Tuesday, October 10, 2017

The Case for CRISPR Enhancement

"We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run."
— Roy Amara, Computer Scientist

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
— Upton Sinclair

"There is no ‘good life for man’ (in general) — or if there is we know nothing of it, or not enough. Even those persuaded that they do, on the contrary, know what such a life should be, promote its universality only at the expense of being denied the opportunity to pursue it. If we need to agree on the broad contours of such a model for human existence, then reaching agreement will precede it — and ‘reaching agreement’ is politics. Some much wider world acquires a veto over the way of life you select, or accept, or inherit (the details need not detain us). We have seen how that works. Global communism is the inevitable destination.
"The alternative to agreement is schism. Secession, geopolitical disintegration, fragmentation, splitting — disagreement escapes dialectics and separates in space. Anti-universalism, concretely, is not a philosophical position but an effectively defensible assertion of diversity. From the perspective of the universal (which belongs only to Gnon, and never to man), it is an experiment. The degree to which it believes in itself is of no concern that matters to anything beyond itself. It is not answerable to anything but Gnon. What anyone, anywhere, thinks about it counts for nothing. If it fails, it dies, which should mean nothing to you. If you are compelled to care about someone else’s experiment, then a schism is missing. Of course, you are free to tell it that you think it will fail, if it is listening, but there is absolutely no need to reach agreement on the question. This is what, in the end, non-communism means.
"Non-universalism is hygiene. It is practical avoidance of other people’s stupid shit. There is no higher principle in political philosophy. Every attempt to install an alternative, and impose a universal, reverts to dialectics, communization, global evangelism, and totalitarian politics.
"This is being said here now, because NRx is horribly bad at it, and degenerates into a clash of universalisms, as into an instinctive equilibrium. There are even those who confidently propose an ‘NRx solution’ for the world. Nothing could be more absurd. The world — as a whole — is an entropy bin. The most profoundly degraded communism is its only possible ‘universal consensus’. (Everyone knows this, when they permit themselves to think.)
"All order is local — which is to say the negation of the universal. That is merely to re-state the second law of thermodynamics, which ‘we’ generally profess to accept. The only thing that could ever be universally and equally distributed is noise.
"Kill the universalism in your soul and you are immediately (objectively) a neoreactionary. Protect it, and you are an obstacle to the escape of differences. That is communism — whether you recognize it, or not."
— Xenosystems, Against Universalism

Some recent replies to a comment I wrote on the Xenosystems blog have made me realize that I will never be properly understood by alt-righters, but I can at least restate my case one last time here for everyone who is capable of getting it.

My central thesis is that capitalism destroys everything it cannot incorporate into itself, that human history marches relentlessly from the organic towards the cybernetic, and that racial preoccupation inhibits the much more important work of genomic progress. As part of these points I have said repeatedly that universal political orders are both impossible to realize and inherently communist in nature, and that only patchwork can create freedom. We will be looking at the last two of these points today; genomic progress and non-communism. Let us take the last point first.

So much of neoreaction is screaming into a void of alt-right cognitive misers. Granted they are less miserly than progressives, but the minute they discovered HBD all thought ceased. That's how it is with people; once they have their answer they have no further use for thinking. Here is one of those comments;

"That’s nice.
"Now any competent government on the land mass we call at present North America will do what the geography mandates: Take Atlantic to Pacific. Just as we did.
"I said competent.
"I didn’t say White you notice. Nothing mandates it has to be white.
I can hazard it won’t be Black.
"As what’s between the Atlantic and Pacific are the richest lands on earth in every category of resource including arable land it’s quite worth taking, but it’s the geography that determines destiny.
"Not your precious and transient data. Atlantic to Pacific. That’s destiny, and its manifest."
— Vxcc2014

The alt-right is communism. It commits the inevitable fallacy of reversion into dialectics about "we." Land has pointed out again, and again, that all universal politics inevitably becomes totalitarian. Dialectics is communism. Schism is neoreaction.

As I originally said;

"The formula given is [Nx(N-1)]/2 where N is the number of people in the group. This bounds common values at an upper limit of no more than 400 people, assuming they debate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 277 days straight, with no one person speaking for more or less than 5 minutes. Above a certain limit, the ability to establish values breaks down, and a central authority is required to establish a common value system/legal code. Even if you do it more efficiently by having them take turns speaking publicly it is still N x T (number of people x time to speak for each), which for 500 people who each speak for 5 minutes is still 42 hours of taking.
"And they have to decide that value code on each and every point of law.
"The obvious solution is a market for values or a patchwork, but human monkey brains are evolutionarily habituated to thinking in terms of “we,” when "we" is not possible in large societies.
"'We is mathematically impossible,” should probably be the first lesson taught in high school."
 — Comment on Xenosystems, October 7th, 2017

Both the alt-right and progressives agree on one thing; they need a future where Whites are threatened with extinction. In the case of progressives they actually want it, (though some may secretly want the alt-right to succeed), while in the case of the alt-right they rely on the external threat to give credence to their cause. They all need the worst case scenario to be true in order to have a justification for what they want. What good is a successful mixed-race future to them? As usual, motivated reasoning drives human everything.

But as we will see, there are possible futures that are both mixed race and successful.

The chart above defines some of these futures. There are tow contrary trends. Observe how dysgenics combines with the eugenic effects of CRISPR to produce nine rough categories of possible outcome. The ones defined in Column 1 are unlikely; worldwide prohibition of the technology would interfere with elite desires for self-improvement. Column 3 outcomes are also unlikely; governments would react with oppressive hysteria to widespread bio-hacking. Thus, we are stuck with the mid-range scenario in Column 2 as our most likely outcome.

The first quote given in this article is about how people underestimate technology in the long-run. The second quote is about how people will avoid understanding something if it conflicts with their agenda. The chart above is an attempt to map potential futures for humanity. The technology in question is CRISPR, which though it will accomplish little in the short-run, has massive long-term potential to obviate political problems. In all scenarios the world gets more "diverse," meaning, a darker average skin tone, or "less White." But per Mendel's laws of genetic inheritance it is not possible for race to be eliminated through interbreeding, and from the work done by Razib Khan, many of the genes for White skin color dominate over those for pigmentation. To quote;

"All that being said, phenotypes do not emerge just out of our own minds, rather, they are often genetically controlled. I have posted a fair amount on skin color because within the last 5 years we’ve really figured out how it shapes the normal range of human variation. In short, about half a dozen loci seem to account for nearly all the between population differences in complexion. But I was talking to a friend today and explained how I realized recently that the nature of the genetic architecture was actually rather counterintuitive from an American perspective. In short, whiteness is dominant!
— Razib Khan, Fear of a white planet, Gene Expression

Yes, the world will get a little more brown, but this is not "the end of White people," nor the end of Western civilization. And as I have already pointed out, almost all races are undergoing a decline in total fertility rate, and Africans should eventually catch up to the rest of the world so long as urbanization is allowed to occur. To quote myself in a previous article;

"Why The Population Bubble Happened in the First Place
"1837. John Deere invents the steel plow. Source.
1911. First antibiotic approved for market use. Source.
1921 to 1970, all serious childhood diseases cured with vaccines. Rubella is last in 1970. Source.
1960. Birth control released to the public. Source.
1980. Level of urbanization in the U.S. exceeds 73.7 percent. Source.
"Notice that there is roughly a half-century gap between the introduction of the first antibiotic and the development of birth control. Levels of urbanization were already at about 46 percent in 1910, but there was no direct ability of women to limit their conception of children. This is probably why Asia is in free fall. Unlike us, their urbanization occurs after birth control, and not before.
"The gap is significant because what you see here are two sets of technologies One set of technologies increases population, (steel plows and antibiotics), while another set of technologies/behaviors decreases birth rates, (birth control combined with urbanization). The fact that there is a half-century gap between these two sets of technologies, is the reason that the the worlds population will reach about 9.7 billion by 2050, and go no higher. What you are seeing here is a massive population bubble created by the gap between population increasing and population decreasing technologies. It is that gap that has created the world in which we live. We are the people born as a consequence of modern technologies like antibiotics, fed as a result of the steel plow, and kept alive during their childhoods as a result of vaccines. By 1970 all of the worst childhood diseases were cured. The population increasing technologies happened first over a series of decades from 1837 to 1970, while the population decreasing technologies occurred between about 1960 and onward. This is going to produce a 9.7 billion population bubble that is going to crash in the future. When we look at declining birth rates what we are seeing is the beginning of the end of the bubble in White countries. That collapse in population is going to spread outward though the whole world, and the rest of the world is going to collapse faster because their urbanization occurred after birth control while ours occurred before, thus, movement to the cities translates directly into population collapse for them even faster than for us."
Anti-Puritan, April 2017

The point is that there are many simultaneous trends going on here, and to focus laser-like on the decline in total fertility rate of Caucasians is to ignore all other context. All races are going to experience decline in TFR. The world is not going to overpopulate. Global warming is not going to destroy everything because in the long-term (300 years), the Earth's entire human population is going to drop radically. Whites are not going extinct because Mendel's laws of genetic segregation won't allow it.

The worldwide prohibition scenario described in Category 1 (in blue) on the chart above will not happen. Gene editing technology is fast in the long-term and dysgenics is slow. Dysgenic effects require hundreds of years to appear. Humans might not even be a single species by then. The point is that all the damage to IQ that happens in 500 years can be undone by CRISPR in 100 or less.

Remember that second quote, "people underestimate technology in the long-run?" Remember that?

Yes, the "Cathedral" might try to ban CRISPR. It is the ultimate checkmate against a leftist agenda. But this is like the belief that elites would suppress a cure for cancer. They would like the cure themselves, and therefore would be unlikely to successfully oppose it in any coordinated fashion. Any elites who could not procure access to a cure through back channels would naturally be supportive of a cure, and elites with poor family members or friends would like to see them live. These types of conspiracy theories become ludicrous upon any deeper analysis.

The cathedral concept is itself a vast oversimplification of the situation; it represents the right-wing version of left-wing ideas like the military industrial complex, or the Marxist bourgeois. Reality is much better represented as a series of feedback loops of "this in exchange for that" between governments and their client populations. Examples would include such things as handouts for votes, tougher criminal sentencing for campaign contributions, academic funding for indoctrination of students, and wars for campaign contributions from the defense industry.

Now I am not saying that wars are literally bought and paid for. There does not need to be any direct interaction between lobbyists and congressmen. There are at least 22,000 lobbyists in DC and they all follow the voting records of politicians. Politicians in turn carefully watch who is giving them campaign contributions, and for how much. If a congressman votes for a war and then receives a large donation from a private army contractor like DynCorp, he can put two and two together himself. He doesn't need to actually be approached by them. Everyone is keeping score. Every vote he casts causes a fluctuation in his income up or down. He winds up representing the market rather than public interest, or he gets voted out due to a lack of campaign funds.

To quote Nick Land on the issue;

"Since winning elections is overwhelmingly a matter of vote buying, and society’s informational organs (education and media) are no more resistant to bribery than the electorate, a thrifty politician is simply an incompetent politician, and the democratic variant of Darwinism quickly eliminates such misfits from the gene pool."
Nick Land, The Dark Enlightenment

This is why "the Cathedral" is not the Cathedral at all, but really just a pile of feedback loops with corresponding ideologies to justify each. The Cathedral is the sum of its payments, and it is perfectly capable of doing the occasional right-wing action if it pays well. It is just that the structure of democracy generally favors left-wing politics since the "equality" of capitalist standardization is inherent in its makeup.

Ultimately the Category 1 futures listed in the chart above will be rendered impossible by the elites own greed and desire to enhance themselves. Get this, Mark Zuckerberg, (of all people), has invested in CRISPR–Cas9 technology. Universities at the very heart of the Cathedral in places like UC Berkeley are the ones pouring money into this technology. Your average college professor may be a regressive liberal and an eco-primitivist, but your average billionaire is a de facto transhumanist who wants to live forever.

A massive dysgenic collapse is the only thing that could make a White nationalist clown world possible. It seems one part of the Cathedral machine is pushing gene editing technology forward. Now why would that be?

The ultimate ace in the hole against regressive liberalism is a desktop 3D printing-style device that can perform cheap gene modification. Want to counteract dysgenics? Design that instead pouring your energy into racial conflict.

Throughout human history our species has encountered catastrophes. Many of these were brought on by technological innovations, but they were always solved with technology rather than politics. The very first catastrophe was the development of agriculture, which some scientists regard as The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. Agriculture brought us into contact with animals and diseases. Large population concentrations enabled slavery and feudalism. Stationary villages made people targets of conquest and war. But all of these problems were solved with more technology. Most of the diseases we acquired were solved with vaccines and antibiotics. Capitalism destroyed feudalism, and like it or not, the spread of democracy helped put an end to chattel slavery. All the solutions were either physical or social technologies.

Solving the First Crisis created the Second Crisis; the crises of overpopulation, global warming, ocean acidification, and the "nutrient droop." The solution to overpopulation created a Third Crisis we might call "the madness crises," which we are are presently experiencing. Again, to quote myself;

"Sometime in the evolution of every species, the species develops the means for controlling reproduction. They develop birth control, abortion, or whatever.
"Any species that doesn't develop reproductive technology endures civilizational collapse as a result of massive overpopulation.
"So most species develop birth control.
"Because life is basically suffering, sane rational people chose not to have kids, while the insane ones continue to grind out babies.
"Slowly the species goes mad, as the nutcases out-reproduce the sane ones.
"Eventually it becomes impossible to get anything done. Every time you build a bridge some Islamic nutcase or eco-terrorist blows it up. People begin running over other people with cars. Politicians become insane and pathologically altruistic, letting in millions of crazy Muslims because, "muh ideology." Leaders refuse to to rational commonsense things because "reasons," and "SCIENCE." Speaking of science: science just becomes another word for religion. Bullshit concepts like "equality" and "social justice" command the public's attention instead of survival and common sense. Everyone becomes a gender weirdo practicing self-castration. Women refuse to make babies, and men refuse to be fathers. The whole world goes mad. Every politician becomes a priest. Every teacher becomes a priest. Every corporate leader become a cult leader. People worship their iPhones and it becomes impossible for anyone to think about anything logically because the species is literally going insane.
"Oh, right, this is the world we live in."
Anti-Puritan, August 2017

And you know what will solve this? CRISPR. And you know what CRISPR will do? It will create a Fourth Crisis. And what will the Fourth Crisis involve? The use of gene editing for nefarious purposes. But this is how a species develops: it creates one crises which is solves, but the solutions to that crisis generate the next one, and the next one, and so on. It may be counter intuitive, but the solution is never politics and always either technology or social technology. The goal is to solve your old crises without creating new ones. That means anticipating all the effects of every action in advance. Liberals can see the obvious consequences of gene modification with much more perspicuity than they see the dysgenic effects of their own immigration policies, welfare state, and globalization. Welfare states subsidizes the birth rates of the poor while taxing those of the middle class. Immigration brings in (mostly) lower IQ people. Birth control is dysgenic for the reasons just stated in the "madness hypothesis." They always see the flaws outside their own biases more clearly than their own.

But all of this is besides the point; the point is that the species escapes the problems of one crisis by innovating beyond its past. Yes, many innovations create crises. But this is like a shockwave on a atom bomb powered spacecraft. For the spacecraft to survive it must outrun its own shockwave. To slow down is to die, being incinerated by the heat of one's own past civilizational mistakes. Politics is always a retarded slowing of civilizational speed. The solution is faster, faster, faster. Always faster, and less politics.

And while going ever faster they need to be careful to not make any new catastrophic mistakes. They need to avoid those technologies and uses of technology that will fuck shit up. They need to dream, and write science fiction to anticipate the worst possible consequences of even the most benign inventions. The worst effects have been caused not by rockets or nukes, but by birth control, cell phones, the internet, and cars. Birth control destroyed healthy family formation, cell phones create social isolation, cars shred families by taking people away from their loves ones, the internet fractured society politically causing the present political madness. It is often the most routine technologies that have the most devastating outcomes.

The future consists of a simple rule: go faster and don't fuck up in the process.

Speaking of the future, let's transition into taking about that, and talking about how to advert the Fourth Crisis, the one where gene technology threatens to destroy the human race. This will seem a little disjointed, and the advice I give will come across as off the wall, but there is a good reason for it which I will explain.

1. Don't apply gene drives to human beings. Ban it worldwide.
2. Build a genetic archive.
3. Prohibit "chemical slaves," and other monstrosities.
3. Do develop CRISPR, and do use it to enhance intelligence and reduce the incidence of mental illness. You need it to offset the effects of birth control, immigration, and dysgenics.

Regarding the first point. Normally when a gene occurs its DNA it is inherited by the offspring according to typical patters. Gene drive technology alters this behavior.

"Gene drives overcome this by ensuring that a particular gene is transmitted to all of an individual’s offspring, rather than the usual half, even if that makes them less fit. The phenomenon has long been known to exist in nature, and Crispr provides an effective way to harness it. By encoding the Crispr editing system itself into an organism’s DNA, scientists can cause a desired edit to reoccur in each generation, “driving” the trait through the wild population."
NY Times, June 8th, 2016

The problem is the military weapons potential of the technology. Applied to humans it becomes a bio-weapon, thought it is doubtful that any democratic regime would be irresponsible enough to actually try that. Such an act would be interpreted as an act of war, and with the regular movement of people across borders there would be no way to contain contamination, and to ensure that only the targeted enemy was affected.

On the second point. Capitalism always tends towards the standardization of objects involved in the production process. It produces suburbs were all the houses are the same. It has standardized lumber sizes, shipping containers, etc. This is the "equality" embodied in capitalism. It likes to treat everything as if it is a standardized input. It has already destroyed local agriculture in favor of factory farming. When capitalism is applied to biological systems it produces genetic monocultures of millions of organisms that are fed antibiotics and confined in dark spaces maximum yield. It will try to slowly standardize the human race. Some standardization is good; the elimination of crime, the improvement of IQ, etc., will have beneficial effects. But a totally standardized human race will be more prone to plagues, and lack necessary forms of genetic diversity to solve problems. There is no way to anticipate all contingencies, but if you build an archive with millions, (billions would be better), fully sequenced human genomes then you can rebuild the human species from scratch should you make a crucial mistake, and you will make a mistake eventually. This is a better insurance policy than any law can give you.

On the third point. A "chemical slave" is a person who is genetically engineered to be dependent on a patented chemical that only one corporation can provide. There are many ways to enslave people like this. Be vigilant and make laws in advance of the arrival of the technology. Once it has been unleashed a financial lobby will exist to perpetuate it in congress. Take proactive steps to outlaw this behavior, and other such forms of engineered medical dependency before its arrival. Do not wait for it to happen. Do not allow cloning. Do not allow any human beings to be engineered with a deliberate medical handicap.

These dangers might seem to refute the notion that genomics is an acceptable technology. This interpretation would be a mistake. Past catastrophes make the development of CRISPR—Cas9 absolutely necessary. To understand why let us shift gears and go back to talking about the past. Specifically, allow us to talk about the Second Crisis, the crisis of overpopulation and its effects. It may be annoying that we alternate between talking about these crises in no particular order, but it is absolutely necessary to present our arguments in the order of the points rather than the sequential numbering of events.

From Wikipedia;

"More than 99 percent of all species, amounting to over five billion species,[1] that ever lived on Earth are estimated to be extinct.[2][3][4] Estimates on the number of Earth's current species range from 10 million to 14 million,[5] of which about 1.2 million have been documented and over 86 percent have not yet been described.
Wikipedia Article on Extinction

It is difficult to get an accurate estimate for the number of species on Earth.

"We are indeed experiencing the greatest wave of extinctions since the disappearance of the dinosaurs. Extinction rates are rising by a factor of up to 1,000 above natural rates. Every hour, three species disappear. Every day, up to 150 species are lost. Every year, between 18,000 and 55,000 species become extinct."
Ahmed Djoghlaf. Executive Secretary, United Nations Environment Programme

Let us run some simple calculations regarding the destruction of the biosphere. If there are 10 million species on Earth and 55,000 become extinct every year then it will take 181.81... years for every living thing to die.

If there are 14 million species on Earth and 18,000 go extinct every year then it will take 777.77... years for every species to go extinct.

If 86 percent of species have not been discovered and the current estimate of discovered species is 14 million, then there are 100 million total species. We can't detect extinction for species that we don't know exist, but if we assume that we can detect all extinctions, then we divide 100 million by 18,000 per year. Then the maximum lifespan of the Earth is 5,555.6 years. Meaning, in 5,500 years every living thing on Earth will be extinct because of us.

That's the most conservative calculation. It assumes we have detected every species extinction when we cannot even detect every species.

So the biosphere has between 182 and 5,500 years of life in it before everything in the world is dead; every plant, every tree, every bird, every mammal, every turtle, every whale, every elephant, etc.

No matter how we run the numbers we come to the conclusion that the biosphere, in its current state, has a limited lifespan. Of course I have already stated that the world's population will go down in the long-term, (in terms hundreds of years). Quote;
"when we look at declining birth rates what we are seeing is the beginning of the end of the bubble in White countries. That collapse in population is going to spread outward though the whole world."
The calculations above assume that the high rate of extinction remains high, and that ultimately assumes the human population remains large. Extinction rates may drop precipitously once population is in free fall. But we cannot count on this, and population decline is just a hypothesis. We need genomics so that we can invent living organisms faster than we destroy them. We need it so we can develop ways of geoengineering our planet. We need it so we can design plastic eating bacteria to consume the great garbage gyres of the world. We need it to solve ocean acidification, global warming, pollution, soil toxins, contaminants in our water supply, etc. We will eventually need it for terraforming Mars.

Last but not least; the problems of the future are going to be ever more complicated. The number of people in the population like Elon Musk is a function of the number of geniuses in society. The more geniuses the more "Elon Musk-type individuals." It may be hard to envision, but it is possible to have thousands of men like that walking the face of the Earth. If the general IQ is raised high enough through genetic engineering it vastly increases the number of super-geniuses on the planet. Man is is too stupid to live, and every social problem in the world can be solved by having enough humans with 3+ standard deviations of IQ over the present population. At IQ 150 virtually all social and economic problems vanish, either because a population of geniuses does not have them to begin with, or because they have the minds to solve them. We could live in a world with a thousand Elon Musks, and democracy functions better with high IQ voters anyway.

Not that I am endorsing democracy.

If genetic determinism is true then there is no genius of Western human intellect that cannot be packaged as a set of gene therapies for Asian consumption. Whoever develops this technology first will become the economic maters of those too squeamish and leftist to do so. It is an illusion to think that we even have a choice in the matter. Western societies could get caught with their pants down fighting a race war while the Chinese make steady progress towards world hegemony. Our society, our biosphere, and even our survival as a species ultimately depends on genomics advances. Racial neurosis is a retarded slapfight that will be entirely obviated by a future where changing your skin color is as easy as changing your pants, where race becomes a corporate brand identity.


  1. I largely agree, but I can understand the alt-right's skepticism. They want a solution to their problems that doesn't involve a technology that is yet to be fully demonstrated. This can easily be construed as myopia or monomania on the racial question, but simpler minds cling to functional heuristics. Genetic determinism supports both positions. The "correct," position largely depends on who has a better forecast on that particular technology over the next several decades. And in the mean time, no matter who is correct on that score, the observable genetic determinism of various population groups is going to play out in a more or less predictable manner. The intellectually deprived are going to agitate for communism or fascism. The more astute will try to maintain liberalism or push for a better set of technocrats.

  2. The whole notion of some major Negro population rise that will lead to them overwhelming the West is based on a poor understanding of how longterm population growth depends on production.

    Negro Africa is not producing the food needed to sustain the ridiculous projections claimed by the UN and peddled by Steve Sailer. Once it reaches a point of no-return, the continent will break out in war, famine, and disease to thin the herd. You can't sustain such huge population growth with imports.

    Mass migration won't be an option. Once the cat ladies die-off and their cuck enablers either man-up or cuck themselves totally through Leftism or Islam, whichever parties fight their way into international office are going to crack down on migrants. I can even see planes to America carrying Jabongos getting shot down.

    1. "I can even see planes to America carrying Jabongos getting shot down."

      That would be a very alt-right turn of events.

  3. ''Some standardization is good; the elimination of crime, the improvement of IQ, etc., will have beneficial effects.''

    Eradication of all sub-lethal diseases that has a genetic component through CRISPR would also be nice.