Huamanity is at a crossroads this century. As birth rates have grown unchecked in developing nations and soon humans will be reaching their carrying capacity on earth what is the solution? I believe the soulution is to save the best of humanity, such as the smartest or most proficient in one area of study. Non-essential parts of humanity--music, money, religion--could be erased while humanity could move unobstructed into a future that is better. My idea is different than those of Hitler because mine advocates destruction of people based upon ability rather than unrelated concepts such as religion.

Humanity will eventually run out of resorces. Is it better to chose who are saved for future reproduction or let chance decide instead?

Discuss

Default_normal

ted nugent on March 7, 2008, 3:43 AM

You forgot complete idiots, in which case you should be first in line for destruction!

User_rmlc_c75a36c61

Daniel Warwick on March 7, 2008, 8:26 PM

tobi, why do you consider me to be a :complete idiot?" Would it not be better for all of humanity for the best people—determined by a nonpartisan machine—than for the best of humans to be as likely to die as the worst of humans?

User_rgrk_5b38e75cb

Denys Artasevych on March 7, 2008, 10:22 PM

Let us start with the first problem deteminaion. Im not sure what you mean by nonpartisan machine, but desiding what parts of the population are more beneficiall then others, is not only a difficult task, there would be endless disagreement on just who deserves to live, a consenssus is imposible.

Second clearly would be the morality of such a “clensing”. How can people who are basically in the same position as everyone else, pass judjment on who should die. There is no objective critereria for such a celection. The only way to do this would be comlete random chance, a lottery.

Third, of course it would never work, you would actually have to convince the majority of people in the world to basically comit suicide. Because if the majority remains averse to this then there would simplly be to much resistance.

Fourth, this thining wil most likley happen anyway. When the earth becomes crowded enough, there will be war it is unavoidable. And that will thin out the population. Im not saying this is better just saying it will likley happen.


There really is a very simple way to solve this problem. Have one kid per family. Institute chinas policy globally. Or mor ideally convince people to have less kids (tough i know, but not tougher then preforming a mass extermination)

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register