Is Edward Dutton right about the future of the West or is it just right-wing copium?

>>24572679 (OP)
There is absolutely no way this dude makes a coherent argument with that premise.

>>24572684
Have you read the book?
His premise makes quite good sense
>Woke ideology promotes anti-natalism
>Dysgenic people are naturally drawn towards woke ideology
>Thus woke ideology promotes Eugenics by promoting anti-natalistic culture towards dysgenic people

>>24572684
I assume it's about the mass sterilisation of society's craziest under the guise of transgenderism. 1-3% being sterilised is a bigger selection pressure than medieval executions.

>>24572688
>>24572697
I think what people forget is that you can bank semen/eggs nowadays. Many doctors want you to bank some before HRT unless you decline, and insurance pays for it.

So technically they could breed.

>>24572679 (OP)
I hope that cover isn't an AI generated image

>>24572705
Yeah, but left-leaning people are also ideologically more likely to reject having children by choice

>>24572705
As long as it harms their total fertility rate it doesn't matter if they can still technically breed. Spending all your money to signal that you're crazy and also removing your genitalia is going to have an impact.

>>24572688
I knew it would be something disingenuous like that. Voluntarily not wanting to have kids isn't eugenics.

>>24572719
Maybe not by definition, but the results are the same

>>24572688
Leftists and anti-natalists are all white people to the right distribution of the IQ bell curve though

>>24572732
Doesn't matter, they're still existential enemies to the White population as a whole

>>24572719
Eugenics and dysgenics describe states of selection, and don't require human guidance.
Thinking eugenics can only describe involuntary sterilisation or genocide is wrong. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention , completely voluntary, everyone wins.

>>24572733
General intelligence is existential enemy to the white population.
The best bet of whites is to use their brainpower that slowly depopulates them into figuring out how to do growth vats, CRISPR, etc.

You either lobotomize whites or allow them to push into le heckin science in search for demographical solutions

>>24572737
>Barbara Harris founded the organization in 1997

>>24572721
>>24572737
This is losing the plot and forgetting why eugenics is generally looked down upon. It's a disingenuous gotcha.

>>24572767
It's looked down upon because people don't understand the word and just think it means jew burning or something.
Female education - dysgenic
Transgenderism - eugenic
Crazy world, right?

>>24572799
>Lib: I dunno, I don't think I want kids for financial/health/lifestyle (take your pick) reasons
>Dutton: Nooooo you HAVE to have kids or else you're practicing eugenics!! You hate eugenics don't you? Checkmate, atheists

>>24572816
I doubt dutton is depressed over mentally ill libs opting out.

>>24572821
And yet he wrote a book about it or at least AI slopped on as evidenced by the cover

>>24572872
The blurb is literally about how wokeness is saving mankind by eliminating the crazies.

>>24572714
One of the few perceptive posts in this cursed thread.
It's worth thinking about what potential factors out there might afftect tfr even by a few percentage points.

Can any of you guys comment on the effects of reduced child mortality and mutational load?
That's an equally important piece of this puzzle.

>>24572886
I see so his disingenuous gotcha is more snark than outrage. Satire?

Reduced birth rates among the privileged/upper middle class are not a new phenomenon.

>>24572688
none of this shit matters, only browns have kids these days

>>24572719
>voluntarily
Every trans/polycule/sterilized person I have known before and after their change have been persuaded by influencers and therapists (and the various cultures set up by medias) in their decision. It is not a factor which should be ignored and swept under the rug by useful idiots like yourself.
When it starts happening to the low caste indians being shipped over in bulk will you notice then?

>>24572909
we must have empathy towards people and you're right that so many have been led astray by malicious actors, and its a complete tragedy of broken lives.

it is also true however, that the next generation will be less suceptible to propaganda and harmful influences because those who were most suceptible were wiped out by the transgender/liberal propaganda

pic semi related

>>24572948
>it is also true however, that the next generation will be less suceptible to propaganda and harmful influences because those who were most suceptible were wiped out by the transgender/liberal propaganda
Being susceptible to propaganda isn't genetic.

>>24572958
How do you figure?

>>24572958
>Being susceptible to propaganda isn't genetic
everything has a genetic component

Dutton being full of shit again

>>24572959
Genuinely baffling take. You're probably trolling but for giggles, tell me how you came to the conclusion that propaganda is genetic.

>>24572948
My problem wit the idea is that what we are seeing is not just failed genetics getting purged.
It's the result of centuries of intentional pollution and perversion, literally traumatic surgeries like vaccines or circumcision and pseudofoods. followed by a perpetual media brainwashing campaign.

>>24572968
Sorry, could you reword that. You're here arguing over the idea that "propaganda" is genetic, when I thought you were arguing about susceptibility to propaganda before?

>>24572975
You know what I mean. Go on then.

>>24572981
I don't want to make an assumption, please state what you actually mean in clear language.

>>24572679 (OP)
The argument is weak, to say the least. It doesn't take into account the fact that these people often compensate for their inability to conceive either through artificial means (assisted reproduction, surrogacy, adoption, all of which increasing in recent years) or through the substitution of parental duties with a “civic” equivalent that often implies responsibilities towards children, whether directly through teaching or indirectly through influences on public policy. The overrepresentation of LGBT people in such sectors is a well-documented fact. In the United States, for example, one recent survey of new social workers found that 15.2% identified as non-heteresexual, way above the baseline. These people are found in government, education and non-profit organisations at much higher rates than expected so even if “woke” people do not reproduce at the same rate as the general population, ideas spread just as much—if not more.

>>24572990
You assert that susceptibility to propaganda is genetic and if those susceptible to left wing propaganda die off, the next generation will be less susceptible to left wing propaganda. Make your case.

Dutton got a bit dumber after he took the vax.
But he generally relied on smarter collaborators.

>>24573001
just as an initial response if there are less people behaviourally aligned to the left wing then there will be lees people susceptible to left wing propaganda if the left wing aligned reproduce at a vastly reduced rate.
But there's clearly a broader question here that you havem't properly stated so I'll need to think on it for a while.

>>24572679 (OP)
I hear this phrase "social darwinism" all the time, but what's it really mean?
The literal reading--survival of the fittest memes/ideas, the least fit die/fade into obscurity-doesn't seem outlandish, or even politically Red or Blue. Ig I just don't understand the hoopla.
Then again, the evolution debate is a weird one to me too. At least with that one, people aren't denying "change happens over time" they're arguing the other parts of evolution/darwinism
Is the right wing invaded by idealogical communists that think all ideas have equal value and the less an idea is believed the more it needs to be upheld as exemplary? That’s the only explanation I have for being anti social darwinism, unless it means something different (which I'm sure it does lol)

>>24572719
Well now you have to prove it's voluntary, if your moral/ethical conclusion is based on free will/choice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eV6J8Wr5qug

He's a funy lad

>>24573013
>just as an initial response if there are less people behaviourally aligned to the left wing then there will be lees people susceptible to left wing propaganda if the left wing aligned reproduce at a vastly reduced rate.
Again, what leads you to believe this alignment is inherited genetically? This position is almost unheard of to the point that it's absurd, so you have to explain yourself here. How do you explain the phenomenon of left and kids with right wing parents?

>>24573036
How would one even prove that in a way that satisfies you?

>>24573086
>How do you explain the phenomenon of left and kids with right wing parents?
The father was cucked by a leftie.

>>24572688
true, at the end of the day they want those "pesky incels" gone who are mean to women. that's the end goal. right there.

>>24572972
very true, there is an artificial element to this which is only slowly being peeled back

>>24572732
not the own you think it is, high IQ correlates with liberalism which correlates with civilization destroying mechanisms.

>>24573146
>Have sex with me, roastie whore!
>Ew, no.
>This is literally eugen-ACK!!
Incels are so fucking funny man

>>24573272
Well in all seriousness, that's not usually how they act, it's more or less a reaction to third wave feminism. The fact that academics don't take it seriously is going to have drastic repercussions a few decades down the road. Its part of the reason transgenderism is pushed so hard on them, to defang them. Male sexuality is considered "problematic" for the "educated" class.

>>24573086

>this outlier exists therefore the general trend is fake
you're quite a disingenuous little thing aren't you.
I don't feel so inclined to respond to the bigger question if you're already pullling these sorts of tricks

>>24573150
>high IQ correlates with liberalism
I'd like to see this in a break down by speciality of reasoning.

>>24573430
I'm not trying to trick you, your original premise makes no sense.

>>24573445
It isn't my original premise I just felt pity for you.

Okay so first the leftist brainwashing part
political affiliation was found to be somewhat heritable.
therefore if a group with a certain political inclination is less likely to breed there will be fewer fewer people with such an inclination over time
thus reducing the support base for political groups that they might naturally favour.
If in a few families the political will is divided you have to remember that genetics is still somewhat a lottery but we work more with trends.

Does that clarify the first matter for you?

>>24573552
>political affiliation was found to be somewhat heritable.
Source?

>>24573569
We're not doing that here, you can look it up on your own time. Dutton probably listed something on his site.

>>24572684
>>24572719
I knew this braindead subhuman woke faggot would say something disingenuous like that. You retards can't even pretend to think.

>>24572688
Leftism is associated with high iq and the only people who breed are low iq religious people, total cope

>>24573690
>Leftism is associated with high iq
that's Simpson's paradox. at every educational cohort, the more right-wing people have higher IQs. it's just that most people have below-average IQ and are vaguely conservative.
in the picture, X axis is left-right, Y axis is IQ, Group A is educated people, and group B is uneducated people

interesting theory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leJSBE7boK4

>>24572732
High IQ woke people are still dysgenic. The genetic cream of humanity for Dutton is high IQ anti-woke people, such as himself and numerous others. Obviously right now, such people form a minority within the group of high IQ people.

What happens then is because of woke anti-natalism, high IQ woke people are outbred by high IQ anti-woke people, as the latter are hugely pro-natalist. Within a few generations most high IQ people will be anti-woke

>>24575354
>such as himself and numerous others
lol
Who?

>>24575387
I believe the dude is married despite from what I'm guessing has autism. where's your wife?

>>24575392
>High IQ woke people are still dysgenic.
Think about it for a second. Let that sink in.

>>24575354
>anti-woke
woke is literally just fabiancommunists

>>24575398
I fail to see what you're trying to convince me of

>>24572679 (OP)
I had this idea before and have written schizophrenic accounts of the fact while intoxicated on various substances before, so I am inclined to believe that this premise must be true. it makes total sense

>>24573661
You retards can't even think at all without some faggot grifter telling you.

>>24575354
>The genetic cream of humanity for Dutton is high IQ anti-woke people, such as himself and numerous others.
Not really, he's just pointing out that what the data says.
Stable, healthy populations have compressed IQ distributions so in this supposedly ideal, pious and structured world of high IQ conservatives you get fewer geniuses, like in Japan. For outlier geniuses the population must also have outlier retards, more variance that sometimes lead to rare geniuses.

While we sit here and argue about pointless shit, the demise of humanity is already planned, and it wasn't devised by some college kid.

>>24575676
No, I don't think you've quite seen the problem for what it is.
The big issue is mutational load not getting purged out every and incapacitating a rapidly expanding number of genes every generation.
This is a sepaate issue to the upper spread of IQ, in order to sustain high intellect you need as many structures as possible working efficiently.

>>24575767
>This is a sepaate issue to the upper spread of IQ
It isn't and there's no population with "an upper spread" as in top heavy distribution. You can lift the average IQ by encouraging genetic health but that also reduces how many outlier geniuses the population produces. The biology behind outlier high IQ is risky which is why the male IQ distribution is flatter and female IQ distribution is compressed around the average. From an evolutionary perspective males are more expendable which allows for risky plays that may lead to genius or retardation. If producing geniuses came with no risk the IQ distribution wouldn't look like it does. You don't get geniuses without harmful mutants around too.

The Flynn effect is environmental so an environmental effect has been hiding a rapid decline in genetic health. Normally in nature this is regulated because the high variance from high mutational load leads to rare outlier successes which outcompete the decaying main population.

Mammals sacrificed the kind of stability crocodiles have for the kind of adaptability that needs high variance and failures. Sex itself emerged as an adaptation that sacrifices stability for adaptability. Humans continued this trend of adaptability over stability as seen in the long childhoods. Whites and East Asians took the trend even further as seen in even longer childhoods and even more neotenous features retained to adulthood.

>>24575753
Tyrants always lose in the end
If tyranny worked we'd all be living under it already