Eugenics is “the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population in order to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable.” “Positive” eugenic policies are intended to increase the prevalence of desirable traits in a population (e.g., encouraging intelligent people to have children), while “negative” eugenics involves decreasing undesirable traits (e.g., “incentivizing those with low intelligence to limit their fertility”).  Prof. Edward Dutton

EVERYONE WANTS AN “UNFAIR” ADVANTAGE

Before Hitler, Eugenics was a widely lauded idea which was championed in socialist Sweden, of all places.  But, post WW2, the idea became so objectionable that it is impossible to even mention it without someone accusing you of harbouring genocidal motives..!  This is a hysterical and deeply hypocritical stance since, if given the choice, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US – even leftists who froth at the mouth at the mere mention of such a “fascist” idea – want their children to be above-average in intelligence, health and physical appearance. 

We all want these advantages for ourselves and we want them even more for our children.  Nobody would ever choose to be born ugly or mentally retarded, physically deformed, with Downs Syndrome or a progressive crippling disease such as that endured by Professor Stephen Hawking for 50 years.

Passive Eugenics would not guarantee perfect offspring but would certainly make it FAR more likely that fewer children would be born with physical deformities and mental deficiencies.  Society would reap the benefits by not having to pay to support such unfortunates – or to pay for the incarceration of ever more criminals with “mental health issues”.

Only the the delusional, the smug, the narcissistic and the neurotic (all typical leftie traits) would condemn or oppose an idea that would not only improve the life prospects of future generations, but the prospects of the survival of civilisation itself..!

REVERSAL of “DYSGENICS by DEFAULT”

No civilised person wants to live in the vicinity of the sort of bad-mannered, uncouth, and loutish slobs – whose houses always have piles of junk and/or old cars outside – who are prone to shouting and screaming, window-breaking, drunken-ness, drug-dealing, honking vehicles full of noisy late night arrivals, raucous all-night parties, etc.  These days our towns and cities – and society in general – do not have strong rules of civic behaviour and the police and authorities increasingly turn a blind eye by dismissing such disturbances as “domestic disputes”.  Besides which, calling the police to sort out your bad neighbours will certainly bring hostility and probably physical retaliation at some later date.  Since moving house is such a costly business, most people in such situations bite their tongue hoping that their unruly neighbour will leave.   Those who can afford to – especially “champagne socialists” – separate themselves from the working class “riff-raff” by self-segregating themselves in “exclusive” suburbs.  

(It tends to be forgotten that “exclusive” means “to exclude” or to “to segregate”, aka “apartheid”, but “liberals” don’t want to know that).

A CHOSEN PEOPLE

OA-Cities would not need to enshrine eugenics in law since all aspiring citizens would be vetted and approved by an “immigration board”, or admission panel composed of long-standing citizens possibly selected on a rotational basis like a jury.  Since this would tend to eliminate applicants with the “wrong stuff”, passive eugenics would occur as if by default.  Furthermore, single citizens would be encouraged to seek their live-in partners either from within their own community or from a similar “sister” one.  It would be advantageous to do so as any “outsider” partner would not automatically become a citizen but would have to pass muster of the admission panel just like everyone else.  

OA-Cities could be founded by consortiums (companies, clubs, churches, etc), groups of private individuals, or even a wealthy single individual who may even choose to adopt a title such as Prince or Duke.  The administrative structure will be similar to that of a company, a trust, or a co-operative. Just as everyone does on their own private property (your virtual island) OA-Cities will be selective when choosing who to “allow aboard”, so to speak. Yes, they will “discriminate” as we all must do in our own lives when choosing our friends, our life partners, our business partners, our employees, etc.  Aspiring citizens will have to apply and go through an interview process and medical check-up, just as one would expect to do when applying for a job.  As we all know, the better the job, the more thorough the interview and vetting process. When applicants are many but positions are few, employers naturally become more selective.  

OA-Cities will be few and applicants many, so why should it be any different..?  

If you owned a private island, wouldn’t you want to decide who is allowed to visit, and especially who is allowed to stayover..?

 

---