Wednesday, June 24, 2015

Concepts of Utilitarian Socialism

Concepts of Utilitarian Socialism

The scientific method is a better method of decision making than traditional politics. Relying on the opinions, thoughts, feelings, and sentiments of individuals does not provide effective results and has not been used to create effective methods of producing any sort of results for over 500 years.

The scientific method is what is entrusted to make political, fiscal, economic, and any other pertinent decisions, rather than a group of individuals that is entrusted to utilize their own reasoning, logic, and decision making that is much more susceptible to fault.

The scientific method guarantees results from a defined procedure. This leaves decision making down to analysis of data rather than speculation and opinion. This encourages transparency and even allocates true political power to any who can propose an experiment that could provide competitive or comparable results to any establishment or institution at an effective rate at a justifiable expense. This system would effectively prove itself as worthwhile rather than rely on the sentiments of the people, which must be debated and argued over within an ineffective and unproductive system of governance that is rife with stagnation such as filibustering.

The laws and order established in society are justified by the results they yield rather than the public opinion, and this leaves little to no room for individuals to contort facts and misconstrue reality through opinion, debate, banter, and even less respectable means of installation of governance such as lobbying from parties that are interested in their own affluence and dominion rather than the well-being and success of the nation itself.

Copious amounts of free will and liberty solely allows people to make poor decisions. While some free will has a negligible impact on society, many people lack the capacity to make effective and productive decisions, and this is why they lead less productive, worthwhile, impactful, justifiable, and meaningful lives.

Just because something is humane, does not mean that it is productive, responsible or reasonable. This can be applied to anything that is justified by opinions, feelings, or sentiments rather than being based around efficacious procedures that more readily and effectively produce results.

Humans are animals and the same principals that govern the successful management of people livestock also apply to the successful management of populations of people. To separate humans from domesticated animals is fallacious.

Culling of populations of animals has been commonplace for a very long time. Humans reproduce in the exact same way. This practice can provide even better results with advances in the field of genetics. Save lest the animal is a prize winning race horse, it is not assigned another animal to copulate with; it is simply organized into a population to limit it’s choices in mates in an effort to ensure the highest quality of offspring are produced.

There is always an applicable use for a person. A disabled person can be the subject of experiments that provide useful information and further scientific fields. Criminals are still capable of work, and this should still be expected of them regardless of being segregated from the common population.

Luxury and opulence may be enjoyable, but they are not pressing needs of a human. These can be allowed to some extent, but know that if luxurious concepts, extravagance, elegance, and ornate things were completely foreign to a person and in no way glorified, a person that was taught to value logic, reason, order, productiveness, efficaciousness, usefulness, and applicable concepts rather than symbols of affluence would give no value to these things. These things solely serve to exacerbate greed and desire for social status based on material possessions, rather than actually valuing a persons true impact and worth to society.

Profit has no worth when it is not utilized to continue and expand upon success or create more opportunity for success. Money that is collected as profit often stagnates and this is effectively limiting the fuel that drives an economy, nation, and population. This does not have to be scattered amongst the people as this is also equally ineffective and often provides even less yield than stagnant money, as giving this money away in an attempt to ease the stress of the life of the common man is often condoning failure and conditioning the acceptance of inadequacy.

Profit would be utilized to provide more opportunities for individuals and organizations to prove their own utility and worthwhileness. The generation of income is a circular cycle that is powered by the expenditure of money on productive ventures as much as it is sustained by the influx of money that ideally proves that such an investment of time, effort, and energy of a collection of people bears fruit and has a meaningful impact that is measured by the influx of money that accompanies a successful organization.

As the world functions now, being productive is a choice. People can freely choose to be unproductive and this is not ideal. Standards of quality are vigorously reinforced, and should a person be unproductive, they would not be given the choice to panhandle for money to buy alcohol, they would be assigned mandatory remediation for their inadequacy. Given a child or young adult is not progressing through education adequately, they are not given the choice to play video games, loiter, skateboard, or otherwise fill their time with less productive means than mandatory remediation.

The true dearth of access to enjoyable activities and free time that results from inadequacy is more than enough of an incentive to instill proper appreciation of being successful in ones studies and work. The knowledge of the repercussions for being obstinate to devotion to eduction and productiveness is a persuasive enough force that a reasonable person would see no reason to be recalcitrant to the expectations of society.

While there are different standards of performance that are expected from different people, as many have different aptitudes, but still there is an ideal level of performance that can be achieved from any type of individual capable of learning. Those that have no capability to learn enough to be productive are given alternate tasks that they can accomplish, even if this is simple manual labor or another task with little intellectual prerequisite. Accomplishing something productive will always lead to the allocation of time for more enjoyable activities and pursuits to condition the proper reasoning that drives productivity, progress, and accomplishment within a society. Even those with little if any capability can be utilized for scientific or social experiments in an attempt to attain some worthwhileness from their existence, rather than cast aside these people are worthless. Even being a subject for science would grant rewards that are enjoyed and appreciated by the subject and allow them to feel that their life and time is valuable in some way to the people that they interact with.

There are alternative methods of conditioning that can be utilized as a back-up in case the individual cannot be conduced into worthwhileness and productivity. These have been applied to slaves and spies in the past, but they are still applicable here. These would be one of the last methods that would be turned to, and of course the conditioning through reward would be utilized if the individual could be dissuaded from their recalcitrance when given the option to avoid such disagreeable methods that have been used in the past to induce productivity.

~~ The benefits of a culled society

While the appreciation and glorification of physical human beauty and physical attractiveness is justifiable in that it often represents physical health and is naturally appealing to individuals, it is also something that can condition poor self image in those who are not as endowed with it. Beauty however is a relative thing, and an appropriately culled population would have a different understanding. Each population would have limited if any interaction with other populations, so the standard of beauty would be established independently within each population, rather than having the entire population accept one standard of beauty.

In a population consisting of naturally, mathematically, scientifically veritably physically unattractive people, the most attractive member of this population would be seen as ideal, and perfectly beautiful in the eyes of the members of this group, regardless of having little ability to be found physically attractive by the common person. This would allow people with otherwise no natural capacity to feel any self-worth or self-confidence that stems from their physical appearance feel the dignity and value that those who are truly very attractive feel when they interact with the population. This would minimize the amount of negative feelings about physical appearances and instead allow people to truly appreciate some form of beauty, even if this concept is only enforced by separating these people into groups of comparable looks.

When a person is a “9/10” they look better than 9/10 of the population. While this is not a specific measurement that can be warped by opinions and culture, most if not all contributing elements can easily be validated by science and mathematics.

If a population consists of people that would otherwise be dismissed as “1/10” that would otherwise feel very unsatisfied with their physical appearance, then the true “1/10” is a “10/100” and as the “1/10” is the upper limit of this population within society, they are effectively a “ 10/10” within their group, and even someone that may be a “5/100” and look worse than 95% of the population could feel like an average person, effectively being treated like a “5/10” within their population. This would have a palpable impact on the self-confidence of individuals who would otherwise feel very reclusive or ostracized due to their appearance.

This can even be applied to people who have deformities, as if these people existed in a population where the only friends and mates that these people interact for the majority of the time with also have obvious deformities, it is much like the deformity has been divided out of the population and is no longer noticeable or impactful. This may be impossible due to other limitations of people who are deformed, often having accompanying impairments, but the limited interaction with people of normal appearance and capability would allow a common standard to be held amongst the population, being able to exclude these people from their own, albeit deformed, standards of beauty, rather than being held to the standards of beauty that are applied to normal people.

The grouping of people by similar skills and appearances also allows people to feel more comfortable with themselves, as they will not feel different or isolated from the majority of the population, as these people are now themselves the majority of the population with which they interact, and they are judged against very similar people rather than against the entire population, and this would minimize the glaring nature of faults and distinguishing characteristics that would otherwise separate these people into effective social castes that are established by the sentiments and opinions of the common public.

While truly capable and viable people would not be barred from interaction with one another when citing productive reasons, these people would still of course reside amongst their populations to retain the benefits gained from a culled population. Those with comparable ability to anyone else would be able to interact via telecommunications or in person, but be distinguished in their own right as not to be ostracized or feel judged by a society who’s glaring objections to or displeasure with their appearance or form cannot be escaped.

While some may see segregation by race as wrong, it is obvious that races still obviously segregate themselves by their own free will much of the time. Rather than being mandatory or forced, integration is a voluntary act. This as a culled society is already very segregated by many characteristics that are not based upon race, and allowing people to preserve their heritage, ethnicity, and culture is perfectly acceptable and harmless.

A culled society nearly instantly eliminates the spread of all sexually transmitted diseases, as people are of course culled by their infected status. A culled society strongly inhibits the exacerbation of hereditary illnesses, disabilities, and predispositions as these are also criteria for culling.

A culled society also eliminates hostility between rival, hostile, or uneasily non-aggressive groups as each population is free to govern themselves, much like a traditional city state, rather than have disputes between groups flare up and become problematic. Rather than having clear distinctions between social groups, when each is homogenous, there is no ability to antagonize another group because if something does go wrong, there are no parties to blame but one’s own select population; this eliminates the hostilities that stem from distinctions between groups as these no longer are visible or impactful, and this eliminates them as any suspect cause for wrongdoings.

Regardless of being disabled in someway, many people with disabilities and illnesses still are respectably productive. Even people with severe impairments have been able to accomplish impactful and worthwhile things. To eunuchate these people would be to abandon any faith in redeeming them in some way and allowing them to provide worth to society, so long as their populations can be supported. By allowing them to continue to exist and reproduce provides opportunities to advance science by giving more grounds and subjects to experiment with in an attempt to resolve issues and improve quality of life; these gains can be impactful across all of society and benefit everyone, and those who are not as efficient or productive as an acceptable person simply have more time to invest in being the subject of science rather than being concerned with other means of fruitfulness. Keeping these people alive means that one day there could be a true cure or resolution to their impairment and this would be as monumental as the cure for polio.

No comments:

Post a Comment