by Corvidaerex » Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:41 pm
(I started this as a comment on another site about the same article, but it got too parapolitical & I abandoned it ... but the RigInt crowd might appreciate it.)<br><br>Yeah, it's an absurd bit of "research." Utterly unexpected things happened to humans just 4,000 years ago (writing) and 25,000 years ago (art) and at some unknown point before that, language. Three unknown things that no species on Earth had ever developed suddenly developed in our species. So this guy is a loon for even pretending anyone could predict what's going to happen over 100,000 years ... or if this planet will even be habitable then.<br><br>On the other hand, we have already split. At least in the United States. (Globalization will ensure this happens worldwide, as we're already seeing in obesity rates in the UK or the shocking decline of intelligence in Russia, where a fascist state has taken hold without comment from the West.)<br><br>The two subspecies are an elite who can choose their mates from anywhere on Earth, getting the most attractive & intelligent traits together while holding an ever-bigger share of global wealth, and an obese diabetic illiterate subspecies of service employees doomed to mate with their local peers and shuffled from one nowhere job to the next, constantly being replaced by automation and robotics. At some point, there won't be any use for them at all -- Kissenger's hated "useless eaters" -- and they'll either be exterminated or shipped off to hellish outerzones.<br><br>It's not some social-darwinism theory, it's a matter of fact. And at some point, the weak will be killed off because we will literally be out of resources in 35 years (when the U.S. population is expected to hit 500 million). Whether this is a soft genocide (akin to China's one-child laws) or something uglier ... we'll have to see. Certainly the climate in the USA right now suggests the masses are being primed for various exterminations, starting with the unfortunate Arabs and Persians who live over the oil fields.<br><br>(And here's some uncomfortable news: You're in the elite. As the man says, What you don't know can't hurt them. You're in the sliver of the pie chart. I bet you travel, drink wine, read books, eat organic foods, exercise, make a living using your brain, and almost certainly don't have more than two children. Sure, you're not in The Elite – well, a few of you are, and Hi! – but you're in the elite subspecies.)<br><br>Here's an interesting thing I found on Cryptogon today: <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/food/Story/0,,1924088,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/food/S...88,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>A drastic change in the diet of Westerners -- completely caused by industrialized food preparation -- has created a subspecies of humans with Very Different Brains. Whether resulting in autism or anti-social criminal behavior or a tendency to drug/booze addiction, the brains are different. This is de-evolution at work.<br><br>I don't think it's an accident. There was ample evidence 30 years ago that a diet rich in transfats, carbohydrates, seed/soya/corn oils and minimal protein was a recipe for obesity, diabetes and poor brain development. So the USFDA codified this diet, demanded schools serve it to children, and the food industry rushed out thousands of "low fat" products which quickly replaced real food for the poor and working class and much of the middle class. PE and recess and even walking to school fell of the schedule for millions of children … just as Coca-Cola and potato-chip vending machines appeared on campuses nationwide.<br><br><br>Why did the entire medical industry and its partners -- the food industry and the federal government -- spend those same 30 years attacking a "diet" (Atkins) that was simply what people used to eat: eggs, fish, beef, vegetables, milk & butter and a limited amount of grains? My guess is that complimentary factors -- high profits on cheap industrially produced & preserved foods, well-meaning doctors who believe the med journals, and a quiet political desire for a brain-damaged obese population of slugs who couldn't fight back if they wanted to -- combined to realize an unmentioned goal.<br><br>Or, to use a term beloved by the Democratic Underground crowd, we already have a subspecies of humans known as "sheeple." (Closer to cows, physically, but "cowple" doesn't really work.) And we have a bread & circuses industry that works closely with government to create a culture of idiocy to keep these folks from making trouble. I came across a quote by Carl Bernstein the other day:<br><br>"We are in the process of creating what deserves to be called the idiot culture. Not an idiot subculture, which every society has bubbling beneath the surface and which can provide harmless fun; but the culture itself. For the first time, the weird and the stupid and the coarse are becoming our cultural norm, even our cultural ideal." Carl Bernstein, The Guardian, June 3 1992. <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/food/Story/0,,1924088,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/food/S...88,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>(Carl, by the way, is the "good guy" in the Woodstein Saga: a real reporter, no cabal bosses giving him the dirt, and a guy who has put his famous byline not on celebrity/political porn, but on things like the unveiling of CIA agents in every newsroom.)<br><br>I'd say the idiot process made a huge jump forward when a senile actor was used as president and convinced a large chunk of the working & middle class that a corporate-crime syndicate was, in fact, for the common man. The process has moved rapidly since, with a number of buffoonish actors from the idiot culture winning important political offices and nakedly obvious frauds like that same corporate-crime syndicate making a hapless New England preppy, brain-damaged alcoholic & Ivy League draft dodger a "cowboy" by purchasing a former hog farm for him in 1999 – adjoining Waco, naturally – as his "campaign" for the presidency began. And it worked, because his name was familiar to voters. (A early 2000 poll found that nearly half the country thought he was actually his father.) It worked so well that clueless liberals think they're slurring Bush by calling him cowboy. In fact, they bought the con. Even Hugo Chavez bought the con. <p></p><i></i>