Chinese Eugenics (and the 1 child policy)

[Walk]

http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/eug.htm

Basically, the 1 child policy has allowed a huge increase in the ratio of men to women in China, because male children are preferred. This will lead to intense competition among men, which will accelerate evolution in the Chinese nation. Looking at how quickly many types of plants and dogs were artificially selected for, I think we're going to see a change in the Chinese psyche very quickly, biologically speaking. The men who will win the upcoming competition will probably be smarter, stronger, and more vicious than the losers.

If the sexes are equal in number, competition isn't as intense, and females compete with dubious traits, like T&A. Face it; most guys, even smart ones, don't care much about smart women are. On the other hand, women prefer intelligent men high on the social ladder, skills that are more important today than muscles were to cavemen.

Or, if we're lucky, they'll try and flood Asia in a massive war, looking for women.  At least war has a dysgenic effect in the long run (even Darwin saw this, and he was at the very beginning of modern biology). China is powerful enough as it is! Should we force liberalism and egalitarianism on them, or should we also embrace progressive biology and claim our genetic destiny?

PS- Legal immigrants are usually more skilled, intelligent, and driven than natives. They know how to adapt well to new cultures, eventually assimilating within a few generations. Shutting down immigration completely would NOT help us in the genetics arms race; we just need better control of it.

[unoturbo]

http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/eug.htm
 This will lead to intense competition among men, which will accelerate evolution in the Chinese nation.  The men who will win the upcoming competition will probably be smarter, stronger, and more vicious than the losers.

Change 'smarter, stronger, and more vicious' for 'richer and more influential'. Since genetics have nothing to do with these traits, I doubt we'll see accelerated evolution.

PS- Legal immigrants are usually more skilled, intelligent, and driven than natives.

This is true to a degree. The general population (of my county at least) are not prepared to do shitty jobs for low wages and so the whole economy is run as a pyramid scheme. Immigrants are prepared to do the worst jobs for the lowest pay but their kids won't be. So we'll need ever more immigrants to maintain our cushy lifestyles. The natives (general population) are usually an embarrassment to any country (look at  a major city on a Friday night after club chucking out time and you'll see them at their finest).

I think we import a lot of immigrants who actually want to do something with their lives and although England is vastly overpopulated, I'd gladly swap somebody who's prepared to leave home and work hard for some of our scum.

Maybe that was a bit too political!

[Walk]

The immigrants I'm referring to are usually intellectuals who fled their homeland after a populist tyrant started a mass movement and persecuted the elite to consolidate his own power. Writers, scientists, lawyers, and other thinkers are the first to die when revolutions happen. It's to our benefit to accept them. It is NOT useful to take in immigrants just to get a short term economic boom by depressing the price of labor, which is what we're doing now.

Genetics have been linked to some psychological traits. Richer people tend to be more intelligent, taller, stronger, and they live longer than the proles. Unfortunately, they have fewer children.