The real issue with this case is the fact that any of these people were in Utah in the first place.  They should have all been in Burma.  Then the Burmese legal system could handle it.  The good people of Utah shouldn't have all of this nonsense undermining their legal system, disrupting their tranquility, ruining their neighborhoods, and consuming their taxes.

This is a common misconception.

Among whites on 23andme, it is estimated that 96 or 97% of them are of pure European descent.  The remainder have an average of less than 1% non-European ancestry, meaning 1 non-white great great great great great grandparent out of 128.  The one-drop rule formed a protective barrier for whites.

Of course this is the 23andme data set, a self-selected group which skews towards the curious, nerdy, and financially secure.  The other end of the spectrum probably has a little more non-white ancestry.  I suspect that most "Cherokee" ancestry among lower class Americans is actually very distant black ancestry, but again it can't be much.

You should read your own link.  If you are a random male soldier NONE of those ways will get you out without a criminal conviction, except *possibly* conscientious objector.

Let's use a concrete example.  Imagine that I am a male soldier and that I have been in the army for one year.  I can't get pregnant and I don't think that I can convince my CO that I am an conscientious objector.  Bottom line: there is no way for me to get out without prison time.

When there is only one surviving dollar bill left in the world and museums and collectors fight over it in an intense bidding war.

He's just making up nonsense, the burden of proof is his.  He should edit his post to remove the misinformation.

Completely false.  Please edit your post to delete this misinformation.

If bitcoin becomes the world currency, a single bitcoin will be worth millions of dollars.

If bitcoin becomes a trusted savings mechanism on par with gold, a single bitcoin will be worth tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Excellent is whatever I want it to be.  I could have a formal standard or just go with my gut feeling.  It is just like breeding animals.  If you want a cow that makes more milk you carefully choose the cow and the bull based on production performance and pedigree.  If I want smarter humans I would carefully select people based on their IQ scores.


If I am the selection mechanism then, by definition, fitness is about my preferences.


No they don't.  You're throwing around words and concepts that you don't understand, and which have no relevance to my ideas.

That is a common misconception.  If you look at actual policies the US is pretty far left in many ways.  I spent a few days studying this a year or two ago, and the US is to the right of about 3/4 of Western countries, and to the left of about 1/4 of them.


I am familiar with the website from which that chart comes, and I don't consider it credible.  How does it decide where to put the center?  It is arbitrary.

I use a non-arbitrary definition:  the status quo is center.  Anyone who wants modernize authority is a leftist, anyone who wants to diversify authority is a rightist.  Anyone who is more of a leftist than Marx is far left, anyone who is more of a rightist than Confucius (the man himself, not his disciples) is far right.

You are correct that Obama and Romney seem to fall pretty close to each other on a left-right spectrum, but the truth is that they are on the left.  This is because they both want to move the status quo to the left.  That is indisputable.  We know that Obama's policies are far left because of his actions on the lumpenprole (people that Marx did not care about).  Romney could have gone pretty far left when he was governor of Massachusetts, but he didn't.  So we can conclude that he (like most Mormons) is only a center leftist.



None of the top three parties addresses any of the concerns of the average person.  UKIP not only addresses them, but has decent solutions.  Also "move past by now"?  Do you see the demographic shifts that are happening around you?  How many children does the average Labour supporter have?  How many does the average UKIP have?  I'm guessing that the latter is at least twice the former.  In the US it will only be a couple of generations before we shed the progressives.  They'll be a few of inconsequential weirdos instead of the ruling class.

This is the pattern every time.  Volume will increase when people start dusting off their old coins and bringing them to market.

The passage that you quoted seems to have no relevance to what I am talking about.  Please clarify what I am missing.

I would not control others, and there would be evolution.  What I would be doing is providing an excellent starting point.

Your point about variance is correct, but again I'm not trying to make a perfect society where everyone is 100% perfect all the time.  However if you started with excellent people who had excellent parents (meaning that the founders are typical members of families with excellent DNA, rather than exceptional people from families with mediocre DNA), chances are that the vast majority of their children are going to be excellent as well.  So yes, there will be jerks, maybe something like 1% of the population, but that is not so bad compared to Earth, which is something like 30% jerks.

You don't have access to google?  If you had actually attempted to do some research you would have found out that I was wrong.  It seems that muslim immigrants are committing only half of the rapes in Oslo.  Keep in mind that "only half" is still huge when you consider that they form only 1.5% of the population.  By simply sending these people back home they could cut the rape rate in half overnight.  However the elites don't want that, so it won't happen.  Pro-immigration = pro-rape.

The rest of your post is hysterics and catty attempts at insults.

It is an established scientific fact that personality is mostly genetic.

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/12/02/science/major-personality-study-finds-that-traits-are-mostly-inherited.html

An online community where you can only gain admission through a rigorous family background check and where all members of the community agree only to marry other members of the community?  I guess it is possible, but people will be tempted to stray from the community, plus it won't be able to provide as much benefit.  Who wants to follow a bunch of strict rules... just to gain membership to a website?  It isn't worth it.

By making a physical community you can eliminate violent crime, and all of its associated costs.  For example Oslo would be a rape-free city if not for immigrants, because all of the hundreds of rapes committed there are committed by immigrants.

This is child abuse, nothing more.

Adults with severe mental illness (transvestites) should be given treatment instead of mutilation.  Children who exhibit similar symptoms (which are probably just a phase) should not have their bodies destroyed with drugs.  In mild cases it should be allowed to pass, and in extreme cases they should be given drugs to help them develop properly into their natural sex (the one that they are born as, testicles = man, ovaries = woman).

As for the Daily Mail, it is the best UK news source.  Is it 98% sensationalist trash?  Of course, but that other 2% has more content then the rest of the UK media combined.  Whenever I see an interesting story about the goings on in the UK it is always in the Daily Mail.  I never see interesting stories in the state-run media, or the other papers.

Exactly, which is why only my idea works.  My founding population would include only people who do not try to gain power, and whose parents did not try to gain power.  The people in my society would have no desire to rule over others.  I wouldn't need to condition them, they would be born that way.

Just about every new technology initially weakens the power of the state, and then ultimately strengthens it.

Bitcoin will initially weaken the power of the state by taking away its ability inflate away your wealth.  It will eventually strengthen it by making it extremely easy for the government to know what you are up to, through blockchain analysis methods that we can't even imagine yet.

"Heretic" fell out of fashion so now the term "racist" is used for those who dissent from the theology of those who control the Church (universities and media).  Racist = heretic.  It is that simple.  The word "racism" has very little to do with race, race relations, etc... except as they are part of the establishment's dogma.  There, discussion ended.

As for Nintendo, their characters are sufficiently stylized that they can represent any character that you would want to include in a game.  Remember that they are a company that focuses on making family-friendly games, rather than pushing an insane agenda.

It is nice to see that right-leaning parties such as UKIP are going to do well this election.  Here in the US we are limited to choosing between Maoism ("progressivism") and Trotskyism ("neoconservatism").

Too many people are focusing on the political system of the new society.  The reality is that the political system will end up reflecting the population's inherent nature, sooner or later.

The solution is to carefully select your people.  Good genetics = good society.  Whatever traits you want society to have make sure that they are abundant in your founding stock.  Additionally you will want a sense of community, so make sure to select a small number of people, so that eventually everyone will have some sort of family connection to everyone else.  I might go with as few as 64 founders, assuming that we would have rapid population growth to cope with inbreeding concerns, though I would probably double or triple that just to be safe.  If population couldn't grow then I would select about 3000 founders.