From: Replicant00@aol.com
Date: Tue Dec 14 1999 - 10:59:29 MST
In a message dated 12/11/1999 1:27:02 PM Pacific Standard Time,
GBurch1@aol.com writes:
<<
As far as I can tell, the main nexus is by way of the notion of "eugenics"
and the image of the "Aryan Master Race". I discuss this a little in the
dialogue I participated in that's published in the most recent edition of
"the Assembler" (and which we're trying to get up onto the Extropy Online
site). The connection is, of course, completely bogus, but it happens often
enough that it has to be addressed and understood. >>
The connections yes, by implication, but if one looks carefully at the
philosophies it breaks down. I like this post because it is honest. It is
naive to think that people will NOT draw comparisons between bio
"improvement" and Hitler's idea, which lead to genocide. This is one of the
problems I have with the rigid, "right" wing bent that is displayed on this
list from time to time. It feeds that phobia (if we are looking at our
effects on cultures outside our own). Republicans & Libertarians, swing right
away from egalitarianism and social regulations, public programs, taxation,
welfare and public housing, and this is seen as conservatism, and even
political fascism. It of course doesn't prove to be that in the final
analysis, since there is no "mandatory" anything inherent in the structure -
but it provides little comfort to those who belive strongly in citizen
support system for our society's elderly, poor and infirm.
It is not facism, but for people have seen things go this way before, and one
would think, especially in Europe, this kind of thinking is considered
"dangerous" when combined with talk of a super-being, or eugenics. it allows
loopholes of a sort for business to take advantage of the infirm.
Economic probability of some people ending up "un-enhanced" disturbs a large
percentage of the population, who primarily see the "good of mankind" as
above their own need. In other places than this list, altruistic instinct
runs higher....
I like the movie Gattica, because it shows an implication of slavery and
elitism among those "improved" which is more realistic. And not entirely
complementary to mankind. It happens of course, by natural selection, and it
is not a gov't inflicted condition, like racism, until it has become
institutionalized. The nature of humans is to form status groups, good old
boy networks, and to shun the lame, infirm and sickly. When we, in our
current state, un enhanced by Nanotech and subject to the horrors of disease,
death and pain, are looked upon as "crippled" by the new generations of
bio-enhanced beings, will we be seen as pathetic, useless creatures?
Who here wants to miss the bio-boat? E-mortality? I for one am not a "mega -
rich" though i know some of you are, and you can say "f"-you to me and do
your own thing. I would not begrudge you your implants, but many of the
"masses" would certainly do everything in their power to stop you. It'd be a
very easy campaign to mount, I would imagine.
Of course any B-movie or sci-fi book points out that the mega-rich will have
such enhancements, while a poor family will not, and then we have the cry and
hue for regulations that allow pricing to include everyone. This is partly
good - since a scrable would be on to make it more affordable, and partly
bad, because if it is something that the government has control over, no
matter WHICH party, we will see it feeding an agenda. And we all know how
efficient grant proposals are.
The conundrum begins.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:06:04 MST