NationStates Jolt Archive

It is of the utmost importance to functionalise citizens in such a way that they comply with the requirements of a modern, healthy economy. Recent technological breakthroughs allow for such functionalisation through the use of genetic engineering. State members of the United Nations should be obliged to alter the genetic makeup of future citizens in order to promote the formation of a society that conforms to UN standards.

It is of the utmost importance to functionalise citizens in such a way that they comply with the requirements of a modern, healthy economy.

Now you see here, this is where we decide you are The Enemy and most likely just being a provocative jerk. The economy is there to serve the people, not the other way about.
And genetic engineering of humans is not something we will ever allow.

If you can get rid of nasal hair, pimples, dandruff and ability to become very overweight then I suspect that most of any nations public would be all for it.

Have you seen the ads for medicine that removes nail fungus?

"Caution: may cause liver failure, heart disease, seizure or stroke."

For nail fungus?

I fear unknown side effects from such manipulations.

What if you grow a race of gorgeous powerful homicidal psychotic mutants?

Have you seen the ads for medicine that removes nail fungus?

"Caution: may cause liver failure, heart disease, seizure or stroke."

For nail fungus?

I fear unknown side effects from such manipulations.

What if you grow a race of gorgeous powerful homicidal psychotic mutants?

Rehochipe is right when stating the economy serves the people. That is why Kapitalie believes the pursuit of a healthy global economy is worthwile. In fact, our nation considers the strengthening of the economy to be so important, it deems regulation on the subject justified. Kapitalie holds the view that all nations, be they communist or libertarion, hold the sacred duty of improving their economy. All that is good stems from this fundamental justification of the state entity.

It is, in the opinion of Kapitalie, described by the United Nations as a 'capitalist paradise' completely immoral to ignore the benefits that genetic engineering promises to bring. Throughout the world, nations struggle with discrepancies between their economical and demographic situation. Limits on human production capacities make the progression from Third to First World country slow and painful. Why should we allow these things, when we have the means to overcome them?

Kapitalie has performed numerous functionalisation projects in the recent past. With advances in biotechnology fasting outpacing those in artificial intelligence, multi-armed mechanics have proven much more reliable than automatisation. Besides that, it has prevented the unemployment that naturally comes with "outsourcing to machines" from arising. The only negative side-effects that have emerged were in the area of intellectualisation. Equiping scientists with higher cognitive abilities rendered them more productive, but led to increasing depressions. This was however rapidly fixed by, again, genetic engineering, in combination with pharmaceutic advances (which have, in turn, led to greater economic prosperity).

Recent studies suggest that the functionalisation studies, albeit performed on a small scale, have caused 40% of the 7% GDP growth in the last year.

In the same way as that the government of Kapitalie does not consider abortion to infringe on the soevereignty of the individual, it does not believe genetic modification of the unborn human is a violation of this fundamental right. It is the next logical step in a tradition of using technology for the benefit of mankind.

Kapitalie holds the view that all nations, be they communist or libertarion, hold the sacred duty of improving their economy.

What if your economy's doing quite well, thank you very much, and you don't want to risk damaging it by committing to high-risk ventures like this one?

What if, in order to improve the economy, one takes away vital civil liberties , so that standard of life goes one step forward and two steps back?

All that is good stems from this fundamental justification of the state entity.

Study after study has shown that happiness does not necessarily rise with GDP. If all your citizens work a twelve-hour day seven days a week, your economy will benefit but your standard of living will go down - you can't enjoy wealth if you're constantly exhausted. This is a crude example; a myriad more subtle variants could easily be brought up. However, this alone demonstrates that growth at any cost is a Bad Thing.

The state is not a CEO; the state is a guardian. Its role is to serve the best interests of its citizens, and if this means holding back the economy, so be it.

But what if we could engineer a world of genetically perfect individuals. All hard working people and and attractive and smart and strong and anything the average person would want to be? maybe we should allow genetic engineering to take place.

Citizens have a right to live in the style they choose, therefore, Tuesday Heights will NOT support this proposal.

http://www.skytowerpoet.net/pics/100_15.gif

The Deadlines of Tuesday Heights (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=skytowerpoet)

But what if we could engineer a world of genetically perfect individuals. All hard working people and and attractive and smart and strong and anything the average person would want to be?

No such thing as a perfect individual.

Look at any athletics meet. The hammer throwers are built differently from the distance runners, and the sprinters have another build again. Bring in the mountaineers and put 'em next to the catwalk models. Different builds, different functions. It's the same with minds, social ability, the works. The optimal set of characteristics for an ideal chemist would make a crap romance novelist. If Isaac Newton had been a socially well-adjusted, good-looking six-footer it'd have set back science a hundred years. If Stephen Hawking was still walking he'd never have taken physics seriously. Humanity thrives on variety.

Okay then, you might say, then engineer 'em all up for the roles we need - produce as many optimal scientists and machine operators and soldiers as society wants, and everything's dandy. Wrong. Society evolves. Back in early humanity, if you'd have asked 'what characteristics does an ideal human male need?', you'd have got an answer something like 'well, he should be wiry and short and dark-skinned so he can run all day in the sun, and he should have a brain that's really good at tracking, 'cause everybody knows the best way to get the chicks is to be the guy who kills the most antelope.' These days you might start 'Well, he's gonna need strong back muscles so he doesn't cramp up from sitting in a chair in an office all day...' Social needs evolve. These days, they evolve really frickin' fast. In the twenty years it takes for your engineered kids to reach adulthood, they'll have changed again. And with no oddballs to increase your diversity, chances are they'll have changed to something you've got no people for.

The driving force of society is flux. You don't get dynamic systems unless you've got difference. If everyone's perfect, things stagnate. The eccentrics are the ones who make things happen; make everyone perfect, and your society will decay.