How to fix The Human Problem

10 11 11 - 04:54

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, it’d be “bright supremacy.” If I could summarize my social policy with a slogan, it’d be, “Start With the Smart.” I believe the higher a population’s 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, I’d halve the global IQ bell curve at its apex and sweep away everything to the left of it. We’d still have representatives from every race and most cultures—although in grossly different proportions than they currently exist—but 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?"

If all people under 120 IQ points were to die tomorrow, life would be:

(A) Better
(B) Worse

Pick one.

fourteen comments

Worse. The slave labor provided by dumb people is what allows smart people to take advantage of their intelligence. If they had to do some of the trivial things that dumb people do for them, they'd have less time to pursue new theories and ideas and whatever it is they do. You think people just working the fields all day have eureeka moments? And you think everyone with over 120 IQ is a genius? Mostly they use that as an excuse to feel better about how useless they are in every other aspect. Like you. 126 without trying - 10-11-’11 06:04

(a)Better for the "smart" people, (b)worse for the dumb ones. IQ (Iridescent Queefs) - 10-11-’11 06:04

"If all people under 120 IQ points were to die tomorrow, life would be:

(A) Better
(B) Worse

Pick one."

Well, that depends on who lost their spouses, children, parents, or friends in the process. My guess is most people whose IQ is over 120 have someone close who is below 120, so in general, I'm thinking worse. If you're so smart, why didn't think of that? - 10-11-’11 12:15

To me, it definitely seems that only the weak care about others personally. nihilistic meditation - 10-11-’11 12:32

Robots > Slaves Cull the Weak - 10-11-’11 16:05

Don't you mean "why didn't YOU think of that"? volunteer? - 10-11-’11 20:31

Short term would be worse, as many low IQ individuals work in necessary jobs and many high IQ individuals would have to relearn how to grow their own food and build infrastructure. In the long term it would be good as it would create a smaller and more sustainable population. Also, natural selection would have a more active role in society. orcnomad - 10-11-’11 23:16

why not raise it to 200 iq and above? GFM - 15-11-’11 13:12

Folks with high IQs would have to learn to be as tough as those with lower IQs. Genetics do determine intelligence but also if whether or not you can lift a sledge hammer without crying like a fucking pussy and connective tissue on some grossly underdeveloped shoulder muscle. However there are people with high IQs in shit jobs and out of society completely.

You guys lean way too much in one direction on this for it to work like you want it to. Gorf Goes Fishing (Email ) - 15-11-’11 17:31

tearing some tissue fuck I guess I would die, the anus gestapo would shoot me, I bet they couldn't shoot right though cause of their atrophied arm muscles, or wait your robots would do it for you, then you'd flare you nostrils and look around in a hilarious arrogant manner as some harpsichord classical plays in the background.. something to fear there gorf goes to hell (Email ) - 15-11-’11 17:33

The William Tell Overture while ass raping you with my both well muscled, and high I.Q., hessian cock of death would indeed be a thing of beauty... interested? - 15-11-’11 18:43

"why not raise it to 200 iq and above?"

Presumably because the author wouldn't make the cut. We're taking his word he's even 120 - 16-11-’11 09:55

Last words don't mean shit, Dave. U.S. Census Bureau - 16-11-’11 22:33

I think this is one of the most significant information for me. And i'm glad reading your article. But wanna remark on some general things, The website style is perfect, the articles is really nice : D. Good job, cheers wow gold (URL) - 25-01-’13 03:55