A Night Unremembered
13 years ago
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Eugenics
... is a set of beliefs and practices that aims at improving the genetic quality of the human population.[4] It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human genetic traits through the promotion of higher rates of sexual reproduction for people with desired traits (positive eugenics), or reduced rates of sexual reproduction and sterilization of people with less-desired or undesired traits (negative eugenics), or both.[6] Alternatively, gene selection rather than "people selection" has recently been made possible through advances in gene editing. The exact definition of eugenics has been a matter of debate since the term was coined. The definition of it as a "social philosophy"—that is, a philosophy with implications for social order—is not universally accepted, and was taken from Frederick Osborn's 1937 journal article "Development of a Eugenic Philosophy". [taken from Wikipedia, that font of all knowledge]
You know who practices this? Farmers and animal breeders; racehorses, dogs, and just about everyone. Secretly, we all believe in the concept. How else do we explain the successful careers of the children of actors, politicians, and athletes?
Sure, name recognition is a major factor... but it's not that much of a factor to explain those successes. And the failures must mean something. Often we blame the failures on some flaw in the genetic makeup (the mother, the extended family) that slipped in. Maybe we wonder if the parent (the mother) messed around. It is also the basis for aristocracies... enough said?
On another front, I am appalled at government. Especially in its failures. Take, for example, the recent problems with the TSA and the lengthy lines at airports. Consider the DMV.
Only government bureaucracies fail to deliver and then demand more money and more power. To fix those problems... they say.
Before you say "privatization is the answer," I know it also happens in large corporations. I've seen it myself.
I don't have answers, just questions.
[10]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Yes, it happens in the private sector as progressives are oh so quick to point out. But, there are direct consequences to poor service, decisions, etc. in the private sector. Poorly managed companies eventually face the wrath of their ill-conceived choices. Not all, of course, but as a rule this is what happens. Good companies are generally proactive and tend to be aware of what's needed to keep the entity viable. It's just not the case in the public sector. There's little incentive to improve on things like customer service or dismiss/fire a poorly performing employee thanks to sometimes restrictive labor laws. My personal favorite go to example is public health in Canada. A lot of energy is expunged on what to do to decrease wait times, chronic lack of equipment, access etc. The usual 'solution' is to throw more money at it; even though it's awash in cash. Rarely to the move from the cost-centric aspect into the patient-centric realm. As in, how do we make the hospital experience as best as it could be for (stressed) patients? Instead, we get notes up on the counter demanding we be respectful because bad behavior will not be tolerated. Those sorts of notes are symbolic of a poorly run operation; or else they wouldn't need it. If people are annoyed - LISTEN TO THEM.
I agree, T.C, my take is that ineptitude and inefficiency are rewarded only in bureaucracies.
Post a Comment