this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024

78 points (94.3% liked)

Political Memes

5598 readers

1631 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civil

Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformation

Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memes

Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotion

Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Idiocracy was only wrong about the timeline (self.politicalmemes)

submitted 16 hours ago by bmcgonag to c/politicalmemes

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

It makes me really sad to realize Mike Judge was only wrong about one thing in Idiocracy... that it would take 400 years for us to get there...because here we are, not even 20 years later.

top 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Sterile_Technique 58 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

The idiots in Idiocracy were aware of their own stupidity, and when they found a guy smarter than everyone else the people in power stepped aside and put him in charge of tackling their most pressing issues.

The idiots IRL think they're geniuses, and when they encounter someone smarter than themselves, who's more qualified than they are to do their job, they run a smear campaign and/or incite violence against that person.

The future depicted in Idiocracy is a fucking paradise compared to where we're headed.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Eeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhh.... One Idiot in Idiocracy was aware of it and paved the way for the smarter people, but even he had to act dumber than he is to convince the even more moronic masses that this was the right thing to do. And even that almost failed and got the smart guy almost killed.

[–] Lauchs 7 points 8 hours ago

Exactly. I don't think the person above remembers the movie particularly well. They were actively trying to kill him until Maya Rudolph saved the day and showed everyone the smartest man in the world was right.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Don't Look Up is also more relevant than ever now.

[–] MintyFresh 1 points 1 hour ago

That movie hurt to watch.

[–] yesman 13 points 16 hours ago (7 children)

Idiocracy is a cute movie that I enjoy. I'm disturbed however by the popular notion that it's prophetic or a documentary considering it's central premise (that people are breeding wrong, and if unchecked society will collapse) is also the central premise of eugenics and a pillar of Nazi ideology.

People who think evolution works like it is portrayed in that movie have done infinitely more harm to society and scientific literacy than creationists.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

There was no eugenics in that movie. Eugenics implies a directed, forced outcome.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

It wasn't eugenics. It was just that dumb or uneducated people and poorer people have more kids. Those kids are also more likely to be poorly educated and also have more kids, while educated and more intelligent people tend to have fewer children and have children starting at a later point in life.

There's no Hitler eugenics here. Poor people live in poor areas with a poorer education system, which leads to more people with low educations.

Hitler thought Germans were simply better than anyone else at everything.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

It's also wrong about history. Throughout human history, the poor have had many, many more children than the wealthy. They needed the extra hands to do the manual labor of occupations like farming.

[–] givesomefucks 28 points 15 hours ago

It wasn't about genetics, IQ is polygenic, and really not inheritable because of that.

It was about memetic inheritance, the people who would have raised curious and motivated kids, didn't.

And the ones who didn't give a shit but liked boning and hated condoms had a bunch of kids they just sat in front of a TV.

It's been a while, but I don't think they blamed genetics directly, they just didn't spell it out in detail and people who didn't know what they meant have apparently latched onto what you said?

At least one other person in this thread anyways, which is weird, I've never seen this claim before. Is it a tiktok thing?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 15 hours ago

It's not completely wrong, especially since humans long left the checks and balances of natural selection. The thing that was ultimately bad about eugenics was how the Nazis enforced this onto the general public through selective breeding programs and viewing everyone else as genetically inferior. But saying that genetics and hereditary traits aren't a thing is just as anti-scientific. In case of the movie it was not just about genetics though, especially since intelligence is just partially based on genetics. It was also about smart people not having kids and consequently failing to do better parenting than the morons that decided to have kids. Some people may escape the cycle of a family that is not good for them, but a lot of them will just carry on the same behavior that they learned from their parents.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

You could just as easily make a case that's about "nurture" more than "nature". Stupid and negligent people will make bad parents regardless of genetics.

[–] PP_BOY_ 4 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

That's a very sympathetic reading. I'd suggest watching the opening of the film which very clearly frames the story in terms of "evolution," "breeding," "genetics," and "intelligence."

[–] [email protected] 8 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

True, but it's only about eugenics if you think that intelligence is a primarily hereditary trait rather than a learned one.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Agreed. The Idiocracy==eugenics concept seems to be localized entirely to the internet, and seems to be paraded around by those that understand neither literature, nor how human genetics actually work. Evident by how they glaze over the remaining 80% of the opening sequence that's about the juxtaposition between American idealism, and the reality of what American culture actually promotes and produces.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

It also shows the "intelligent" couple as having fertility issues, while Cleetus the Slackjawed yokel has a hundred children.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

Because they prioritised their work, which is extremely common.

It is harder for older couples to have children.

[–] PP_BOY_ 1 points 16 hours ago

I said this same thing almost verbatim a few days ago and got downvoted to hell lol. Idiocracy is fine. It's okay. Some of the punchlines are pretty dated. But reddit incels love it because they think it validates their thoughts on eugenics.

[–] givesomefucks 7 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

It's your frame of reference.

For about 1 in 1,200 people, over 80% of the population is more than 30 points below them.

That's the agreed upon difference where frustration is common, and even the lower IQ person will blame the smarter person for any confusion like in the movie. They literally don't understand what the problem is, and will just throw out insults instead of of asking questions to try and understand.

Idiocracy was if a regular 100 IQ person went to where everyone was maxing out at the equivalent of 70 and everyone else was much lower.

But there's always been (and always will be) the people who are already that out of place in their own time period.

It is not a pleasant existence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I don’t think IQ ever considered willful ignorance though. It’s meant to be based off the average intelligence of a population, but how do you factor in those that would rather be angry and hateful than think for half a second?

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

how do you factor in those that would rather be angry and hateful than think for half a second?

That's never been new...

And it's a very common coping mechanism. They do think, it's just not productive and most people get frustrated and upset.

There's plenty of people who have voted the same as me for president for 20 years, and when I try to explain that what we're doing clearly isn't working....

They just call me nonsensical names.

They're not choosing to do that, they're just failing to understand and getting upset about it. And with an IQ differential greater than 30 points, both people will be very frustrated.

The vast majority of people believe they're the good guys and what theyre doing will help everyone. They're just not smart enough to see the obvious result, so when people try to explain it, it conflicts with their current behavior and they reject it.