/natsoc/ - National Socialism

>>2522

I'll be honest, transhumanism is really fucking stupid from a traditional point of view, or even any point of view devoid of bias. Transhumanism is something I used to think only Communists or extreme Leftists would support, that is until I saw people with similar views to yours sprinkling into /pol/.

National Socialism sought to advance society and people, indeed, but through the rebirth of old ideals and methods, reborn through new implementations. NatSoc is nothing more the the civilized reapplication of all aspects of Barbarism. Where the strong would survive in the days of antiquity, in NatSoc the strong would be given benefits by the government, and people would be encouraged through programs and propaganda to be stronger. The focus on eugenics was really just an attempt to restore the Germanic people to their most pure form: "The Neanderthal". The modern German at that time was still very much a hybrid, as nobody was around 7 feet tall, pale as snow, pale haired, and blue eyed. The purest of Germans were close though. The aim of German eugenics and biotechnology was not to move humans "forward" towards a superhuman, roided-up, cyborg-like semi-human, it was to move them "back" towards the Neanderthal superhumans.

Any comparisons between NatSoc and technocracy are foolish. The Third Reich was a National Socialist nation-state with a utilitarian and corporatist structure. That means that the highest ideal was preservation of the nation, by socialist means (Prussian Socialism, not Marxism) and a corporatist structure, that means that farmers decide agriculture policy, soldiers make military policy, cities make provincial policy, provinces make national policy, etc..

Technocracy on the other hand is a dangerous gamble, having computers and machines decide everything for you with little human input, humans building better computers and machines, with the machines providing for the humans, the whole time the humans are praying the technology doesn't get so advanced that it wipes them out when the humans are not needed. If the humans integrate with the computers and machines, however, they aren't really humans anymore, are they? It all honestly sounds like technological Marxism.

National Socialism long term goal is to bring humans back to their superhuman form by natural and traditional means. Technocracy wants humans to become not-humans through technology.

I honestly hope you're not a shill, and if you're not, I encourage you to think deeper, not wider.

>>2530

>>2522

Transhumanism as pushed in popular culture tends to be all about replacing healthy body parts with parts that you need to pay to keep functioning. So nothing like bioorganic cybernetic implants but more like deus ex gibmedats anti rejection drug dystopia.

Image related and I'd love to have a discussion here but with BO absent and moderation possibly falling to a sjw I'll conserve my energies for more stable boards.

Maybe someone more familiar with this topic can help me understand.

What exactly do transhumanists mean by "transcend"? I'm aware that there are some out there that believe that it is our destiny to become gods through technology and understanding and completely leaving our biology behind. I'm also aware that there are people with comparatively more humble views regarding transhumanism that would simply like synthetics and electronics to have a more integrated role in our lives.

How do transhumanists even define what it is to be human and how do they define the idea of "transcending" it? I only ask because it seems to me like there are a lot of transhumanists who aren't on the same page with one another.