The Blogging Nazis

I wonder how the Conservative Party feels knowing that the co-founder of its unofficial online blogging community “The Blogging Tories” is promoting a concept torn right out of the Nazi playbook.

Here’s Craig Smith advocating a “positive” kind of state-sponsored eugenics:

It has been give a bad name because traditional attempts at implementation have focused on harming those deemed to be not worthy – forced sterilization or worse.

But what if we were to approach it from a positive perspective. Instead of infringing on the rights of the average and below average, why not implement measures that encourage procreation amongst those who score well in eugenics tests. It would be a point system something like this…

1. Genetics (100 points). Lose 20 points for each instance of the following: diabetes, heart disease (below the age of 60), cancer (below the age of 60) and 10 points for lesser genetic diseases. You also lose 20 points for any relative dying of natural causes before the age of 60 and you gain 20 points for every relative surpassing 90 years of age.

2. Athletic ability (50 points) – coordination tests, fighting tests, speed test, endurance tests, swimming, jumping, strength.

3. Intelligence (100 points) – comprehensive IQ test

4. Beauty (30 points) – subjective measure based on rankings of 100 random individuals.

Participation is purely voluntary. People who score 90%+ will receive $50,000 per child per year until 18 years of age. people who score 80%+ will receive $10,000 per child per year until 18 years of age.

I’ve always thought there was a lot of Ur Fascism running through the “thinking” of many of “The Blogging Tories” but it’s still kind of shocking to see this Lebensborn kind of nonsense being advanced so shamelessly.

29 Replies to “The Blogging Nazis”

  1. This is Craig Smith’s next post: “We unwittingly perform eugenics on a daily basis in this country. Welfare is a subtle form of eugenics – it facilitates child birth amongst the poor. I’m simply suggesting that we identify the very best, brightest, strongest, and most beautiful and offer them incentives to have many children.”

    Pretty pathetic.

  2. So… the spontaneous self organization of a free market is worthy of more faith than the spontaneous self organization of gene flow.

    Oh, right, that evolution thing is BS.

    I see there’s no points for original and innovative thinking. Oh Yah, IQ tests.

    Fighting tests? Wtf?

  3. Excuse me, Red. This is pretty much what the nazis did right? Subsidising “purer” individuals to have children?

    Could anyone give me a synopsis of that?

  4. Wow
    I had to scroll back up to check out who wrote this scary crap.
    (I though – back country Tennessee perhaps?)
    Sounds like he would love a “Stepford Wife” to help raise his $50k/yr kids (I assume he counts himself in that class)

    is this typical of the supporters of the governing party? (are the BT commenters outraged or supportive?)

  5. OR — There’s lots of info on the web. I suggest you go exploring. It makes for fascinating, if creepy, reading. Anyway, here’s an extract from the Jewish Virtual Library:

    Himmler’s romantic dream of a race of blue-eyed, blond heroes was to be achieved by cultivating an elite according to “laws of selection” based on criteria of physiognomy, mental and physical tests, character and spirit. His aristocratic concept of leadership aimed at consciously breeding a racially organized order which would combine charismatic authority with bureaucratic discipline. The SS man would represent a new human type–warrior, administrator, “scholar” and leader, all in one – whose messianic mission was to undertake a vast colonization of the East. This synthetic aristocracy, trained in a semi-closed society and superimposed on the Nazi system as a whole, would demonstrate the value of its blood through “creative action” and achievement.

    From the outset of his career as Reichsfuhrer of the SS, Himmler had introduced the principle of racial selection and special marriage laws which would ensure the systematic coupling of people of “high value.” His promotion of illegitimacy by establishing the State-registered human stud farm known as Lebensborn, where young girls selected for their perfect Nordic traits could procreate with SS men and their offspring were better cared for than in maternity homes for married mothers, reflected Himmler’s obsession with creating a race of “supermen” by means of breeding. Himmler’s notorious procreation order of 28 October 1939 to the entire SS that “it will be the sublime task of German women and girls of good blood acting not frivolously but from a profound moral seriousness to become mothers to children of soldiers setting off to battle” and his demand that war heroes should be allowed a second marriage expressed the same preoccupation.

  6. From the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party (Green Nazis… go figure):

    Eugenics is the human practice of adopting organized breeding to replace natural selection. While eugenics is in concept a great idea, the state cannot, by the very nature of large organizations, take over this role, and must rely on society to implement positive eugenics. Positive eugenics is the process of promoting those who excel, and are of good character and intelligence and strength, and to ensure that they breed more than the average. Negative eugenics is the process of culling those who are failures, by the estimation of that society, and in any forward-thinking state should be limited to removal of obvious defectives: mentally retarded, physically retarded, pedophiles, criminals. In most cases, if the person can care for themselves, sterilization is all that is called for; criminals require execution not as a punishment, but as a means of insuring they do not trouble others.

    Interestingly, as a commenter at CC’s place noted what Smith is proposing is a rather perverse form of wealth redistribution. People of average or substandard intelligence, appearance, athletic ability or poor health (heart conditions, etc.) would be subsidizing the reproduction of “superior” humans. Lovely.


  7. Also interesting that the spokesthingee for the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party screed RT quoted above shares the same name as the co-founder of Blogging Tories.

    Still unsure if that’s a coincidence or not.

  8. I don’t know, I think that screed along with this one from The Atheist Jew – a fellow conservative – paint a picture that does not include satire or polemic.

    I wonder what guys like Warren K would think of this?

    SUZANNE tried to pull the “its exactly like abortion” nonsense over at stageleft. I think I set her straight, but you may want to correct me if I didn’t.

  9. So… the spontaneous self organization of a free market is worthy of more faith than the spontaneous self organization of gene flow.

    Boggin’ Toree answer: Yes. Next question.

    You know, with these fascists, it’s not the pseudo-science that gets me so much; it’s the incoherence. The minimum I expect from rigid ideologues is consistency.

  10. The Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta was only repealed in 1972, maybe some would like to bring it back…. The stated goals to not seem to have worked anyway if we look at Patsy…

  11. OMG. What is wrong with these people.

    Here’s an idea:

    Why don’t we cross-breed Craig and Suzanne and and then donate the specimen to Scientific Research?

    It probably wouldn’t work though, as the off-shoot would probably spontaneously abort at the mere idea of its parentage ….

  12. It gets even better – Smith is a “Site Administrator” on the Forum !

    Nothing gets passed you, eh? 😉

    For quite a long time now, I’ve been shocked at how Stephen Taylor doesn’t seem to be easily embarrassed by what goes on there. He’s either incredibly insensate or incredibly stupid.

    I imagine if the MSM were to get wind of it, we’d see a Blogging Tory purge to rival anything Stalin ever did.

  13. CWTF — Sorry about the moderation. I was forced to include some words in the filter in response to a threat. I’ve fixed it now so that it shouldn’t be a problem.

  14. In my defence, I don’t go to that place…

    I just pay attention to milestones and salient factors…such as who’s an authority and what’s the most outrageous thing they’ve ever said.

  15. What an incredibly ridiculous – and frightening – post from Smith. I threw up in my mouth as I read the responses.

    I find it especially humorous when people who know nothing about evolution proceed to accuse “Darwinists” of being immoral and genocidal, and then display their ignorance – and hypocrisy – in colossally stupid shit like this.

    This has GOT to be satire. I can’t believe that there are people who are this dumb.

  16. Dave — I’m not convinced it’s satire, although I suppose there’s always that explanation. “It was a joke!” That’s usually how the wingnuts excuse their more outrageous commentary and insane departures from reality.

  17. Creepy is what it is. Quite the photo…. if you block out from the eyebrows up and the nose down and see only the eyes – 2 people come to mind.

    Cindy McCain and Harper.

  18. RuralSandi,

    You said:

    “Creepy is what it is. Quite the photo…. if you block out from the eyebrows up and the nose down and see only the eyes – 2 people come to mind.

    Cindy McCain and Harper.”


    I was sure it was Dion in drag, but perhaps I need to get my prescription checked.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s