Where Quantity Exceeds Quality.
I was fascinated with a link between the behaviour and character of this "profession" yesterday. Behaviour enjoyed and smirked over by a rapidly expanding champagne socialist, Twigg. Of course he might be in a relationship with a bicycle pump which would explain the bloated appearance and the method of hie hot air expulsion.
I digress. When I collected the Sunday newspaper early this morning I read of the prolific fecundity of a sperm donor. This guy, apparently with the aid of his wife, (yes I wondered about that) and selected academic, reputedly intelligent friends, produced some 600 kids. Now this was seen as little more than the philosophy promoted by Hitler and his Aryan dream. An approach to procreation regarded as sinful and terrible.
Yet when we witness the socialist tenet in action, that all of us are equal at birth, we have to quietly consider why we accept the bloodstock manipulation of animals, particularly horses and dogs, whilst blithely observing how the decline of standards and breeding within ourselves, is driving us to destruction!
Strangely, despite our publicly expressed horror at selective procreation, the natural elements still exert remarkable pressures. Successful politicians, entrepreneurs, professionals and even gangster hierarchies pass to their offspring advantages which in many cases bring about socio-economic advancements. Not least the introduction to a wider circle of similarly created gene pools.
Two glaring examples spring to mind. The Kinnocks have long since abandoned their social angst and bitter, angry, chip on the shoulder credentials. One of their sons is now the Danish Premier's husband. A new dynasty expanding from a Welsh minuscule gene pool to a global, or at least European one.
Then there is The Middleton Clan. Here is a couple who have been blessed with throw back genetic excellence that has elevated them, in my opinion, deservedly, to the pinnacle of British society. I would suggest their addition to the rather inbred genetic weaknesses, manifesting themselves with my generations' Royal counterparts, is a very good thing.
In essence, it therefore appears that no matter how excellent the nurturing of a creature from birth, the genetic make up is still paramount. Old Etonians are as likely to be buffoons as are the highest aristocratic families born of the World. In the same way, long forgotten couplings seem capable of producing throw back excellence in the humblest of families. Poverty certainly does not mean automatically reduced genetic structure.
So where does this leave the debate? We consider genetic engineering perfectly reasonable in all but the human condition. However science has long believed itself to be capable of breeding out disease, malformity and disadvantage. The problem arises, of course, in determining how many creatures of excellence do we need? Do we have to create Eloys, labourers and menial job applicants and produce manufactured levels of socio-economic classes? These considerations become demonstrative of the horror of such thinking.
Now, here's a thing to muse upon as I close this post. Isn't this already happening? We have elites who mix with their counterparts. We have manipulation of whole tribes and nations to satisfy lust for power, supremacy and wealth. Competition can only get more desperate as billions and billions of people demand more and more resources.
To control this population explosion we are deemed to require a dominant elite that chooses, Pol Pot like, who shall join their gene pool and who shall not. Naturally any who brook argument are seen as not acceptable to the desired sperm donor aim. As with the case reported today, it may be successful in many ways and produce highly intelligent and seemingly superior beings. The essence of this ideology, however, remains that of all would be rulers, of course. It's about who gets to do the choosing! Few are deserving of that role and are certainly not to be found in Western and EU murky gene pools of today.