Does BMG agree with Will Saletan’s racism?

(Is the MA "flat" tax really progressive-ish? - promoted by David)

I posted a diary here yesterday to bring your attention to the state of progressive eugenic thinking, and it’s rather shocking how few people have disagreed with Will Saletan (Slate’s longtime science and technology writer previously known for moderate views) when he wrote this last year in Slate:

Don’t tell me those Nigerian babies aren’t cognitively disadvantaged. Don’t tell me it isn’t genetic. Don’t tell me it’s God’s will. And in the age of genetic modification, don’t tell me we can’t do anything about it.

   No, we are not created equal. But we are endowed by our Creator with the ideal of equality, and the intelligence to finish the job.

Farnkoff commented that Saletan is an anagram for Le Satan, and that got a 5 from ShillelaghLaw, who also posted a picture of Khan from Star Trek II and said genetic modification gives him the creeps, and that’s good, but really, those are very mild, passive objections.  The kind that will just be rolled right over.  Seems most people here are only trying to avoid the issue.

I’ll put this up now as poll now, and also at RMG, to get to the bottom of this.  Leaving Obama and McCain out of it this time:

Is Will Saletan right?  Do we have an obligation to “finish the job” of evolution, so that people are created equal in the most literal, genetic sense, at least in terms of intelligence?

This post was originally published with Soapblox and contains additional formatting and metadata.
View archived version of this post


12 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. I'm not even sure who Will Saletan is...

    ...why should I (or anyone here) be on the hook to justify anything he says?

    You, on the other hand, have posted volumes of homophobic dreck.   Wouldn't apologizing for the hurt you cause be a better place to start?

    • You're not on the hook for what he says

      I'm wondering why so few people are willing to denounce it.

      • We don't denounce Falangism either

        I figured it went without saying that eugenics is bad.  Didn't realize I have to denounce it every time it comes up in some sort of game...we'd lose a lot of time if all we did is denounce things that are obviously bad.  Is there anything else on your mind that needs denouncing right now?  Stalinism?  Terrorism?  Lynching?

        I imagine you'll have better luck at RMG anyway...if there's one characteristic of the conservative moment, it's the enthusiasm for denouncing ideas.

        sabutai   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM
        • Interesting about rmg...

          but RMG is not playing John Howard's game.  No comment on his copy of this present diary there yet either.  Of course, their readership is small compared to BMG, but the regulars never waste much time pouncing on stuff they're interested in.  So their silence is quite meaningfully deafening.

        • It doesn't go without saying

          There are lots of people that are for eugenics, they don't know that it goes without saying that it is bad.  Saletan, for starters, and you'll find lots of books out there in defense of genetic modification, and then there's the whole Transhumanist movement, and the same-sex conception issue.  People are working very hard for that stuff, and there is no law against it, no one cares.  So, no, it doesn't go without saying that we will successfully stop eugenic genetic engineering and preserve natural conception rights.

          Those other things that could use denouncing are not new things, they aren't like genetic engineering of human beings, which is brand new.  It's not some on-going problem that we face all the time like other problems, it is something we shouldn't be avoiding and dillydallying around.  No law equals approving of genetic modification, and liberal eugenics.

      • Well for starters...

        "I'm wondering why so few people are willing to denounce it."

        ...speaking only for myself I haven't denounced it because this is the first I'm hearing of it.  The last person who tried to create a "master race" was Adolf Hitler.  What I'm wondering is why it is assumed that this is progressive.  On the surface it appears to be anything but.

        • Just watch what happens

          See if anyone stands apart from the biotech reproductive-rights free-market eugenics party.

  2. People are afraid to talk about things like this.

    I've tried to discuss "yucky" things (like this) and most will just snipe at the author and run away.

    Don't bother next time (wrong blog site).

    • People are willing to discuss

      virtually any topic that is reasonably reality-based with a person who is rational.  Most people are not willing to indulge the fetishes of irrational people whose sole purpose seems to be to engage others in a self-indulgent masturbatory dialogue about the sex lives of same-sex couples.  Don't you know who 'they' is?  

      • I don't care about sex lives

        • yes you do.

          • excuse me?

            What gives you that idea?  Maybe you should try rereading my stuff without that offensive bias and see if you understand it better.  You're mixing me up with the Peter and all your favorite enemies who I would agree are strangely focused on sex lives.  There is no friggin way you can say that about me, look at my blog.

            Newsflash: you are the one that doesn't care about same-sex couples, I am the one that does care about them.  You are the one that thinks gay couples need genetic engineering to be equal and have full human dignity, I think that is homophobic and insulting: gay people do not need to be able to conceive children with someone of the same sex to be fully worthy and dignified, it's a sick attempt at exploitation by the eugenicists.  Look carefully at the implications of your stubborn thinking, look at what you are doing to people and saying about them.

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Sat 25 Mar 11:36 AM