1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
|
Ronald Bailey
I am very concerned about the political and social possibilities to get this tech to all of us. The democratic threat to transhumanism. One of the things I want to point out, for those of us who are living with democracy. There's this current touchstone in current government. Liberal implies limitations on democracy. There's this hu.. human rights, over democracy. The constitutional separation over the democratic legislature. There's certain questions, out of the public sphere, such as religious sphere, as public rights. Minorities against the will of the majority. There's actually limited democracy. It's not social democracy or radical democracy on which the rights get pinned on the will of the majority.
Our friend here, James Hughes, who has done huge amounts for the transhumanist movements, had to argue that we need a stronger to predict who has a right who has the right to experiment with ther mind. I would agree with this, a good idea if it were true. A strong democracy are a threat to the precursor to the transhumanist future that we're hoping for. Here's a recent example.
Two weeks ago, the Ohio State Senate voted to ban minotaurs, sintars, but the bill has gone to the lower house in Ohio. And there were a few things to ban, and one of them was specifically, would be embryo-producing a human nucleus into a non-human egg, or a non-human-lifeform into brain derived from human tissues. Those are two experiments that have actually taken place. In 2008, a british research introduced human nucleas into a hollowed out cow embryo. The other one at Stanford in 2005, researchers injected human embryonic stem cells into mice, and the idea was to create models for human brain diseases. Those experiments would be outlawed in Ohio should the law be passed, but they would also be outlawed in these other jurisdiction. People like Canada? France? Germany? They also outlawed this research, currently.
By the way the images over here are the brains of the mouse, had a condition called Shivering. Human fetal cells were injected and cured the mouse of that disease. Here, I think, is some example of what it is. Majorities overcoming minority preferences in the area of family right: abortion was legal in every part of the U.S. in the 1800s, but in 1900 it was legal in only one state. There was the first eugenics law, in 1907. In 1924, Virginia passes the racial integrity act, this forbade whites from getting married to blacks. As of 2003, gay sex was illegal in 13 states. In 2009, 30 states have adopted constitutional provisions banning gay marriage. This is controlling. They do so, and they do so because they are enacting the will of the majority.
These restrictions, many of them, have already been lifted. None of them were lifted because of democratic votes, but becaues of courts, because of private influence on people's lives. It wasn't because people voted against it, it was because courts said it was wrong. Blacks and whites can get married because the supreme court says that you must allow it. Voters and their representatives are ... a brief look shows that leading democracies, universal health care budget, like Australia, France, Germany, Japan, Norway, Switzerland, banned these, reproduction or research. They also banned genetic modifications in children, which was done in the U.S. like cytoplasmic transfer. Some of them share three parents in the U.S. in a genetic stance. Then the FDA said that you have to stop that.
Stem cell selection techniques are also banned. The one exception is at the bottom, the U.S. doesn't ban any of these at an international level at this point. (applause) Despite the fon-to, of the.. we want to protect the rights.. regulatory history shows that just the opposite occurs. Further elaboration leads us to a transhuman future. The democratic tyranny, is the rule not the exception. Think of it this way, biotech compnaies- what are they going to do for genetically enhanced people, if you look at what they do for GM crops?
Maybe we can form coalition with other marginalized groups. I would suggest that part of the problem with that is there aren't any enhanced humans. The largest group, the largest community that opposes gay marriage, are black people. (wtf?)
To close, I want to agree with.. progress is not inevitable, it is the great work, with which we are all here and engaged. Democracy is not the instrument that will enable this progress, but liberalism is.
|
