Please Help Reverse This : microblogmemes

[–] [email protected] 28 points 3 months ago

We are now in the Handmaid's Tale

[+] [email protected] -11 points 3 months ago (13 children)

idiocracy is a stupid movie that promote eugenics. I'm so tired of seeing people hailing it as some sort of genius movie when the only thing it has is "aren't other people stoopid? durr" wow easy there you're making my brain hurt with all this brilliant analysis. fuck idiocracy.

load more comments (13 replies)

[–] [email protected] -3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

[–] [email protected] 171 points 3 months ago (10 children)

People are not more stupid than before. They are just more ignorant, bigoted, lazy, and scared. And this is not an accidental outcome.

[–] [email protected] 68 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Nooo! It's because stupid people have too much sex and smart people don't breed enough! Probably part of the gay agenda! /s

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

Pleeeeaase don't think about the fact that this movie is kind of basically supporting pushing eugenics... It's totally a political commentary about how bad Republicans are, and definitely not actually propagating hardcore Randian Libertarian ideals in its insistence that certain types of people are just inherently, genetically, more suited to rule over others.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (7 children)

It does have one anti-capitalist theme (the megacorp buying the FDA), so, I don't know, if it's exactly Randian, per se.

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You are indeed proving you point here 😂

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Stupid Sexy Flanders!

load more comments (9 replies)

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That moment when you realize this was an optimistic take.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'd much prefer Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho as president tbf

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Me too. Me too.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (6 children)

Idiocracy is propaganda for eugenics.

Edit: woah, I guess I overestimated some people's media literacy. Here's a video explaining what I'm talking about

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Well, watching the world burn and 8 billion people contributing to that, I can get behind some eugenics.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah! ~~Poor~~ dumb people should have been banned from reproducing ages ago! It's not like there's a economic-political system continuing to knowingly destroy the planet in service of number go up!

It's the ~~poor~~ dumb people!

/s

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago

See, now I didn't say anything about eugenics for the poor or dumb. I just said I supported the idea of eugenics. I would be very happy to start with the wealthy and powerful first. (Although one might make a good argument that there is a significant overlap between the rich and the dumb)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

We're talking about that movie where a man of below average intelligence goes to the future and saves the world by teaching them the value of education, right?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 months ago

We're talking about this movie

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago

No, a man who is average in every measure

[–] [email protected] 66 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Everyone always jumps to eugenics to explain Idiocracy, but I don't ever remember hearing genetics mentioned in the movie. The movie merely states that dumb adults raise dumb children. I don't know about you, but I see that everyday. This doesn't need to be explained by genetics. Children mimic the ways the adults in their lives act to model themselves on as they mature. You can counter this with things like public education or community involvement, but if the parents are involved and interact with their child, they're going to mimic them. If you know a smart person who was raised by dumb people, chances are the parents weren't really involved with the kid as they grew up.

This isn't even a obscure fact. What do you think those Jesus Camps are for? Why do you think rich people send their kids to elite schools?

[+] [email protected] -7 points 3 months ago (9 children)

It's eugenistic because the movie argues idiot parents have idiot children while smart parents have smart children. For every example you can find of this being true you can find another of it being false.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Stupid, ignorant people raise stupid, ignorant children.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 3 months ago (6 children)

The movie never adresses systemic failures in the educational system. It literally starts with "stupid people fuck too much".

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

eugenistic because the movie argues idiot parents have idiot children while smart parents have smart children.

This still comes down to a nature vs nurture argument, and the movie tends to fall back on things like education being the primary issue.

Idiots raising idiots isn't necessarily an argument based in eugenics. Parents who never learned are not going to be able to teach their children. If there isn't something like a decent public education system, then what chance do the children of idiots really have?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (44 children)

the movie tends to fall back on things like education being the primary issue.

Are we talking about the same movie?

The movie's "happy ending" is literally that the "smartest person" becomes the boss of all the stupid people. I think y'all don't really know too much about eugenics.

load more comments (44 replies)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Did you read my whole comment? Smart kids come from dumb parents when the parent isn't involved as much in the child's upbringing. The movie is simplify the concept because it's a movie, not a lecture.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Ok, but what you are saying translates to if the parents are not smart enough they should better not be involved in their own children's upbringing for their sake. That's an awful take.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

It's not an awful take, it's reality. Being dumb is not genetic and this has nothing to do with eugenics.

Also, they didn't say parents don't need to be involved at all. I think the idea is that the children get exposed to other people and ways of thinking and not JUST the things their parents decide for them. Otherwise it'll be indoctrination -better or worse- but the kids won't think for themselves.

For example, I think homeschooling is especially awful because parents just can't teach all the things that being in a classroom will. I don't know why it is legal in the USA, they should just have separate classes for kids with special needs imo, like in Europe.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Yes, and I simply disagree. If what you are saying was true, humanity as whole would still be farmers, hunter and gatherers.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

And yet the movie ends on a hopeful note. I'm not entirely sure they were committed to the genetic explanation.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago

I don't think the movie wqs intended as eugenic propaganda, but sure looks like it. Also all the memes and jokes about our future being this movie sure as heck don't seem to care about the ending.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

This movie came out when social media was in its infancy. Just replace eugenics with manipulation from social media and we're headed down the same highway of doom! Toot toot

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] [email protected] 28 points 3 months ago

I mean, it's not nice to joke with eugenics but I think it was no more than that and besides the movie explicitly mentions that research of important topics halted in favour of projects with a more promising outpay and that education became worse and worse by the year, which are both very real threats.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Idiocracy is Satire that ends up being optimistic as the "selectively" bred population seeks out and acts on marginally more intelligent advice for large scale political issues that actually do solve easily determined problems.

I don't know that it's evolutionist message is eugenics. Those that self select to remove from the breeding pool probably shouldn't be maintained. Darwin awards exist for a reason.

Edit: Ugh, I just realized Prunebutt is slrpnk. I need to block that instance. Every interaction I've had has been bad faith arguments. No I do have the instance block. Why am I seeing his comments?

[+] [email protected] -6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The whole notion of intelligence being inheritable and letting the "stupid" (or rather: the poor) reproduce indiscriminately is basically the original idea of eugenics.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Intelligence is inheritable, brain size is a selective trait. Arguably one of the five defining traits of Homo Sapiens. Repetitive de-prioritization is an environmental pressure as maintaining said size is a significant energy expenditure.

It isn't eugenics it's evolution. If the size doesn't provide a reproductive benefit it doesn't continue after a few generations. Ironically our internal special conflicts/predation help to maintain intelligence value.

[+] [email protected] -6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Intelligence is inheritable

Intelligence doesn't even have a proper definition in the biological domain. If you have any scientific proof that intelligence is inheritable, do show!

You can juggle words all you want: you're describing eugenicist principles. Those aren't only morally unjustyfiable: they're simply wrong with an oversimplified understanding of evolution and intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Eugenics seeks results, Evolution seeks to understand how we got to where we are (maybe what we could do, CRISPR is pretty damn cool).

Intelligence (the ability to learn and reason) is based on brain size and composition/structure, both of which have a basis in genetics. It isn't totally reliant, but it provides the framework.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I don't know how else to phrase it: the claim that intelligence is breedable is a eugenicist foundation.

Evolution is a process, you're confusing evolution with evolutionary science.

Your definition of intelligence is incredibly oversimplified. Intelligence is not an inheritable trait (as in: the difference in intelligence of human population does not significantly stem from genetic differences).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think there is a fundamental miscommunication happening here and it's basis may lay in time. Idiocracy is set 1000 years after 2001. A millennia is evolutionary significant.

The movie suggests a self selecting breeding program that de-prioritizes intelligence. 100 generations is significant. This would likely result in reduced brain mass and simplified structure. This would be a measurable genetic result.

Again this isn't likely due to circumstances I outlined above, but Judge's model has a basis on different environmental benefits from reality. As he has stated about his satire.

[+] [email protected] -6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The movie suggests a self selecting breeding program that de-prioritizes intelligence.

Yeah. That is a fundamentally eugenicist idea.

You repeatedly claim that it's a satire. What is the target and the purpose of that satire?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Two points. First Eugenics has an outsider making breeding choices not the breeders that's the point of self selecting. Second I don't think you even conceptually understand theoretic/metaphoric modeling and if you do you are purposely ignoring it for rhetoric benefit. If it's the former then Wikipedia would vastly simplify any further discussions, if it's the latter then this discussion need not continue.

As to the purpose of the satire it's an absurd mirror to modern life and a thought experiment on the consequences of free breeding without external pressure (see earlier discussion about how intelligence is expensive). It's also an optimistic and comedic take on NIMH when you take it too further conclusions and comparisons.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

First Eugenics has an outsider making breeding choices not the breeders that's the point of self selecting.

No, that's not what eugenicist theory means.

Eugenics starts with the statement that left to its' own, self-selecting devices, humanity is in danger of undesirable traits self-selecting in such a way that humanity might/will degenerate into something worse. Therefore, intervention is supposedly needed. That was the starting point of eugenic theories. It doesn't need any action taken, to be a eugenicist theory.

Claiming that eugenics starts at someone actively changing breeding patterns is like claiming that theoretical physics isn't physics.

Second I don't think you even conceptually understand theoretic/metaphoric modeling

Well, if you think something wrong, I guess that's a you problem.

As to the purpose of the satire it's an absurd mirror to modern life and a thought experiment on the consequences of free breeding without external pressure (see earlier discussion about how intelligence is expensive).

You're again describing an eugenicist thought.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Genes make a substantial difference, but they are not the whole story. They account for about half of all differences in intelligence among people, so half is not caused by genetic differences, which provides strong support for the importance of environmental factors. This estimate of 50 percent reflects the results of twin, adoption and DNA studies. From them, we know, for example, that later in life, children adopted away from their biological parents at birth are just as similar to their biological parents as are children reared by their biological parents. Similarly, we know that adoptive parents and their adopted children do not typically resemble one another in intelligence.

Article: Is Intelligence Hereditary? - Scientific American

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

That's not really a study, nor does it cite any.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 39 points 3 months ago

Right. The solution to ignorance is education. Not selective breeding programs.

Microblog Memes