You're viewing a single thread.
Idiocracy apparently was a documentary.
A map. It’s not the example I’d prefer when debating whether or not life imitates art.
My only beef with Idiocracy is how stupid the eugenics stuff is.
In the first 2 minutes there are facts exaggerated for comedic effect. Measures of intelligence such as educational attainment and literacy are negatively correlated with fertility
Eugenics implies a controlled breeding program which there was no hint of in that film.
I think you and I remember that scene differently. The example "intelligent" couple put off having children to focus on career goals, when they finally decided to go for it and had fertility issues, they were significantly older than when the scene began.
Loss of reproductive functions happens naturally with age, which is why humans have a so-called biological clock. That metaphorical bell rings when you're at your biological peak for creating offspring.
The simpletons in the example, being driven more by biological needs and fleeting desires. So they had children without regard to whether they could afford to or with any planning or foresight.
The intellectuals on the other hand were waiting for the right time, which, by the time that happened, fertility had dropped to the point where it wasn't going to happen.
That's what I understood from it, but idk. I'm just some guy
What you describe is empirical fact. Higher earners (proxy for more intelligent) reproduce later and less.
This is due to capitalism, not eugenics.
no one's arguing that part. the movie implies that this leads to a stupid population, which is a eugenicist claim, and factually wrong.
It's only eugenics if the solution is to interfere with human reproduction. The movie is about an average person living in a stupid world. Not a call to euthanize useless eaters.
Lets see if you can propose a different 2 minute introduction that allows the same world building but satisfies your sensibilities. I suspect you won't be able to beat the directors choice.
easy. you don't tie it to breeding at all.
"education was systematically enshittified so most of the world is dumb now"
done.
Cool.
Now. On your copy of the movie: delete the first 2 minutes; replace with this title card; sit back; enjoy the film.
that was a great turnaround from your challenge, wasn't it?
"oh I'd like to see you do better"
"yeah this would be better"
"well do it for yourself!"
yeah i can, but then again i could watch movies that are already not stupid instead of buying dumb ones and fixing them manually.
Not really a turn around. I'm demonstrating how the details of the first 2 minutes are inconsequential to the rest of the film.
If those 2 minutes offend you, skip them, invent your own opening and enjoy a hilarious comedy that makes no further comment on the fact that richer, better educated couples statistically have less children.
"Critics note Vining's involvement with the white supremacist journal Mankind Quarterly and his acceptance of grants from the Pioneer Fund."
And
"Some studies nonetheless claim to show no evidence for dysgenic effects in human populations.[47][48][49][50] Theories about dysgenic and eugenic effects in human populations have historically been associated with scientific racism."
Well well well, I'm not subscribed to Mankind Quarterly, but I would like you to know that before the industrial revolution my ancestors (and probably those from everyone reading here) were working them fields and couldn't read, so let the rednecks reproduce, we'll be fine. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
I'm not arguing in favor of eugenics.
I'm saying that a 2 minute opening exposition of a comedy film has no ulterior motive.
Whether or not it was the motive, the result is that it promoted a eugenic idea.
Again, no control over human reproduction is even hinted at. The writers are creating jokes, not nazi propaganda.
Either write a better introduction and post it here or GTFO