Table of contents
Page for this series
Hufschmid's main page

Concepts of a New Culture

13) Utopia is Dystopia

19 April 2024

 
The “Mouse Utopia” experiment

The experiment created a “mouse heaven

In the 1960's, a biologist, John Calhoun, created a large cage for mice that would provide them with plenty of living space, and which was isolated from the outside world so that they didn't have to suffer from predators or other mice.

Only healthy mice were allowed into the cage, so none of the mice were sickly, retarded, or mentally ill. He provided them with plenty of food and water so that they didn't need to work for, or compete for, food or water.

The cage was kept in a room that provided them with a pleasant climate so that they didn't have to suffer from bad weather. The mice had freedom to do whatever they pleased.

They could spend their time enjoying themselves, as if they were in a mouse heaven, like those in the drawing to the right.

The experiment could be summarized as initially providing the mice with a wonderful life, but since they reproduced in large quantities, and since the cage had a limited size, they eventually reached a population density that was larger than what they had evolved for.

Most creatures have an emotion that causes them to want a certain amount of territory for themselves, and when other animals are in their territory, that emotion is stimulated, which creates an unpleasant emotional feeling. That causes the creature to become upset or irritated with the intruder, and that causes him to either run away to a less crowded area, or try to chase away the intruder.

However, the mice could not move to a less crowded area because the cage had a fixed size, and they could not chase the intruders away because there was no place for them to go to. Therefore, their territorial emotion was constantly being stimulated.

None of our unpleasant emotions are supposed to be stimulated constantly. That territorial emotion should have been stimulated only momentarily once in a while. When an unpleasant emotion is stimulated, it creates what we could describe as stress, irritation, frustration, or misery.

An animal reacts to an unpleasant emotional feeling by doing something to stop it, but the mice could not do anything to stop that unpleasant emotion. Therefore, they were suffering constantly from the overcrowding, which affected their attitudes and behavior. They were in a situation that was similar to the people who have Prader-Willi syndrome, except that instead of being constantly irritated by hunger, they were constantly irritated by the overcrowding.

The result was that their behavior became increasingly abnormal. Eventually the male and female mice had trouble forming relationships, which caused their population to decrease. That should have solved the problem of overcrowding, but the baby mice were being raised among adults who had abnormal behavior. The adults were not proper role models so the baby mice did not learn "proper mouse culture". Instead, they picked up "neurotic mouse culture". They became adults who had trouble forming relationships and raising babies. Their population continued to decrease until all of them had died.

The Mouse Utopia was not a prediction of our future

Some people believe that the experiment shows what might happen to the human race if we do not control our population. For example, the Smithsonian magazine published this article with the title:
How 1960s Mouse Utopias Led to
Grim Predictions for Future of Humanity


sciencehistory.org posted this article with the subtitle:
Biologist John Calhoun’s rodent experiments
gripped a society consumed by fears of overpopulation.

The people who believe that the experiment is a possible prediction of our future are examples of people who have such a distorted view of humans and animals that they give us unrealistic analyses of news events, historical events, human behavior, and culture. They give us a distorted view of the experiment because they don't have the emotional ability to look critically at humans.

The Mouse Utopia explains human history

The "Mouse Utopia" experiment was not showing us what our future might become. Rather, a document about the experiment would be more accurate if the title was:
The 1960 Mouse Utopia Experiment
Provides an Understanding of Human History

We are at the stage at which the mice were experiencing constant and unpleasant emotional stimulation from overcrowding, and which had resulted in them developing abnormal behavior. However, human behavior is more complicated, and we are suffering from more than overcrowding, and this results in such a wide variety of abnormal behavior that it is difficult to notice the similarities between our behavior and that of the mice.

We are suffering from problems that the mice did not have, and could not suffer from, such as crime networks, human trafficking, noise, traffic congestion, pollution, telemarketers, and a mixture of races and cultures that ignore, fear, or hate one another.

Furthermore, the mice were never irritated by accusations of feminism, sexism, anti-Semitism, racism, climate change denial, homophobia, or Holocaust denial.

The mice were also one race, rather than a mixture of different races. Therefore, there were no white mice who had to listen to brown mice whine about white privilege, and there were no angry, Pakistani mice to give a speech at a university in which they boasted about being a hero:
I have fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white mouse that gets in my way, burying its body and wiping my bloody hands as I walk away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step, like I did the world a favor.

Our abnormal environment is stimulating various unpleasant emotions more often than we were designed for, which causes us to be irritated more often than we were designed for. We are being irritated excessively, just like the mice. The excessive irritation interferes with our thoughts, decisions, goals, social activities, and treatment of other people. It is causing us to behave abnormally, just like it did for the minds.

The three main reactions of the mice was to:
1) Withdrawing from society and trying to ignore the overcrowding.
2) Getting into an excessive number of fights.
3) Doing some pleasurable activity to an excess.

It is impossible for us to know how our prehistoric ancestors behaved, so we cannot compare our behavior to theirs to determine what has changed. However, there are a lot of reasons to believe that people today are behaving in an abnormal manner, just like those mice. For example:


1) The volume of our voice.

I have heard people from or in foreign nations complain that Americans speak at an excessively loud volume level, and I have even been told a few times to lower my volume level. Many of the people in Europe, Japan, and Asia speak at a noticeably lower volume level, and they are also less likely to have conversation in public, such as on trains.

Why do so many Americans speak at a high volume level? Many foreigners assume it is because we are rude, impolite, or inconsiderate, but I think it is because many Americans are living in less crowded conditions.

The human mouth and vocal cords were designed to speak at a certain volume level, and I think many Americans are speaking at that "normal" level because we are living in less crowded conditions. The people in Japan, Hong Kong, and Europe are living in such extremely overcrowded conditions that if they were to speak at a normal volume level, they would annoy one another.

Their extreme population density has resulted in them reducing the volume of their voice in order to reduce the irritation of one another. They also avoid having conversations in public in order to avoid irritating one another.

They are not quiet because they are more polite than the Americans. Rather, it is because they are behaving like a dog that has been beaten with a stick, and is hiding in a corner. Or, we could describe them as behaving like those mice who were hiding in the corners.


2)
Relationships are deteriorating.

The overcrowding caused the mice to want to get away from the other mice, which interfered with the desire and/or ability of the male and females to form relationships.

Although feminists claim that men have been abusing women all throughout history, it is more sensible to believe that they were forming relationships as easily as all of the other animals, and that their relationships were more pleasant than they are today. The reason is because most of the reasons that married couples fight with each other today did not exist in prehistoric times.

Today men and women have so much trouble forming relationships that very few of the relationships become a marriage, and many of the marriages end up in divorce. Some of the couples who remain together are actually miserable but are more afraid of a divorce than of remaining in a miserable marriage. The couples who have truly pleasant marriages seem to be an increasingly small percentage of the population.

I also suspect that some of the people today who claim to be homosexual are actually frustrated heterosexuals who have gotten involved with a homosexual relationship because they are so lonely and frustrated.

There are also some people who form close relationships with dogs, inflatable women, children, and sex robots. We should consider that they are doing that because they are having trouble finding a compatible spouse or friend.

Although there are a lot of different ways to explain the problems that people today are having with relationships, such as the genetic degradation of the human race, but we should consider the possibility that our behavior is becoming abnormal for the same reason that the behavior of the mice became abnormal.. Specifically, that our social environment has become so unnatural that our unpleasant emotions are being stimulated excessively, which is causing us to be irritated much more often then we should be, and for longer periods of time, which in turn is causing us to develop abnormal attitudes and behavior.

Furthermore, relationships between men and women are deteriorating because we are suffering from problems that neither the mice nor our prehistoric ancestors had to deal with:


Adults are preventing children from learning about sexual issues, so the boys are becoming men who are ignorant about, and have obnoxious obsessions with, sex and women's sexual organs. This is causing a lot of women to be irritated, and causing a lot of men to be frustrated.


We allow businesses to contaminate our culture with advertisements that stimulate men sexually. We also allow businesses to stimulate people excessively with wedding pornography, romance pornography, and baby pornography. All of the pornography is stimulating boys and girls to an excess, and giving them unrealistic expectations of life. For example, the wedding pornography is causing girls to develop obnoxious obsessions with weddings.

Businesses are also stimulating people excessively with pornography about traveling to exotic locations; becoming wealthy enough to purchase yachts, mansions, and diamonds; and becoming famous and winning lots of trophies and awards.

The extreme pornography is stimulating our emotions excessively. Even though many of those emotions are pleasant, we were not intended to be stimulated to such an extreme. It is resulting in children picking up unrealistic and idiotic expectations of marriage, sex, travel, material items, fame, babies, jewelry, tattoos, pets, and lots of other issues that businesses can profit from.


We allow media companies to produce television programs and movies that give children a distorted view of relationships and sexual behavior, such as when a television program shows two male doctors at a hospital who cannot resist having sex with one another in a closet at the hospital. Although there are certainly people who behave in that manner, the television programs are giving children a distorted view of what is "normal" human behavior.

Many of the television programs and movies also deceive children into believing that women are almost as sexually aggressive and promiscuous as men.


We allow feminists to promote the accusation that men are sexist creatures who abuse women, and the theory that we are unisex creatures. The unisex theory encourages women to marry a man who is her "equal", rather than a man who can provide her with guidance and take care of her and her children. However, the only men who are equal to women are feminine men, or homosexuals.


We have a natural desire to compete with one another for status, but the difference between the wealthy and poor people is so extreme today that our emotions are stimulated excessively. This causes a lot of people, especially men, to become obsessed with comparing their wealth to that of other people, and struggling to get more wealth.

It also causes a lot of people to whine about their low income, the high prices, or the high taxes, even if they have an above-average income. It also results in people showing off their wealth, which adds to the stimulation of the poor people, and can result in envy, anger, or low self-esteem.

Some people become so obsessed with getting more wealth that they commit crimes to get more of it, and that causes them even more mental anguish because they will then forever worry about being exposed and arrested.

The mice suffered only from overcrowding, so we ought to wonder what would have happened if they had also been suffering from some of the problems that modern humans suffer from. For example, imagine if the male mice were suffering from excessive sexual stimulation; the female mice were whining about sexism and suffering from excessive stimulation of baby pornography; and all of the mice were also suffering from telemarketers, extreme differences between wealthy and poor mice, noise, pollution, and traffic congestion. How would all of those problems have affected their behavior?

When the overcrowding of the mice became so severe that the adults began behaving in an abnormal manners, their children were also stimulated excessively, and their children were raised by adults with abnormal behavior. This resulted in the children becoming adults with abnormal behavior. This problem seems to be occurring with human children today.

For example, a lot of people today are so afraid of getting married that they either delay it by many years, or they live together without getting married. Many couples also delay having children. This could be interpreted as evidence that they are behaving like the young mice who had trouble forming relationships.

Some teenagers are so confused about what to do with their life that they spend a few years traveling around the world, or trying different activities. We have expressions to describe this: find oneself and find yourself.

We will never know if any of the prehistoric teenagers wasted some of their life in an attempt to "find themselves", but it is unlikely. The confusion of the modern teenagers is more likely to be due to the same reason that the young mice became adults who could not function properly in society.

Specifically, modern children are being raised in an unnatural environment in which they are being stimulated excessively, and they are being raised by adults who have abnormal attitudes and behavior.


3)
Excessive masturbation.

Some of the mice reacted to the overcrowding by spending excessive amounts of time grooming themselves, and I think it was to bring some pleasure into their miserable life. This behavior can be seen with people, also. When we are unhappy, we tend to do something that brings us pleasure.

We should consider the possibility that some people are grooming themselves excessively, just like some of the mice. For example, there are some people spending a lot of their time and resources on their hair, tattoos, cosmetic surgeries, body piercings, and fingernail decorations. Do those people truly enjoy those extreme grooming activities? Or are they doing it because they are miserable?

There are also people who react to unhappiness by eating, and others react by shopping, having sex, taking drugs, watching television, trying to become the center of attention, playing with a pet dog or child, or struggling to win trophies.


4)
Withdrawing from society.

Some of the mice reacted to the overcrowding by trying to ignore the problem by hiding in a corner. Many people are doing something similar, but instead of hiding in corners, people ignore or ridicule the problems, and believe whatever they find more pleasant.

This can be seen when we provide them with evidence that we were lied to about the 9/11 attack and the Holocaust, and that many of the influential people are pedophiles. They refuse to think about the evidence. They push it away, ridicule it, or ignore it, which is essentially the same as running away from it and hiding in a corner.

Some people go even further and create a pleasant fantasy world for themselves. One of the most popular are the religious fantasies in which they imagine some type of supreme being is floating around in the clouds. They imagine themselves talking to that supreme being, and that he will protect them from danger. Other people withdraw into Harry Potter, Star War, or Avatar fantasy.

Our prehistoric, nomadic ancestors were living in an environment that they had evolved for, so their behavior would have been "normal". However, we cannot observe them, so we cannot see how they treated one another, or how they raised their children. We cannot listen to their voices, either, so we don't know the volume level that they spoke at.

When our ancestors settled into cities, they inadvertently put themselves into the mouse utopia experiment. The very first cities provided everybody with plenty of land and food, so the city would have resembled the mouse experiment at its beginning. The first few generations of people in those cities would have enjoyed living in them.

Today, however, most of our cities are so overcrowded that the people are living in the phase of the experiment at which the mice were developing abnormal behavior.

We are not fighting with each other as often as the mice were fighting with each other, but that is only because we are routinely suppressing our anger of government officials, business executives, our neighbors, and telemarketers. If humans had as little self-control as mice, we would be regularly getting into fights with one another, and causing a lot of deaths.

Even though we exert a lot of self-control over our anger, all of us occasionally lose our temper over issues that did not exist in prehistoric tribes. For example, all of us occasionally becomes irritated by other people when we are driving an automobile, and so many people have lost their temper that we have an expression for it: road rage.

Our modern societies are causing all of us to frequently be irritated by something. We are suffering from irritation much more often, and for longer periods of time, than we were designed for. This results in us constantly struggling to control our temper, pouting, and anger.

We have no idea how often prehistoric people became irritated with one another or with situations in their life, but it is impossible that they were irritated as often as we are because most of the irritations that we suffer from did not exist in prehistoric times.

We are being irritated more often, and for longer periods of time, then any of our ancestors, and we cannot ignore this. Excessive stimulation of unpleasant emotional feelings will have a detrimental effect on the attitudes and behavior of all animals because the unpleasant emotions evolved in animals in order to make them do something to eliminate the source of the irritation.

However, we cannot eliminate the sources of the modern irritations. This results in us doing something idiotic instead, such as distracting ourselves with something pleasurable, by taking drugs, by withdrawing into fantasies, or by becoming whiny, irritable, angry, envious, or sad.

Since human behavior is more complicated than mouse behavior, many of us behave in a manner that is significantly different from the mice, which makes it seem as if we are not similar to the mice. However, there are a lot of things that people are doing today that suggests that they are miserable, and they are struggling to either stop the misery, or counteract it with some pleasurable activity. Three examples of modern behavior that we should consider to be the result of our suffering:


1)
The craving to travel.

Our nomadic ancestors never had vacations. They worked every day of their lives. It is unlikely that any of them fantasized about having a vacation so that they could travel to an "exotic" area of the world.

As discussed in the Jobs document, animals evolved to enjoy working. Animals have no desire for vacations, sick days, holidays, or weekends. Animals are inherently lazy, so when they have nothing to do, they do nothing, but when they are stimulated, they enjoy working.

Humans have more curiosity than animals, and that can cause us to want a vacation simply to allow us to visit a different city or area of the world, but we should consider that one of the reasons that we want vacations and to travel outside of our city because we are in a similar miserable situation as the mice. Two reasons that our social environment is abnormal and causing us to to want to travel during a vacation are:


a) Our cities are miserable.

When an animal is unhappy with its living conditions, such as its lack of food, or the large number of predators, it will consider moving to another area. Humans inherited that characteristic. We refer to that attitude as: The grass is greener on the other side of the fence.

When we are unhappy with our city or our lives, we are likely to assume that there is another city that is more enjoyable, and has better people.

If we enjoyed the city and the people that we were living with, our desire to travel would decrease. We would continue to want to visit other cities and areas, but only to experience something different, not to escape from our misery.

Unfortunately, we cannot design a city and culture that everybody is happy with because we have subtle differences in our intellectual and emotional characteristics. Therefore, in order to create a city that the people enjoy, we must restrict the immigrants to people who enjoy whatever culture we decided to create for the city, and we must also restrict reproduction to reduce the genetic diversity of each generation so that the people remain compatible.


b)
Children are picking up false concepts about vacations.

Modern children are picking up idiotic attitudes towards vacations and traveling. One reason is the same as it was for the mice; specifically, the adults are behaving in an abnormal manner. For example, the adults who try to become the center of attention by boasting about their travels are inadvertently fooling children into believing that the people who travel are having a better life than those who do not.

However, we have an additional problem that the mice did not have. Specifically, organizations that profit from promoting traveling. Those organizations are deceiving us into believing that there are certain areas of the world that are more "exotic" and "exciting" than wherever we are living right now, and that the only way we can fully enjoy life is to travel to those areas.

When we have a vacation, it should be for a "sensible" reason, not because we have been deceived by people who want to be the center of attention, or by businesses that want to exploit us for profit.

We dislike our cities and social environment, and that is causing us to remain inside our homes, or move to the suburbs, or go on vacationswant, but those are idiotic reactions. A more sensible reaction is to study human behavior and experiment with our cities and social environment so that we can provide ourselves with a city that we enjoy.


2)
The craving for material wealth.

People today are phenomenally wealthy compared to our ancestors, but most people are constantly whining that they don't have enough money, that prices are too high, their income is too low, and taxes are too high. Some people are going beyond whining about their shortage of wealth; they are looking for opportunities to commit crimes; trying to find a wealthy spouse; or they are trying to become wealthy from lotteries or gambling.

There are lots of ways to explain why so few people are enjoying their wealth, such as the genetic degradation of the human mind during the past few thousand years, and the boasting about material items by the wealthy people.

However, we should consider that one of the reasons people are whining about not having enough wealth is because our modern societies allow people to have extreme differences in wealth. There are some people who have gigantic mansions and private jets, and other people who have tiny apartments.

These extreme differences are unnatural for us. We evolved to live among friends who don't have much of a difference in material wealth. Our modern environment is unnatural, and it is stimulating emotions of envy, competition, anger, and sadness. It makes us feel inferior, abused, and like slaves or peasants.

The constant stimulation of unpleasant emotions has caused many people to come to the false conclusion that they are miserable because they don't have enough material wealth. In reality, they are suffering because we are living in an abnormal social environment, just like those mice.

A person who is suffering from a lack of wealth cannot improve his life simply by getting more wealth. The reason is because he is not suffering from a lack of wealth. He is suffering because our culture is unnatural. The only way to reduce the misery of "poverty" is to provide ourselves with a more natural social environment.


3)
The craving for retirement.

Every culture refuses to believe that humans are animals that have been designed to live only long enough to reproduce, and this has resulted in modern cultures promoting the false concept that when we become old enough to retire, we will be in our golden years of life. In reality, if we live beyond age 50 or so, we are entering the dying phase of our lives. It would be more sensible to describe our golden years as being the first 45 years, and after that we slowly disintegrate.

One reason people fantasize about retirement is because they do not enjoy their jobs, their city, or their social environment, and they are fantasizing that by retiring they will be able to avoid the unpleasant aspects of modern life and do whatever brings them pleasure.

All of the social animals evolved to enjoy their group and the work they do. For example, prairie dogs do not fantasize about retiring from their "job" of digging tunnels and searching for food so that they can do what they want to do. They want to dig tunnels and search for food. They love working every day at that job, and they love living in their city, and they love living among other prairie dogs.

However, if John Calhoun were to put some prairie dogs in a confined area, provide them with excessive amounts of food, and allow their population to become excessive, the prairie dogs would eventually dislike their city and the other prairie dogs.

If we could go back in time to observe our prehistoric ancestors, we would find that they enjoyed looking for food, water, and shelter. We would not find any of them fantasizing about retiring or having vacations. We would not find any of them waking up in the morning and whining:
"I have to spend another day looking for food. I'm so sick of this. Every day is the same. Look for food and water. Then look for a place to sleep. Then repeat that the next day, and the day after that, and so on, forever! I have a dead-end job. I'm stuck in a rut. I want to retire and be pampered by servants."

However, when our ancestors settled into cities, they began doing jobs that were unnatural for humans. For example, farming is not a natural job for humans. Furthermore, the cities became increasingly miserable as a result of immigration and uncontrolled reproduction. The cities became increasingly overcrowded, ugly, and polluted, and the people began living among criminals, retards, beggars, and strangers.

During the past few centuries, our jobs have become even more unnatural, and our cities have become extremely overcrowded, noisy, and polluted. Many cities are also a mixture of cultures and races, many of whom fear or hate one another.

Most jobs today require us to go to school for years, but school is unnatural. To make schools even more annoying, many of the courses are worthless, which results in graduates having trouble finding a job. Our schools are also teaching a lot of false information about historical events, which can irritate the people who discover that they have been lied to.

To make our jobs even worse, most people today are employees who, as mentioned in the previous section, spend their lives to make a few people absurdly wealthy.It is unnatural and unpleasant for us to be somebody's slave or servant.

Many people assume that they dislike their job because "work" is bad, and that they will enjoy life when they retire, but the reason they dislike their job is because our jobs, economic system, and other culture is inappropriate for humans. If we could create better culture, we would love going to work, and we would consider retirement to be boring and miserable.

We will not improve our lives by retiring. We need to alter our culture to eliminate the sources of misery that we are suffering from.

The people who design zoos try to make them as natural as possible for the animals, but no culture promotes the concept that there is such a thing as a natural environment for humans.

Most people believe that humans are either a creation of supreme being, or that our mind molds itself to our environment, and neither of those philosophies promote the concept that certain cities, jobs, or cultural activities are natural to us.

We cannot improve our lives simply by gathering more material items, becoming more famous, or by having more sex. We need to restrict leadership positions to people who understand that humans are a species of ape, and that we have genetic characteristics that cause us to prefer a certain type of environment, and suffer in other environments.

Our leaders also must understand that every species evolved to deal with certain types of irritations, and that they will suffer when their environment stimulates their unpleasant feelings beyond the extent that they were designed for, and that will cause their behavior to become abnormal.

All of the existing cities are putting us into an unnatural environment. In addition to being overcrowded, noisy, filthy, and ugly, they don't give us much access to nature. Humans evolved to be surrounded by birds, butterflies, trees, flowers, grass, and creeks, not asphalt parking lots, concrete sidewalks, or telephone poles.

We are also suffering because we were designed to live among people we enjoy and trust, but all of us are living among strangers, criminals, homeless people, lunatics, crime gangs, drug addicts, and different races and cultures that hate one another and speak different languages.

We must experiment with our culture to make it more appropriate for what humans truly are. For two examples of what this constitution will do to reduce the unpleasant stimulation:

1) Provide everybody with equal access to material wealth. That will prevent us from being stimulated into competing for material wealth, and prevent us from becoming angry, envious, or sad that some people have more wealth than we do. It also eliminates the problem of wealthy people who degrade our social environment with attitudes of superiority, and by flaunting their wealth.


2)
Prohibit different classes of people. Everybody is of equal status, and nobody is in the role of a servant, and nobody is pampered or has any special privileges. This prevents employees from feeling as if they are slaves or servants who are pampering Kings and Queens. They will feel as if they are members of a team who are helping each other.

Our ancestors inadvertently put themselves into a utopia experiment

The population of our prehistoric, nomadic ancestors was kept under control by nature. However, when they settled into cities, they inadvertently put themselves into a variation of the mouse utopia experiment. The reason is because they began developing technology to provide themselves with large amounts of food. Instead of being provided with food by John Calhoun, they developed farms, ranches, irrigation systems, and other technology to provide themselves with lots of food.

By increasing their production of food, they allowed more of their children to survive, which caused their population to increase. As the population rose, the cities initially expanded onto more land, but since land is limited, the cities eventually had to increase the density of people in the city. This resulted in the people living with population densities that was beyond what humans had evolved for, which created the emotionally unpleasant environment that we refer to as "overcrowding".

To make their social environment even worse, some of the hungry people began to survive by begging for food, and others formed churches and charities that begged for donations. This allowed people to survive through handouts. Even worse, some people began to survive through crime.

The beggars and criminals were genetically inferior to the people that could take care of themselves in an honest manner. The result was that a lot of the inferior people were surviving and reproducing, thereby increasing the number of inferior people in every generation.

The past few thousand years of human history have been a variation of the mouse utopia experiment in which we have been using technology to prevent hunger, infant mortality, predators, and disease. However, instead of providing us with a heaven-like environment, it has resulted in cities that are overcrowded, filthy, ugly, and noisy. And it has allowed the human race to degrade genetically.



Schools should have a friendly environment, not the environment of a prison.
We have created cities that are emotionally unnatural for us, and this is resulting in unpleasant emotions being stimulated on a routine basis. That in turn results in us developing abnormal attitudes and behavior.

For example, children evolved for an environment in which they can trust the people they live with, so it is unnatural for us to teach children to be afraid of strangers, and to send them to school where armed policemen are watching over them.

We evolved to enjoy the people we live with, so it is unnatural for us to install security devices in our home, or put a fence around our home, in order to protect ourselves from our neighbors. We don't want to evict or euthanize the destructive people, but tolerating them is allowing them to torment the rest of us.

If the people had understood these concepts when they settled into cities, and if they had kept their population at an appropriate level by restricting reproduction to the higher-quality people, they would have created cities that were clean, spacious, orderly, quiet, and beautiful. They would have also continuously reduced the number of criminals, beggars, drug addicts, lunatics, and other misfits. They would have created cities in which the people were healthy, honest, and responsible.
More details about this concept are here.
Utopia is Dystopia

Life is however we interpret it

We could describe utopia as a society that is pleasant, similar to the concept of heaven, and we could describe dystopia as a society that causes us to suffer, similar to the concept of hell. Unfortunately, everybody has a different idea about what type of life is pleasant, and what is suffering. For a few examples:


1) To some people, utopia is a society in which nobody is allowed to eat meat or use leather, but other people would describe that as dystopia.

2)
To some people, utopia is when adults are free to have sex with children and animals, but to some other people, utopia is a world that allows them to kill the people who have sex with children and animals.

3)
To some people, utopia is a world in which everybody can have as many guns as they please, but to others utopia is a world in which there is so little crime that nobody needs weapons or security devices.

4)
According to Vicki Polin, her relatives would consider utopia to be a world in which they can practice pedophilia and the ritual murders of babies.

5)
To some people, utopia is a world in which everybody follows the Muslim religion, the Mormon religion, or the Catholic religion, and they are free to kill the infidels, heathens, and witches.

6)
To some people, utopia is a world in which abortions are illegal, and anybody who conducts one can be executed.

All of us are so arrogant that each of us believes that our particular concept of utopia is the most sensible, but there is no right or wrong culture. We simply have to make a decision on what we want our culture to be, and then evict the people who refuse to accept that culture.

Modern culture must restrict our freedom

Our modern societies are so large and complicated that we need a government to organize us. We need a government to create laws for us to follow, and we need some type of legal system to enforce those laws and settle disputes. The problem is that we have different ideas on what the laws should be.

Our modern societies must put a lot of restrictions on our freedom, so everybody must be able to accept restrictions on their freedom, and be willing to voluntarily obey them. However, all living creatures are random jumbles of genetic traits, and this will always result in everybody reacting slightly differently to the restrictions.

At one extreme are the people who are most satisfied with the restrictions. That minority of the population will not feel as if they are oppressed by the restrictions. Instead, they will regard their society as utopia.

At the other extreme is the minority of the population that is the most irritated by the restrictions. They will regard the restrictions on their freedom as a dystopian society that is tormenting them. They might accuse the government of being selfish, cruel, despotic, dictatorial, or tyrannical. They might complain that they are denied the freedom to enjoy life, and that they are oppressed, discriminated against, abused, or insulted.

Modern humans must be able to accept the fact that we need a lot of restrictions on our freedoms. If we dislike a restriction, we should react by discussing the issue and suggesting changes, rather than cause trouble by disregarding the restriction or whining that we need more freedom.

We must push ourselves into evicting the misfits

The people who cannot accept their culture and refused to follow the rules are misfits, and must be evicted from society. We should not feel guilty for evicting them. We do not have any obligation to feel sorry for them, or let them torment us with their whining, fighting, vandalism, or rebellions. We have to accept the unpleasant aspect of life that utopia is dystopia to some people.

This Constitution requires the Courts Ministry to pass judgment on whether a person is detrimental to society, and they are required to evict the detrimental people. It is emotionally unpleasant for us to pass judgment on who among us is a misfit, but ignoring this issue allows the misfits to degrade our social environment and our lives. We are going to suffer regardless of whether we ignore the misfits or evict them, but we will significantly reduce our suffering if we evict them.

One of the problems with evicting the misfits is determining when person is such a misfit that he needs to be evicted. Most people are likely to agree that we should evict the people who are involved with murder, but what about people who ride skateboards down staircases, or who make a mess at a retail store?

The issue is complicated because some of the irritating things that people do are the result of inappropriate culture rather than because they are misfits who should be evicted. An example is that we often disregard foot paths because our culture is inappropriate, rather than because we are "badly behaved".


Example: Foot paths must be designed for apes.

The photo below shows that so many people have walked on the grass in order to save themselves a few seconds of time that they have destroyed some of the grass. (This problem is also mentioned here.)



Although we could describe the people who refuse to follow the foot paths as irresponsible, badly behaved, "misfits", it would be more accurate to say that those foot paths were designed for a fantasy creature rather than what we truly are, which is a species of ape.

Humans are apes, and all animals are inherently lazy, so when we design a footpath, we must to design it for a lazy ape. In order to encourage people to use foot paths properly, we must differentiate between a path that is intended for transportation, and a path that is intended for entertainment.

The photo above shows paths that are for transportation; specifically, for people to get to and from their job. Since we are inherently lazy, transportation paths should be designed to be efficient because if we notice that there is an easier way to accomplish our goal, our "lazy emotion" will be stimulated, and that will push us into taking the easier route.

By comparison, paths that are designed for entertainment, such as a path through a botanical garden, or a bicycle path through a forest, is intended to let us enjoy nature or get exercise, so those paths can be "inefficient", such as paths that meander. We can demand that people that follow those paths rather than take shortcuts that destroy nature.

The people who refuse to follow the entertainment paths destroy the beauty of the area. For example, in the image below, the city put a lot of resources into making a beautiful bicycle path, but one of the bicycle riders is on the dirt, which destroys the vegetation and allows the rain to erode the area.



No society considers a person to be a "criminal" for refusing to follow a bicycle path or footpath, but that is only because every society has very low standards of behavior. Every society also allows people to be obnoxious, sloppy, and irritating in airplanes, at restaurants, and at retail stores.

Businesses and militaries set high standards of behavior for their members, and this Constitution requires the government to set equally high standards of behavior for citizens.

However, we cannot set high standards if our culture is inappropriate. We cannot expect people to follow the rules if the rules conflict with our emotional desires. For example, we cannot expect people to resist walking diagonally through a square patch of grass when they are rushing to get to a school classroom or job. Expecting people to follow an inefficient transportation path is as idiotic as:

Having hungry people work in a restaurant and expecting them to refrain from eating some of the food.

Allowing women to wear sexually attractive clothing while working in close contact with men, and expecting the men to disregard their sexual feelings.

If our rules are not compatible with our emotions, then we will be under pressure from our emotions to disregard the rules. Therefore, in order for us to set high standards of behavior, we must choose a group of people to be considered as "normal", (the City Elders), and set the rules to fit their emotions so that they are willing to follow the rules. Then we can justify evicting the people who don't follow the rules on the grounds that they are emotionally incompatible with our culture.

Creating rules that fit our emotions requires that we restrict leadership positions to people who have a better-than-average understanding that humans are apes, and who will design culture to be appropriate for ape emotions. We cannot allow the anti-genetic people to get into influential positions. (The concept of designing our culture to fit an ape was discussed here in the Laws document.)

How high should our standards be?

Should we evict people who refuse to follow bicycle paths, or who put graffiti on walls or trees? Should we evict people who make a mess in a public bathroom, or should we put them on restrictions, such as restricting them to certain neighborhoods? Should we evict people who are sloppy, obnoxious, and noisy at the restaurants, or should they be restricted to certain neighborhoods?

In a democracy and in a free enterprise system, the standards of behavior are set by the majority of people. As a result, the nations with the most primitive people have the lowest standards.

The same is true with businesses and other organizations. The organizations that hire low-quality people cannot set standards as high as those that have higher quality members.

This constitution advocates standards for the citizens of Kastron that are at least as high as what we find in such businesses as IBM and Toyota. However, in order for Kastron to be successful with high standards of behavior, we must ensure that the people in the city have higher quality minds than the typical person. We need people who are better-than-average.

When we set high standards of behavior, the people who cannot meet the standards are "misfits", and they are likely to accuse us of being cruel, intolerant, arrogant, or irrational, but we must resist feeling guilty. It is not our fault that some people are misfits. Rather, misfits are an unavoidable side effect of setting standards of behavior.

We either suffer from laws or from citizens

By increasing the restrictions on our freedom, we can make an organization more efficient, clean, quiet, safe, and productive, but we will sometimes be irritated by the restrictions. Conversely, as we increase our freedom, the organization becomes more chaotic, and we irritate one another more often.

This concept is easily noticeable with a group of young children. As we increase the freedom of the children, they become less orderly, and they irritate one another more often. Conversely, as we increase the restrictions on their freedom, they become more orderly, but they become more irritated with the restrictions.













Increasing the freedom of the children will reduce their education and cause them to irritate one another.


Restricting their freedom causes them to behave better and become more educated, but they dislike the restrictions.

It is easy for adults to realize that children benefit by having their freedoms restricted, but adults have a difficult time believing that adults also benefit by having their freedoms restricted.

As we become an adult, our arrogance increases, and we develop a craving to be leader, and those emotions make it difficult for us to believe that adults would benefit by being treated like children.

Of course, adults benefit from restrictions on freedom only if they can provide themselves with leaders who are truly more educated, responsible, honest, and intelligent than the government officials who are currently dominating our nations. Unfortunately, adults have almost as much trouble selecting leaders as children do.

Children cannot make wise decisions about who should be their leader because they will follow any adult who makes them feel good, such as the adults who offer them candy, give them praise, and let them do whatever they please. Children dislike the adults who criticize them, make them learn, give them chores, or force them to be responsible.

Adults also dislike the adults who criticize them, or who demand that they learn a useful skill, be responsible, follow the laws, and contribute something of value to society. Adults prefer to follow whoever makes them feel good, such as Hollywood celebrities, religious fanatics, and dishonest government officials.

The theory that we will improve our lives by having more freedom is nonsense. The more freedom that we provide to children or adults, the more selfish their behavior becomes, and the more they irritate one another.

Every freedom has advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, we must analyze every freedom and pass judgment on whether we truly benefit from it.

A reduction of certain freedoms will make our lives and organizations more efficient and orderly, but increasing our freedom allows citizens, businesses, Zionist groups, journalists, think tanks, charities, and other organizations to abuse us. There is no perfect solution to this issue. We either suffer from government regulations, or we suffer from the abuse of other citizens and organizations.

We should complain only about selfish laws

Everything in the universe interferes with the existence of other things. Even though the universe is gigantic, resources are limited. In order for one creature to live, another must die.

This concept applies to humans, but we are resisting it. In order for humans to live, other animals and plants must die. Also, every human has an effect on the life of other humans. Even though some people believe that they are not bothering anybody, their existence has an effect on other people, creatures, and things because they are taking up space, eating food, creating waste products and trash, and influencing the economy by the work they do and the purchases that they make.

We must be concerned about how our lives and behavior are affecting other people. We need limits on our freedom to prevent us from becoming an irritation to other people and the planet.

We benefit tremendously from laws that unite us into a team, but there is no benefit to being united into a team that provides government officials, business executives, investors, and Hollywood celebrities with mansions and private jets, or teams that arrange false flag operations or wars.

We must change our attitude towards freedom and laws. Instead of whining that laws are oppressive or abusive, and instead of demanding more freedom, we must encourage one another to analyze laws and pass judgment on whether they are beneficial to the human race.

We must also realize that laws are social technology, and we should continuously look for ways to improve them, rather than boast that our culture cannot be improved upon.
We need dystopia to create utopia

Utopia requires dystopia for maintenance

A society is "utopia" to the people who approve of its culture, and it is dystopia to everyone else. Therefore, we can create a new city that is a utopia simply by restricting the immigrants to the people who enjoy that particular culture.

However, the children who are born into a utopian city will be a jumble of genetic characteristics, and that will result in a small percentage of them who dislike the culture so much that they consider their society to be dystopian. They will become unpleasant, unhappy misfits who degrade life for the other people.

In order to maintain the friendly, pleasant environment of a utopian city, the misfits must be evicted, or suppressed in some manner, such as restricting them to certain neighborhoods and jobs. This creates the unpleasant situation in which the utopian society has to use dystopian techniques to maintain itself.


People will never agree on what culture should be

Everybody claims to be peaceful and loving, but everybody also advocates and supports the torture, death, eviction, or punishment of people that they dislike.

Who should be evicted from society? Who should we kill? What should our laws prohibit? What sort of freedoms should the people have? Unfortunately, we cannot agree on who should be evicted or euthanized, or what our laws should be.

This Constitution requires the government to design laws according to what would be best for the City Elders. The government does not pander to the City Elders. Rather, they design laws to be beneficial to them.

Of course, this brings up the issue of who decides who classifies as a City Elder. If we allow a group of pedophiles to make those decisions, then the Elders will be pedophiles. If vegans get control of the city, then the Elders will be vegans.

It is impossible for us to agree on how to design a society because our minds are random jumbles of animal characteristics with irrational emotions, and our minds have different intellectual abilities and defects. Our minds are not flawless computers with identical abilities.

The only way we can resolve differences between us is by fighting until one group dominates the others. Our ancestors have been settling disputes by fighting, and fighting will continue to be the only practical method of resolving differences.

However, we can reduce the fighting significantly by reducing the genetic diversity between us so that we are more compatible. Allowing the people with abnormal desires and mental characteristics to reproduce is making the problem worse by increasing the number of people in every generation who cannot agree on what our culture and lives should be.

Whichever group of people wins the battle for our future will be able to decide what type of desires and mental characteristics are "normal", and if they restrict reproduction to the people with those characteristics, then they will be able to reduce the fighting tremendously by making people more compatible with them.

Laws must be given “performance reviews

We are still so ignorant about human behavior that we cannot predict whether a particular law will accomplish what it is expected to accomplish. Therefore, we must experiment with laws by implementing them, and then periodically observing the result, and passing judgment on whether the law has been as beneficial as expected, or whether it should be revised or terminated. This periodic analysis of a law is essentially a "job performance review" for a law.

For example, it was sensible for people to believe that punishing people for burglary, rape, and other crimes would reduce crime, but the people should have occasionally reviewed those laws to determine whether they were accomplishing their goal. If the people had given those laws a job performance review, then they would have realized that they were failing, and they would have realized they needed to try something different. However, no nation cares whether the laws that punish people for crime are accomplishing their goal of reducing crime. Instead, every nation promotes the attitude that their culture is perfect, and whoever criticizes their culture is insulted as a traitor.

For another example, it was sensible for nations to experiment with a law that gives women the right to vote, but every nation should have occasionally reviewed the effect that the law was having to determine whether it was successful in some manner, such as improving the lives of women or the relationships between men and women, or making the government less selfish or violent.

However, no society cares whether their laws are successful. No government is required to periodically analyze their laws and ensure that they are functioning as expected. Instead, every society considers criticism of their laws to be traitorous and insulting. Therefore, no society cares whether giving women the right to vote has improved life in some manner, or whether it is a failure that has made our lives worse.

I suspect that if we analyzed how a nation changed after allowing women to vote, we would come to the conclusion that it has failed to improve the government, the lives of women, the relationship between men and women, and everything else that it was intended to do.

We might even come to the conclusion that governments are more corrupt today than they were before women could vote, and that there is more loneliness, single-parent families, venereal diseases, unwanted pregnancies, and divorce than there was before women could vote.

We cannot be certain if the increase in those problems is due to allowing women to vote, or if it is due to other things, such as immigrants, modern technology, or the genetic degradation of the human race.

It is possible that if women had never been given the right to vote, our governments would be even more corrupt and violent than they are now, and that there would be even more divorce, loneliness, and crime.

How do we deal with this confusing situation? One option is to experiment with the laws. For example, we could take away the women's right to vote and observe the effect, or we could take away the men's right to vote and watch what happens. Or we could allow both men and women to vote, but put restrictions on who qualifies as a voter.

The scientists, engineers, technicians, mechanics, carpenters, plumbers, farmers, and other people who are successful in solving problems are those who are willing to experiment, and then analyze their experiments, and then experiment again based on what they learned from their previous experiments. However, no culture encourages experimentation with itself.

This constitution changes that situation by requiring the government officials to occasionally give their laws a "law performance review", and experiment with improvements to the laws.

Citizens are also encouraged to post analyze laws and post a "law performance review" in the Suggestions category, and they will get credit for identifying laws that should be improved or terminated.

Eliminating poverty requires dystopian concepts

We suffer from technology, not poverty

None of the wild animals can be described as being in "poverty", and none of our prehistoric ancestors lived in poverty, either. The reason is because the "wild" humans and other animals that could not take care of themselves tended to die at a young age, or be eaten by predators.

Likewise, none of the wild humans are "elderly" because the elderly animals are the most likely to be the losers in the competitive battle for life.

The situation changed dramatically when people settled into permanent cities. Living in a city allowed the differences between the most successful and the least successful people to increase.

In the prehistoric, nomadic tribes, there was not much of a difference between the most successful member of the group and the least successful. But after settling into cities, the difference between the most and least successful people increased through the centuries to the point at which there are people today who are billionaires, and others are homeless and hungry.

Living in a city made it possible for a small percentage of the population to survive on an inadequate amount of food. Their lack of food caused them to be physically weaker and less healthy, but it was possible for them to survive because they did not need as much energy, stamina, or strength as a member of a prehistoric, nomadic tribe.

Living in a city also made it possible for people with a seriously defective immune system to survive because they could rest at home for days or weeks, and be taken care of by other people, whereas a person in a nomadic tribe with a defective immune system would have been among the first to die or be killed by a predator or neighboring tribe.

The ignorance of the people caused many of them to assume that the people who were "poor" or sickly were victims of something, such as poverty, the devil, ignorance, alcohol, or gambling. That caused them to assume that they could help the poor people by giving them handouts, and by educating them about alcohol, the devil, and gambling. However, those solutions failed because none of those "poor" people were suffering from poverty or ignorance. Instead, they were suffering because they were physically and/or mentally inferior to the people who were successful.

The development of technology has allowed people to survive who don't have the ability to take care of themselves. This has resulted in a small percentage of the population that is constantly or frequently suffering from hunger, disease, migraine headaches, mental illness, alcoholism, gambling, debt, and other problems. These problems are not caused by "poverty". They are a side effect of using technology to prevent nature from restricting the reproduction of the genetically inferior people. None of those problems can be solved with handouts, pity, jails, rehabilitation programs, or Bible studies.

Most adults can understand that Calhoun would not have helped the mice by giving them even more food, or by punishing the mice that started fights, or by giving pity to the victims of the fights. However, we have trouble believing that humans are just an advanced version of a mouse, and that handouts, jails, and pity are just as ineffective for eliminating our problems.

Hunger is the result of overpopulation

The overpopulation document explained that hunger is the result of people producing more children than they can support, and that we cannot stop hunger simply by making the wealthy people share their food.

To be more accurate and provide more details on this concept, we can stop hunger by making the wealthy people share their food because they have enough food to feed every hungry person.

However, by preventing people from dying of hunger and malnutrition, we allow the population to increase, so after a a few years or decades, there will no longer be enough food for all of the people. The number of hungry and malnourished people will start to increase.

Therefore, making the wealthy people share their food will stop hunger only for a brief moment in time. It is not a solution to the problem.



Hunger is due to overpopulation,
not food supplies.

Humans and other animals do not distribute food among themselves equally. Instead, as the graphs to the right show, a small percentage of every species has plenty of food, and another small percentage is hungry.

That bell graph has virtually the same shape regardless of how much or how little food is produced.

For example, when bad weather reduces the food production for a nomadic tribe, or for the farmers who are living in a city, there will continue to be some people who have more food than others, and there will continue to be a small percentage that is starving to death.

When we produce more food than normal, some people will have an extreme excessive food, but there will still be people who are hungry because we don't distribute food equally, and some people have more children than they can take care of.

A disruption in the food (or water) supply will increase the number of deaths, which reduces the population, but when the food supply increases, there will be a reduction in deaths, which increases the population. To rephrase this concept, the population is always at the maximum amount possible for the resources.

However, when there is a decrease in the food production, the people who suffer the most are those who are at the "hungry end" of the graph.

We rarely see a hungry animal because the animals that cannot find enough food are the most likely to be eaten by predators or die from disease. However, hungry humans can easily survive and reproduce today, so there are millions of them scattered around the world.

From the point of view of ignorant people, it will appear as if the group of "poor" people are always suffering from hunger for no apparent reason, and that every time there is some bad weather, they suffer even more for no apparent reason. This can cause people to feel sorry for them, and want to give them handouts.

There are so many people who believe that hunger is due to a shortage of food that many government agencies and organizations in the USA and Europe have been providing handouts of food to hungry people around the world, and within the USA. Those people have such a resistance to looking critically at their theories that they ignore the evidence that their policies have failed to stop hunger.



India has enough food for millions of Indians to become obese, but not enough food to allow uncontrolled reproduction.
In reality, a small percentage of every group of animals are hungry because every group is suffering from overpopulation.

Every animal reproduces in such excessive amounts that it is impossible for all of their children to find enough food.

The people who cannot understand or acknowledge the concept that humans are apes will have trouble understanding the concept that hunger is caused by overpopulation, and that the people who are hungry, "poor", or "in poverty" are genetically inferior to the rest of us.

We cannot stop hunger or poverty by giving handouts of food to the people. The only way to stop hunger and poverty is to apply dystopian concepts to a society. Specifically:

1) Pass judgment on who among us is genetically superior, and restrict reproduction to those superior people in order to reduce the number of inferior people.


2)
Restrict reproduction in order to keep the population a level that we can easily take care of, even when there are crop disasters, earthquakes, and other bad luck events.
Who made you God?”

We need self-control to improve culture

Almost everybody can have a calm and sensible discussion about the features of refrigerators and bicycles because those issues do not stimulate our emotions. However, many social issues, such as abortion, crime, genetics, immigration, marijuana, and euthanasia stimulate our emotions. Therefore, in order to have a calm and intelligent discussion about those social issues, a person must have enough self-control to ignore or suppress his emotions.

It is possible for a person to be successful as a technician, engineer, carpenter, or computer programmer even if he has a bad temper, extreme arrogance, an intense fear of the unknown, or other emotional problems. However, a person is not likely to provide us with useful leadership unless he has above-average self-control.

Most people get into arguments over social issues because they do not have enough self-control to remain calm. Instead, they react to criticism and conflicting opinions with anger, lectures, insults, pouting, sarcasm, intimidating facial expressions, or violence. For example, instead of having a calm discussion about abortion, they try to intimidate one another with such remarks as:



Abortion is murder!


Abortion is a woman's right!


What gives you the right to control my life?


What gives you the right to murder a child?

Those are not intelligent arguments. They are analogous to the growling and snarling of monkeys. It is impossible to have a discussion with people who make those remarks because those people are not discussing the issue.

Some of the remarks people use in their arguments are so generic and meaningless that everybody can use them for any issue we please. For example, everybody can respond to their critics with: "What gives you the right to tell us how to live?"

The people who use those arguments tend to yell, use angry facial expressions, and swear, in order to increase the intimidation. They also frequently interrupt one another because they are not interested in listening to other opinions.

Modern humans must have more self-control and intelligence

Prehistoric people did not have to deal with complex issues, but as our technology improves, we have increasingly complex issues to deal with. Therefore, we need greater intelligence and self-control, and an ability to compromise on a lot of issues.

Unfortunately, the majority of people do not have the ability to discuss issues or compromise on issues because they cannot keep their emotions under control. Instead, they argue and insult one another.

We need to be compatible

In order for us to create a stable and pleasant society, we must be able to compromise on issues, and this requires that we be compatible enough to compromise. We do not have to be identical, but we must have a certain level of compatibility.

We cannot create a pleasant society when the people have such extreme differences in their mental abilities that some of them insist that we are creations of a supreme being, and others insist that we are like pieces of clay, and others insist that we are a species of ape. People's with such wide variations in their mental abilities will never agree on what their culture should be. They will fight incessantly.

People today need higher-quality minds, and we need to be less diverse and more compatible. Therefore, in order to create a peaceful, pleasant world, we must implement some dystopian policies:

Raise standards for people and evict the misfits.

Reduce the intellectual and emotional differences between us (more here) by restricting reproduction to the people we regard as "normal".

Increase our self-control and intelligence by restricting reproduction to the people we regard as superior.

We need to reduce our emotional and intellectual differences, but only to make us more compatible, not to make us identical. We benefit by having people with slightly different abilities and desires.

We must accept other people's defects

In addition to becoming more compatible, we must also be able to acknowledge the concept that all living creatures are defective. We must be able to accept our own and other people's defects.

This requires self-control because we have a natural desire to believe that we are perfect, and to torment people we regard as inferior to ourselves. This characteristic is most noticeable with children and animals, such as when chickens pluck feathers out of one another, and when children torment the children who are fat, skinny, ugly, or have crooked teeth.

We cannot expect children to understand these concepts, or have enough self-control to suppress their craving to torment one another, but we can raise the standards for adults and require them to refrain from tormenting people that they regard as inferior. We must accept other people's genetic disorders, just as we accept left-handed people.

Most adults are capable of accepting a person's physical disorders, such as an ugly face or crooked teeth, but every culture is encouraging us to criticize people with behavioral disorders, and to put pressure on them to behave like the rest of us. For example, every culture is encouraging us to put pressure on drug addicts, homosexuals, and pedophiles into becoming "normal", However, putting pressure on those people to behave like normal people is detrimental. Two reasons are:


1) The defective people cannot become normal, so the only way they can avoid the insults and abuse is to become an actor who pretends to be normal. This torments those people by making them live a phony life.

For example, Kay Griggs claims that many of the people in the top leadership positions of the US military, and many other people, such as George Stephanopoulos, are homosexual, and they are married only to fool us into believing that they are heterosexual.

By refusing to accept that some people are homosexual, we are forcing them to become deceptive and dishonest. This puts them into a miserable situation, and none of us benefit from it, either.

Likewise, by not accepting the fact that some people have cravings for marijuana, heroin, gambling, beastiality, coprophilia, and other abnormal activities, we pressure them into doing those activities in secret, which can deceive people into becoming their friend or spouse, which in turn can result in a miserable relationship and a divorce. It can also result in them getting jobs that they should not have, such as an alcoholic becoming a pilot, or a pedophile getting a job at a daycare center.


2)
If we pressure homosexuals, pedophiles, or other people with mental problems to get married and have children, as "normal" people do, and if their mental problems are inheritable, then we increase the number of mentally defective people in the next generation. We should not pressure anybody into having children. Reproduction should be controlled, not encouraged.

If we can accept the fact that everybody is defective, then an alcoholic will be able to admit to that problem as easily as a person can admit to having a crooked tooth, and a pedophile will be able to admit that he has an attraction to children.

By keeping a database of everybody and their problems, scientists will be able to study everybody's problems. This will allow us to determine which of these problems are inheritable, and which are due to the environment, such as concussions, chemicals, and diseases. That knowledge will allow us to reduce the problems in the future generations.

Instead of trying to fix the defective people with punishments or insults, the Behavior Ministry of the Health Division is required to investigate them to determine which problems are due to inheritable characteristics, and which are due to environmental problems.

The same concept applies to crime. Instead of trying to cure criminals with punishments and rehabilitation programs, and instead of trying to prevent them from committing crimes with security devices, we must restrict reproduction to the people with higher quality minds.

The same concept applies to drug abuse. Instead of trying to prevent people from abusing drugs by making them available by prescription only, or by adding methanol to alcohol, or by punishing people who abuse drugs, we should restrict the reproduction of people who cannot be responsible with drugs.

These are the concepts that we use to breed animals and plants, but the majority of people refuse to believe that those concepts apply to humans. The people who oppose restrictions on reproduction must be classified as unfit for influential positions. They will destroy the human race if they are allowed to dominate a society.