>>11998146>yeah because that's working out wonderfully for us right now, isn't it?If you don't give the retards a voice, what's the fucking problem? Just don't let the average low IQ idiot have any sort of involvement.
>entirely missing the point where I've said FOR THE MOST PART by cherry picking from the exact situation I've excludedStill, you can certainly determine if a person is, at the very least, smarter, stronger, healthier, etc. than average. It's not that fucking hard.
>yep and in this region the boundaries are unclear because we don't have a clear measure of intelligence (if you even think of saying IQ then I'll just tell you to hold your breath)IQ test is ehhh as an end-all, be-all means of measurement for intelligence, but it does at least have some merit. I'd say measure people's ability to logically reason, reading and writing comprehension, mathematical ability, ability to cipher through common news sources, creativity, musical ability, artistry, scientific literacy, etc., across a longitudinal study and those who pass a certain median across each are allowed to pass on their genes. And make this a test you can take every so often, so even if you fail as an adult, since intelligence is malleable, you are allowed to have kids. Not only does this incentivize people to, you know, LEARN, but it also incentivizes people to have children and pass on their genes.
>yes because long-running regimes always maintain their moral roots, don't they?Doesn't have to be a regime, it could be something supported by a stable government that's passed on between political parties, like just about any first-world nation today.
