Idiocracy - is this what we're heading for?



Supposedly IQ is going up for college grads, but from what I can see the long-term trend can't be good.

It's now been proven that smart people tend to have smart kids, and if you have a high IQ you're generally going to do well in life because that's what our free-market, capitalist economy is set up to recognise. If we define success as being relatively wealthy and useful to society then proficiency, industriousness, organisational skills, communication, foresight and a good grasp of STEM are what counts. Unfortunately though, these people also tend to have fewer children.

As an example, I would consider most of my mates to be successful (the jammy f#ers). From my 7-10 close mates they all have a mortgage, they all drive, they're all married or in long-term relationships and they all have responsible jobs. They also only have 1-2 children.

Now, on the other side there's the people I'd prefer not to know. There are at least as many dolies, professionally unemployed and general waste-of-space people that I have contact with. The problem is, the fathers are absent and sometimes petty criminals or druggies and the mothers have multiple children because, in spite of being young and pretty, they choose to breed with retards and losers. They then find themselves with multiple children of different fathers and unable to cope. These children often portray the feral behaviour of their parents and so the cycle continues.

Ergo, responsible people have fewer children, whereas all the impulsive, idiotic and irresponsible idiots have multiple brats because they're stupid and incapable of long-term planning. You only need to read the criminal news in the local rag to see most of the scum have a plethora of illegitimates by the age of 19 and have no intention or means of ever supporting them.

I realise I'm coming across as a bit einsatzkommando here, but if we carry on like this what will be the future of our society? It doesn't help that we're also importing a load of economic migrants who have no useful skills or qualifications and often make the situation worse.

Would we be better off under a benevolent dictator like Putin who could put in a bit of population control, or is our own freedom and individual liberty (the right to be idiotic) going to be our downfall? You can probably see this theory in reality when you observe sink hole estates and ghetto cities such as Detroit.
 
Last edited:
The film was satire back in the day, then became a window to the future, now we're pretty much there.

I place the turning point around the 1950's.

Up until then, we were the survivors/descendants of the strongest, fittest, smartest, healthiest, luckiest etc... they had survived, disease, pestilence, war, famine, disaster, plagues, etc...

Then we had a massive upsurge in child birth survival, general healthcare, social care, benefits, health & safety awareness etc...

And now we actively pay stupid, unhealthy people to have children, and they have lots of them.
 
Last edited:


Supposedly IQ is going up for college grads, but from what I can see the long-term trend can't be good.

It's now been proven that smart people tend to have smart kids, and if you have a high IQ you're generally going to do well in life because that's what our free-market, capitalist economy is set up to recognise. If we define success as being relatively wealthy and useful to society then proficiency, industriousness, organisational skills, communication, foresight and a good grasp of STEM are what counts. Unfortunately though, these people also tend to have fewer children.

As an example, I would consider most of my mates to be successful (the jammy f#ers). From my 7-10 close mates they all have a mortgage, they all drive, they're all married or in long-term relationships and they all have responsible jobs. They also only have 1-2 children.

Now, on the other side there's the people I'd prefer not to know. There are at least as many dolies, professionally unemployed and general waste-of-space people that I have contact with. The problem is, the fathers are absent and sometimes petty criminals or druggies and the mothers have multiple children because, in spite of being young and pretty, they choose to breed with retards and losers. They then find themselves with multiple children of different fathers and unable to cope. These children often portray the feral behaviour of their parents and so the cycle continues.

Ergo, responsible people have fewer children, whereas all the impulsive, idiotic and irresponsible idiots have multiple brats because they're stupid and incapable of long-term planning. You only need to read the criminal news in the local rag to see most of the scum have a plethora of illegitimates by the age of 19 and have no intention or means of ever supporting them.

I realise I'm coming across as a bit einsatzkommando here, but if we carry on like this what will be the future of our society? It doesn't help that we're also importing a load of economic migrants who have no useful skills or qualifications and often make the situation worse.

Would we be better off under a benevolent dictator like Putin who could put in a bit of population control, or is our own freedom and individual liberty (the right to be idiotic) going to be our downfall? You can probably see this theory in reality when you observe sink hole estates and ghetto cities such as Detroit.

Sadly, we’re breeding the unskilled unskilled labour force that we allegedly need, but one with no work ethic… Perhaps better incentives are required, maybe with a catchy slogan.
‘Albeit macht Frei’ f’rinstance.
 
We need a cull.
 
We need a cull.

Soon...

Be patient, meat sack.

10711425.jpg
 
We're already well past the Idiocracy stage when it comes to popular entertainment.


I'd rather watch this than any Kardashian stupidity, as it's less of an insult to my intelligence.
 
Would we be better off under a benevolent dictator

I am a firm believer in that. Democracy is overrated as evidenced by the shit show that politics is in just about every democracy that I can think of.

It goes without saying that, as I am smarter and more important than everyone else, I should be in charge.
 
I am a firm believer in that. Democracy is overrated as evidenced by the shit show that politics is in just about every democracy that I can think of.

It goes without saying that, as I am smarter and more important than everyone else, I should be in charge.
You Abbott and Angela rayner, the dream team, lets face it, it cannot get any worse....can it? o_O
 
And we will have, at some point in the near future, its called a world war, which will last about 30 minutes,. As for the now, its covid 19, responsible for about 4,550,000 deaths.
..which is a the size of a small village in India.
 
You Abbott and Angela rayner, the dream team, lets face it, it cannot get any worse....can it? o_O
They would be my permanent envoys to Gruinard Island and Ilha da Queimada Grande respectively.
 
Isaac Asimov was asked in the '70's whether a super computer or robot would be able to write a complicated scientific theory, compose a symphony or make a difficult ethical decision.
He replied ,'Can you'.
A decade later his rely was longer, 'Most humans can't'.
 

Robme

LE
The film was satire back in the day, then became a window to the future, now we're pretty much there.

I place the turning point around the 1950's.

Up until then, we were the survivors/descendants of the strongest, fittest, smartest, healthiest, luckiest etc... they had survived, disease, pestilence, war, famine, disaster, plagues, etc...

Then we had a massive upsurge in child birth survival, general healthcare, social care, benefits, health & safety awareness etc...

And now we actively pay stupid, unhealthy people to have children, and they have lots of them.
Isn’t it also the case that the Royal Family (as an example) have produced 3 sons whose place in society must give grave thought as to why Prince Philip didn’t have the snip, before the Flower whisperer, The Nonce and the Frustrated Dancer (apologies to Monty Python) poped along?
The richer they are, the more bovine they become, and they tend to marry similar low I.Q totty. Or have I got that wrong and Princess Nut Nuts’ plan to free wild animals into a country, where the country planned to be conserved wasn’t even consulted in the first place. Has been seen as a good idea by these durex escapers.
 

Dalef65

Old-Salt
We need a cull.
There's a school of thought that says the opportunity presented itself in March 2020.

As a global society we then failed to grasp said opportunity, and we bottled it by implementing mass lockdowns.*

* Not necessarily my personal opinion, merely describing the train set as it were.
 
There's a school of thought that says the opportunity presented itself in March 2020.

As a global society we then failed to grasp said opportunity, and we bottled it by implementing mass lockdowns.*

* Not necessarily my personal opinion, merely describing the train set as it were.
As pointed out above, it is a small amount.
Even the probable 350 million the XLW killed last century would be a drop in the ocean.
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
I realise I'm coming across as a bit einsatzkommando here, but if we carry on like this what will be the future of our society? It doesn't help that we're also importing a load of economic migrants who have no useful skills or qualifications and often make the situation worse.
One of the trends you might expect to see is that control and wealth get increasingly concentrated in a small number of hands at the top, which is never going to...oh wait.

The question isn't "what happens to society", there is a strong argument it not only already has happened, but actually has been happening for the whole of human history (just not always based on IQ). I think you have it the wrong way around. If you look over a longer period than your personal idea of who is a chav, the numbers suggest our society (certainly the UK, really most of the West) is getting more intelligent, has more education, etc. This was predicted to reduce inequality. It hasn't, quite possibly for the reasons you cite. More successful and/or high IQ people have fewer children, therefore concentrate influence and $$ in their hands (in our current system of capital and ownership).

The real question is: how long can democracy, in the current form, survive this effect? Voting is still a blip in the timeline of human history, and if the majority are increasingly shut out from the benefits, or more specifically if there are wildly disproportionate benefits visibly rewarded only to a minority, then pretty soon the majority will decide that minority can go **** themselves. Which is never going to...oh wait.
 
D

Deleted 184863

Guest
To take the title literally, idiocracy is rule by idiots. The general level of IQ is another subject.
And yes, those in authority are increasingly idiots. Biden, Trudeau, Johnson, Macron, etc, simply have neither the intelligence nor the ability to recognise it to solve a crisis, as is being shown by the never-ending succession of crises they are creating.

Democracy, in the sense the Ancient Greeks who invented it understood it, does not exist. We have what is called representative democracy. Yet it is quite clear the primary loyalty of the representatives is to their own party, not the people they represent.

The party structures are so large and expensive that to rise to the top, politicians must increasingly devote most of their working (and often private) lives to doing so. This perforce means they have a lot less experience of both the real world, and the people they represent. Furthermore, the rich people and corporations who provide the party funding largely do so out of a desire for influence. This of course is illegal in a representative democracy, and so inevitably politicians are increasingly corrupt.

It is easier to direct idiots, since they will tend not to explore complex options (not unreasonably, since they are often not capable of doing so). Thus it suits the rich who seek influence to have both idiots in authority and idiots as most of their workers. They also need to be biddable idiots. This is achieved with politicians by corrupting them, and with the workers by forcing them to work to eat and have shelter. Within any large competitive structure, such as a political party, it also suits those in power to surround themselves with people less intelligent than themselves, as it removes competition. However, to solve complex problems, intelligent people are needed. Thus we have seen the huge rise in numbers of special advisors to politicians. The problem here is inherent in the advisors' advantage of being able to be got rid of easily - the advisors need to be mostly political operatives to get and keep their positions, and to say what the politician wishes to hear.

And so we get special advisors who cannot cope with, and often cannot see approaching, and even if the can may not tell the politicians, exceptional circumstances which lead to a crisis. And then the handling of the crisis is primarily aimed at preserving the positions of the politicians and their SpAds, not actually fixing the crisis.

But a virus literally can't get the memo, and is uninfluenced by "Don't you know who I am?"
 
We have what is called representative democracy.
We have a delegational democracy. We vote for our member and get 4yr11mth of oligarchy until they have to be nice to us again.

In a representative democracy, they'd be obliged to listen to us and represent our wishes.
 

Latest Threads

Top