[Leires]

iT's a doCuMentArY!

It's a film that was intended as a joke, and uses Eugenics as its premise. Yes, the Internet has made idiots louder, but it has also helped intelligent people become smarter. The next 4 years will be like the last 8, minus the pandemic.

[ziddoap]

>The next 4 years will be like the last 8, minus the pandemic.

Yes, calls to takeover ally countries and releasing a presidential cryptocurrency really remind me of the last 8 years.

[hedora]

Speaking of inscrutable nonsense that antagonizes ally countries: I’m still pissed off about the Canadian lumber tariffs.

[3vidence]

My brain struggles to understand how people can see how Trump is operating and think it is "normal".

What has happened to Americans??

[hedora]

Don’t worry, Trump will get us another pandemic.

We still haven’t restored the part of the US federal government that stopped SARSv1 (they operated out of China and other countries with the cooperation of local authorities). Trump disbanded them before SARSv2 (aka COVID-19), so they weren’t around to respond to it.

Also, we’re still funding the biological weapons research programs that almost certainly created COVID (according to documents from multiple departments in the Biden administration).

On top of all that, RFK’s trying to switch everyone to raw milk in the middle of a bird/cow flu pandemic. That creates a new disease transmission vector that’ll probably help it cross to humans.

[ornornor]

There is no eugenics in that movie?

[deltaburnt]

I like the movie a lot, but the beginning is a little problematic from a modern viewing iirc. It discusses how the poor and uneducated produce more kids than the higher classes, thus a dumb population after many generations.

Factually true about the correlation between higher standard of living and having fewer kids. However, that exact discussion has been used as a dog whistle against other "undesirable" groups in the past. The movie's beginning implies it would be better if we decide who gets to have kids.

Overall a great movie, but I think that part has aged poorly.

[s1artibartfast]

I don't think you have to draw that specific implication.

Given that the phenomenon is essentially real, what do you think that means?

Is reality problematic?

[llamaimperative]

> Is reality problematic?

Look around! I'd say so! :)

[drawkward]

>uses Eugenics as its premise

Uh, false?

[lambaro]

there's an implied (if tongue-in-cheek) pro-eugenics message, since the premise is rooted in dysgenics being a real problem

[drawkward]

How you go from "smart people should reproduce more" to "cull the population of the unfavorable" is on you, but thats certainly not the conclusion I would draw.

[jpadkins]

eugenics != "cull the population of the unfavorable"

eugenics includes positions like "unfavorable should reproduce less than the favorable"