10 11 11 - 04:54And a viewpoint that has come back into favor:
If there is one group that needs to die, it is the stupid among us. If I had to give a name to my political philosophy, itâd be âbright supremacy.â If I could summarize my social policy with a slogan, itâd be, âStart With the Smart.â I believe the higher a populationâs collective intelligence, the better will be the society it builds. Smart people can always raise crops, but dumb people will never be able to solve quadratic equations. Therefore, my primary determinant regarding who gets to stay and who has to file out the door marked EXIT would be intelligence. Although imperfect, we have ways of testing such things. In the improbable event that the heavens were to part and an angel were to task me with immediately eliminating half the global population, Iâd halve the global IQ bell curve at its apex and sweep away everything to the left of it. Weâd still have representatives from every race and most culturesâalthough in grossly different proportions than they currently existâbut the quality of human existence would take a gazelle-sized leap forward overnight toward a brighter future come dawn. - Jim Goad, "If the World Is Overpopulated, Who Should Die?"
In other words, quality control. No natural selection? We'd better make some choices before we get inundated in idiots.
His is a less radical formulation of Prozak's challenge:
If all people under 120 IQ points were to die tomorrow, life would be:
Very few people want to answer that question.