, which is completely different, that maybe Europe would have been better off if they had won and brought their program of modernization, social unity and eugenics to the more backwards rac *ahem* NATIONS of Europe. Any thoughts?
Hımm not even close to be an expert in the topic but i think nazis would be new america. Individualism and humanitarian ideolygies are 100 years old babies, people killed each other for religion for 1000 years. Racism was a norm in europe in 1850s, via hegel etc. Actually i believe there is a difference betwee in races, (black people score lower on iq test, they are better phsically, womens hips larger while birth can be enlarged etc.) after Nazi's these ideas became taboo in world because of the things happened. Still nazis go way too much to claim you change biologicial structure of a community, jews and germans and pretty much same except cultural difference. So they went for cultural superiority, which is today american culture. In context, as i mentioned humans can be very cruel against other beings even with the empahty.(stanford prison experiment and milgram experiment.) 150 years ago slavery was ok and i believe %90 of this forum would be ok given the norms and beliefs in society, years ago vikings, aztecs sacrifed their own people which was ok, and today we kill animals and Slave them which will probably be prohobited at max 100 years or so yet most of us ok to slaughter animals. That people will think about us what a barbaric and cruel people we are: just like we(majority of people) look at past generations. I am not vegetarian but i want to emphasize it all matters in the context of society. History shows us its pretty elastic and adabtable. 200.000 years ago there were only tribes, big familes and clans today we live in small familes with individual beliefs, and rights granted by law which is way different than past. Because we are living it in we dont realise how different it is. So Nazi's world be pretty ok for who live in with-except victims- probably better economics and harsher disciplines. Because we dont live in it it sounds distophian but if you were born there it would be ok. (actually being ok makes it distophia :d)And like how soviets invaded balkans to make other countries socialist, and like how america and westerns created national countries in middle east controlled by western laws, Nazis would do same since they got power. You need to have same ideolygies in the world to trade well and sustain stability, so world swifts its perspective towards to the ideolgy of biggest force.