IQ Testing and Nazi Eugenics - Stephen Murdoch

[DoctorSarahLPalmer]

All those with an IQ under 100 should be put to death!

[skb0rzn]

Wait I think there SHOULD be an I.Q. Test, proof of ability to care for children etc.. Not to sound fascist, but COME ON!!! " Been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding" Its sort of factual. Ignorant masses have more children than highly educated people... fact. I also believe that if you are on welfare, you get NORPLANT. Thats right, NO KIDS till you can take care of them. Nuff said.

[Keysteeze]

Would it not be beneficial to society if all violent criminals were given irreversable vesectomies upon the conviction of their crime? Given that most criminals are caught at a young age this means that violent criminals (rapist, killers, robbers, etc) will not be passing their seed onto the next generation.

[Matheus30741]

@Keysteeze I agree.



[Icemario87]

@Matheus30741 You're stupid.

[Matheus30741]

@Icemario87 Genes regulating serotonergic neurotransmission, in particular monoamine oxidase A (MAOA), have been highlighted in the search for a genetic predisposition to violence. Lesch K. P. In: Neurobiology of Aggression. Mattson M. P., editor. Totowa, NJ: Humana; 2003.

[Matheus30741]

@Icemario87 another: Brown University. "'Warrior Gene' Predicts Aggressive Behavior After Provocation." ScienceDaily, 23 Jan. 2009. I'm not saying that the environment does not interfere, just for record.

[Icemario87]

@Keysteeze No it wouldn't, idiot.

You clearly have the (unscientific) personal opinion that "rape," "murder," and "robbery" are genetic. They're not, they're societal. Take a "rapist" and make him have kids with a "killer" and stick that baby in a loving, adoptive family in a loving, educated community and science will show the truth to you.

Mate a peacelover and an intelligent pacifist, stick that baby in a community filled with violence. And science will show you a violently adaptive child.

[Keysteeze]

@IceMario Ok smart guy. Let us assume you are correct. That there is not any genetic component to violence. Then clearly these individuals have destructive memes that they transmit to their children. Which could still be considered grounds for sterilization. Anyone that thinks it is 100% environment, or 100% genetics is kidding themselves. Obviously socio-economics plays a role, but how significant a role? If you say 100% I might get fired for laughing at my computer.

[Icemario87]

@Keysteeze "Ok smart guy. Let us assume you are correct. That there is not any genetic component to violence. "

You'd be more accurate if you said "Ok smart guy. Let me assume your position for you: That there is not any genetic component to violence.

"Anyone that thinks it is 100% environment, or 100% genetics is kidding themselves."

Anyone that says anything has a 100% singular cause is an idiot. There must necessarily be a myriad of causes. However some are more influential than others.

[Icemario87]

Cont'd

Furthermore, the thrust of my point is simple:

"Would it not be beneficial to society if all violent criminals were given irreversable vesectomies upon the conviction of their crime? Given that most criminals are caught at a young age this means that violent criminals (rapist, killers, robbers, etc) will not be passing their seed onto the next generation."

The result of this experiment would be murder of genetically unrelated but economically similar humans with no impact on crime rate

[Keysteeze]

@Icemario87

1. You failed to address the issue of (non-biological) memes being transmitted from parents to children.

2. It appears that you equated vasectomy to murder. That is an idea I have never heard before.

3. I am going to venture a guess and say that it unlikely that you are in favor of convicted felons being allowed to adopt/raise children. If that is your belief, then you must accept that this belief is not very different from my vasectomy proposal. Please clear this up for me.

[ScrollAndKeyBeatz]

@Icemario87

Wow, I have never read such bullshit in my entire life.. You COULD take the offspring from a rapist and killer and insert them in a loving family and they would be an adaptive pacifist. But by your logic it's foolproof... That is just ignorance. There are such things as bad apples.. You opened yourself to the argument that children do not become problems even from loving homes. They do and they are not just isolated instances.

[Icemario87]

@ScrollAndKeyBeatz "Wow, I have never read such bullshit in my entire life.."

You "COULD" get over yourself and put down the alcohol. I wrote that comment for a specific person, someone who seemingly hadn't considered the idea. It wasn't intended you for to waltz in drunk, three weeks later, and blow it way out of proportion making wild claims about the implications of my "logic."

Lay off the keyboard, it makes you look bad.

[2JAMMY]

The IQ tests were developed by Morons and the eugenics programs are still being carried out by the feebleminded. Thank god I'm just a normal idiot. :):):)

[MichaelS3352]

I think the Nazi period, and its practice of positive and negative eugenics, was not the end of this hideous trend, but only the beginning. I wish I could be more optimistic about the future, but I am afraid that the facts of human nature as it is speak otherwise. We are a species of predatory ape, simple as that and, I think, no more than that need be said as a prediction of the future of humanity and the world. Given that, eugenics will be a constant, not a variable.

[Icemario87]

@MichaelS3352 say "predatory ape" 3 times fast.

[tigerfedor1]

ugenics always seemed rather redundant to me, in the not so  far future we will be able to play around with intelligence levels. stephen hawking has already said we will be able to increase brain size. and if you think this will be impossible just read up on the predictions for quantum computers and nano technology, in fact once AI supersedes our own, it will be entirely redundant

[CriticalDissection]

The Nazi's used eugenics the most? Bullshit. AshkeNAZI Jews have been doing this for hundreds of years, and still do today.

[Raybanmonster]

Oh please you silly assholes.. Eugenics will never surface to rid your town of asian or black people. get over yourselves.

[guitarobsessed85]

@Raybanmonster Asian chicks are hot anyway :) Asians also tend to have higher IQs

[Ascended111111]

Not true.  the Germans got eugenics from Britain and the USA! the holocaust museum doesn't tell the whole truth...

[shine350]

and the sociopaths shall inherit the earth

[tigerone1970]

Right, too bad IQ tests don't test for conscience.

[shine350]

It's a pity Darwin didn't concentrate on sociopathy and narcissism within the ruling classes instead

[101101101777]

funny, as I watch this google ads assail me to take IQ tests

[LorenzKamo]

what is wrong with wiping out the mentally retarded from the gene pool?

[screenwriterOscar]

Gettting rid of mentally retarded and disability by 2012. that would be economic crisis and proven lowest IQ on regular adults. You will be living great great great depression.

You see how bankers failed to change the whole economic system.

Anyways, shrinkage disability and retarded population is happening. So, you can't fix the economy way back up 14,000 - 20,000 Dow Jones. Go ahead try it.

[zadeh79]

IQ is still a eugenicist scheme.

[painkillerzman]

I totally agree with those actions the nazis took against the imbecil and half-wits of our world they had good intentions, but intelligence and knowledge (those questions about who is Bismark and whatever) are 2 totally diferrent things. The fact is you could teach a mentally retarded man to remember all of those things but it wouldn't make him more intelligent. Not one bit.

[armelix73]

Nazis murdered some 200 000 of their own people ("feeble minded"). No wonder it improved the overall quotient of Germany. In spite of all that, according to the newest data presented at the UN, Germany (107), Holland(107), Sweden(106), Poland(106), Italy(105) have the highest IQs in Europe.

Some of the nations, like Poland, had their genetic pool minimized by the nazi executions of the intelligentia, and yet managed to recover. . .

[UberGodless]

yea nazis were onto something, they should have been harder on religion like god, but they would have never rose to power i suppose.

[101101101777]

Are you crediting nazi killings to current IQ ratings? How is their any positive connection? People killed for iq levels then somehow makes a smarter populace now? that's crap.

[armelix73]

No, I'm talking about balance in Nature. How evolution brings about regeneration.

No matter how many intelligent people got killed by the Nazis, Nature found a way to replace them all. Incredible, isn't it!?

[ednairlanda]

If u want to change the world, the way chindren live and born U have to change the man itself not the human being ! nobody is eer satisfied, these ppl want more even if they reach what they've been seeking for, when they reach the want more, one day they gona bring up the si-fi movies into reality and their suppost super man or perfect human will destroy our planet ,as we already do, we claim to be inteligent and smart ,but we destroy the enviromet where we live,now u want they to change ppl?wtf

[UberGodless]

your a fucking fool, stop talking.

[ednairlanda]

Who r u to judge whether sb is fool or not? u are the fool and the shit percentage of population in this world , so u stop talkin dumbass!

[UberGodless]

I am the human who fights christs children. so go fuck yourself and die alraedy.

[OTSPProductions]

Nature used to do eugenics for us, now that we have taken that away by controlling our environments and how we live, there is no one to control the population which is the reason for natural succession.

The negative side of eugenics is unfair and unjust but as long as people make good breeding choices then it shouldn't be much of a problem. One of these choices being the amount of offspring, 2 to 3 at most, 8 or 9 kids is just ridiculous and a waste of effort.

[Invain01]

we need population control and eugenics for the the survival of this planet over the next 1000 years, who can argue against that

[johan28]

if we don't "couple" wiht genetic engineering and cybernetics, we may find ourselves being replaced by artificial intelligence on a chip. It's not just me saying it. I think an IBM executive said recently that in 30 years humanity will be made obsolete by artificial intelligence.

You have been replaced by #1451252145.

Ok, so you don't believe me.

Go here:

watch?v=G6CVj5IQkzk

And here:

watch?v=oozFn2d45tg

For some reason, I don't believe that a technology of that sort will be restricted.

[MAXBLAYLOCK]

Sterilization is not always the best solution for feeble mindedness. We could make good use of mental defectives. With proper conditoning and drugs, retarded people, idiot/savants and autistics could well make the perfect labor class of the future.

[GetDrunkAndWatch]

Eugenics failed. Genetic engineering is how the "bad guys" will be try to eliminate what they see as bad genes. If genes make us who we, our children, or even our race are, scientists will be able to eliminate the "defectives" by just altering DNA of sperm and eggs. People will even pay for their unique genes to be eliminated. People in power will no longer want to murder groups of people because they will kill what they saw as bad in that group. Is this a more humane form of genocide?

[BeNgEE08]

Nazis and Eugenics= collectively exhaustive. Eugenics may be engaged in subconsciously by some members of society which is would be hard to measure. The only way it makes a comeback into the mainstream is a via another racist dictatorship digging up these theory's and dreaming of the unattainable purity. I am a doctor

[BeNgEE08]

I will only be reproducing with someone as smart and attractive as myself. I guess this is sort of Eugenics I dont really care though if it is or its not. NO little mudblood barrack osamas over here

[BevHillsKid]

LMAO

[IIIClydeBarrowIII]

Eugenics is the same thing as Transhumanism.

Look it up!

[squarepusher2]

BTW, you use 'society' as a convenient euphemism for 'scientific eugenic community', and deep down you know that - you don't speak for society, and neither does the scientific community.

So to be enacting policies based on what you, as part of this pro-eugenic clique, deem to be good for everyone else, that's altruism, and I would like to remind you that altruism has had a very bad track record so far in the 20th century. Every despot has wrapped himself in the almighty cloak of altruism.

[dalejrfan800]

Eugenics is also a natrual process, People select an Ideal mate, someone who is smart, has the best physical appearence, and even a sense of humor. If you have seen the movie Idiocracy, That is not likely to happen. But I do believe if people don't start caring, there could be a greater divide between the Human race, there will be a class far superior to the other. Naturally.

[nustada]

What do you mean, people like you prove we are already there.

[dalejrfan800]

On our way there.

[andrewbnkjv]

FORA TV IS SHIT. EUGENICS GLOBALIST.

[havoctrend]

The correct spelling is "Bismarck" He was a German Chancellor blah blah I didn't know who he was, I had to do a search lol

Did any of you know that Albert Einstein was labeled as dumb or un-teachable? Now you do if you didn't.

[nustada]

Well he would have been slaughtered by the eugenicist. Eugenics are a mechanism for control.

[amajetich]

The truth is If you believe in killing idiots what is Education for??? There is always someone that knows something you don't...

Idiot. Ignorance means lacking knowledge...

everyone lacks knowledge in some things.

So, everyone is worthy of death under this belief, even those WHO LEAD in THESE SICK LIES. Hitler- I know he is burning in hell.

As well as anyone that follows eugenics...

[khattamshud]

kill everyone with IQ under 120.

[dalejrfan800]

Based on Statistics isn't that about 90% of the population you're wanting to exterminate?

[nustada]

IQ is based on averages 100 being average. Therefore someone is always under 120, or 101 for that matter, therefore with your idea, everyone would die. I vote you go first.

[dalejrfan800]

Yay I get to live! MY IQ IS 122! - exclaimed Dalejrfan800 with sarcasm in his voice.

[MartinJWillett]

Murder is wrong, coercion is wrong. But what is wrong with sterilizing people on the basis of their lack of ability? Slippery slope is not an answer. What is wrong with avoiding the breeding of more idiots in and of itself?

Idiots breed with idiots and raise idiots in homes of idiots in which idiocy is seen as normal. Nature or nurture does not matter. If idiots don't have as many children there will be fewer idiots raised. Coercion and murder is bad, so don't coerce or murder.

[immortalisjuvenis]

NO STERILIZATIONS EVER!, unless under the consent of the person and probably through incentives. One-child policy, forced abortions, lasts a few hours, worst a few minutes, anesthetic exists. I am for Eugenics, but not Nazi pseudoscience, or negative eugenics, with the only one exception being forced abortions.

[MartinJWillett]

Ignoring eugenics because it makes people feel a little uncomfortable is not an attitude which should be allowed to persist indefinitely. Genes for idiocy, crippling diseases, sociopathy and criminality don't have any right to exist. We need to wage war on bad gene combinations without hurting the people who are their victims/carriers. Of course coercion is wrong but we can't be held back by people who make out that society benefits from their precious flaws.

[immortalisjuvenis]

I agree. The evidence and reasons are all over. We absolutely need Eugenics

The problem right now, is how it would be done, morally, unbiased and scientifically, and could the government be trusted. I have my own ideas that I think are fair & will work, but does the government?

If you go around the net on forums and polls, people are actually more for eugenics, than I thought, but the majority also says that they are afraid of how it would be done. I'm sure a agreed upon way should be found

[squarepusher2]

Everyone advocating eugenics is a disgusting human being.

And don't give me your bull about improving the race - that's just an altruistic excuse you use to justify your disgusting stance.

I can't believe what I read in the comments section - sterilizing 'dumb' people is good? Sir, the eugenicists INVENTED IQ tests!!!!! If you're so smart, tell me how you can QUANTIFY intelligence based on questions conceived by someone else?

This kind of thinking should have died with Hitler and the Nazis

[immortalisjuvenis]

Everyone wanting children to be born well is a "disgusting human being"? are you mad?

EUGENICS, Greek for WELL(EU)-BORN(GENICS)

Eugenics simply wants more people to be born well, and as to what well is or how it would be done, Eugenics as a social philosophy (rather than ideology as you see it), has no say to.

We simply want people to be born well, because every child deserves to be born well and society deserves it too. We can easily have a completely, functional and ethical Eugenics system.

[ClonedTyranny]

immortalisjuvenis: I've been struggling with this, how exactly can it be done ethically in your opinion?

[squarepusher2]

You know, I find your ideas to be a perfect example of idiotic thinking. Should that mean they should sterilize you or kill you?

And while I don't subscribe to any faith, it's no wonder you're an atheist - you're probably of the extreme kind that wants to hit religious people over the head with your own dogmas.

'Genes for idiocy?' Go promote your pseudo science somewhere else - or go join the global warming movement - I'm sure you'll find something to your liking there.

[MartinJWillett]

Are you declaring that there could not possibly be any genetic component in idiocy (look it up) just because you don't like the idea or what some people might do with it? You don't get to decide what science is or what it will be allowed to find.

The principle of eugenics is not wrong, having more healthy, smart and happy people and fewer disabled, unhealthy and stupid people. Many of the methods are obviously terrible. Are you incapable of separating out means from ends? That's your problem.

[squarepusher2]

Science is not supposed to oppress people or forcibly sterilise them or kill them. You're putting science ahead of the human individual, which is the whole problem by itself.

Scientists do not have to be on power-trips and have God-like complexions - they do not have to 'root out idiocy', they need to be working on ways to better people's lifes without enabling future dictators and despots to get rid of mass amounts of people all in the name of phony/pseudo-scientific theories.

[MartinJWillett]

There is no duty on science to submit to anybody's political agenda. Eugenics is a matter of policy, scientists don't make policy. Eugenics is not the same thing as killing people you don't like it is having a policy on breeding rather than just letting whatever happens happen unplanned with no thought to the consequences. It is not an evil concept per se, but the Nazis put back the concept probably at least a century by ensuring this hysterical overreaction you love being a part of.

[squarepusher2]

What you deem to be 'hysterical overreaction' is a natural reaction to your disgusting ideas.

BTW, your postulated policies on 'breeding' are nothing new. The Spartans were practicing that in ancient times.

Frankly, your whole argument is illogical. You say scientists don't make policy, but then in the same breath state that we need to have policies on breeding.

I can only conclude that you have been fed this rubbish at the academic level and honestly believe the horsebuggy you've been fed.

[MartinJWillett]

What is disgusting about having happier, healthier and smarter people? Do you think having stupid and damaged people improves society? Should we have more? It's easy to damage people, if having stupid and crippled people is good for society as a whole let's create more, we know the recipe. That is a disgusting idea.

You don't know much about logic do you? There's no logical problem with policy being made by society as a whole rather than scientists alone.

[squarepusher2]

And you are going to decide who is stupid, right?

What if they identify you and your progeny as being stupid? Should they forcibly sterilize you, your offspring and your whole family?

Please, think before you write/speak. There's a very sound reason why eugenics has been dropped by the world ever since the atrocities committed in the early 20th century.

It is a bad idea, period, and no amount of circular reasoning is going to change that.

[MartinJWillett]

Forcible sterilization is wrong. Killing people is wrong. Eugenics is not wrong, some of the methods that have been used are terrible but methods are not the same as aims. Extortion is a way of earning money, hating extortion is not a reason to give up on the idea of making money any more than hating extermination and forcible sterilization is a reason to give up on qualitative human advancement.

[Filmmaniac03]

Lol, you're relying on American media just a little too much. The American media loves to twist things to give the impression that everybody else is eagerly abandoning eugenics, but it isn' true. It's just American fantasy.

The eugenics hasn't been 'dropped by the whole world', just the West. Go over to the Far East, and you'll find a MUCH different attitude.

[colrox1984]

eugenics is always terrible, insulting and unnatural in whatever form is comes - what makes you such a pedigree

[MartinJWillett]

Eugenics is about caring about breeding and not just leaving it to the whims of individual attraction (genes for female beauty ending up alongside genes for making money) or the political choice of parents. There is no reason why it has to be compulsory, sinister or oppressive and no reason why it has to act on whole organisms. It's about putting the phenotypes, us, in charge of the genes rather than be ruled by their whims for all eternity. I don't want my descendants to be slaves any longer.

[Invain01]

amen (:)) we need more people who think like you, for this planet to move past rampant consumerism and overpopulation people need to take a moment and think about how their actions or lack there of

[dalejrfan800]

This is a very long process you're talking about. It actually will never end. Just because a person doesn't have disease all over the place in their family tree doesn't neccessarily mean it will never appear. I understand Morallity is an inportant subject here, but I myself have a criminal record. Also, where it comes down to it we're all criminals to a degree. I know there is a problem in this world. but the true idiocy is behind your ideals. ha, we cant be held back? Are we in a race now?

[Seanmurdoch66]

my last names murdoch

[PeteUtonic]

But what's your point?

"Because the Nazis did it" is not a logical argument against anything. 'Reductio ad Hitlerum' is not valid!

[Hottides]

Indeed. Is Hitler's love of dogs and nature an argument FOR animal cruelty and environmental destruction? Even Hitler was on target sometimes.

[nustada]

I wasn't because they did it, it was because they were motivated by it. You think your part of the elite? you are going to among the 80% who are going to be exterminated.

[soccom8341576]

Don't forget that the Chinese is also doing that object to the government.

In my point of view, genetic discrimination on the basis of specific IQ tests scores is probably pointless. Only ranges matter. Ranking the common person based on IQ tests is inconclusive. Given enough time, people will be able to learn and adapt, and they will get better at it.

[super8hogan]

well put soccom8341576

[dalejrfan800]

That is true, the could probably just by everyone a Nintendo DS and brain age.