Last Notes

#doll
https://blossom.primal.net/0e30ab966cc276691e74280699a56b5db0dc07025255796fa39a888f55c64b82.jpg

Racism in the Age of Gene Editing: A Myth That Can’t Survive Scientific Reality
For centuries, racism has clung to a false, self-serving premise: that human beings can be sorted into discrete, hierarchical "races" with inherent, biologically determined differences in intelligence, morality, or worth. This lie has fueled genocide, slavery, and systemic oppression, all while being repeatedly debunked by science. But the rise of precision gene editing—tools like CRISPR-Cas9 that can modify specific DNA sequences with growing accuracy—doesn’t just add another nail to racism’s coffin. It reduces the entire ideology to a transparent, desperate farce: a set of myths so disconnected from biological truth that clinging to them in 2026 is less a political stance than a refusal to engage with the world as it actually is.
Let’s start with the foundational science that predates gene editing, but which this technology amplifies to irrefutable clarity. The Human Genome Project confirmed decades of prior research: 99.9% of human DNA is identical across every person on Earth. The genetic variation that does exist is not clustered along the arbitrary lines we call "race." There is no gene, no set of genes, no genetic marker that defines a "Black person," a "white person," an "Asian person," or any other racial category. Genetic variation within any so-called racial group is far greater than variation between groups. A person from Kenya may share more genetic material with a person from Norway than with a neighbor from a different ethnic community in their own country. Race is a social construct—one that has shaped power, access, and lived experience profoundly, but one that has never had a basis in biology.
Gene editing shatters racism’s last remaining pseudo-scientific crutches. For racists, the myth of inherent racial hierarchy depends on the idea that traits they claim to value (or revile) are fixed, heritable, and tied to racial identity. But CRISPR and related technologies prove that human traits are fluid, modifiable, and decoupled from any perceived racial lineage. We can already edit DNA to eliminate sickle cell anemia—a condition long misassociated with "Blackness" as a supposed sign of "inferiority," even though it evolved as a defense against malaria and exists in populations across the Middle East, the Mediterranean, and India. Tomorrow, we may edit genes to enhance disease resistance, cognitive function, or physical resilience—and these modifications will work the same way in every human genome, regardless of the racial label society assigns to its owner.
Think about the absurdity of a racist confronting this reality. A white supremacist who claims white people have an inherent genetic "superiority" is left arguing for the supremacy of a set of genes that could be edited into any human being on Earth—or removed from any white person, for that matter. A Black nationalist who claims inherent Black genetic superiority faces the same logical void: if the traits you valorize can be added or subtracted with a molecular tool, they cannot be the basis of a permanent, group-based hierarchy. There is no "racial essence" to protect or exalt, no pure genetic lineage to defend. All human genomes are part of a single, interconnected, constantly evolving pool—and gene editing puts that interconnectedness on full display.
This is not to say gene editing is without moral peril. The technology could be weaponized to deepen inequality: wealthy people might access enhancements unavailable to the poor, or oppressive regimes could attempt to engineer populations to fit their ideological whims. But these risks are not racial in nature—they are risks of power and greed, applied to a shared human biology. Racism, by contrast, offers no framework for addressing these challenges; it only distorts them, turning questions of collective justice into petty, false battles over imaginary genetic lines.
Clinging to racism in the age of gene editing is ultimately a choice to prioritize hate over truth. It means ignoring the fact that the same genetic code that makes us vulnerable to disease, or capable of kindness, or able to create art, is shared across every human being. It means rejecting a future where we could use genetic science to lift up all people—eradicating suffering that has plagued communities for millennia—in favor of a past built on dehumanization and lies.
Racism was never intellectually defensible. But in a world where we can read, write, and rewrite the code of life itself, it is not just wrong. It is irrelevant—a relic of a time when we knew far less about who we are, and a barrier to becoming who we could be.

2026-08-06 16:43:11 UTC

Have you ever noticed that all those "alternative" Sloptubers worshipped by /g/ do absolutely NOTHING to strengthen alternative platforms? Mental Outlaw, Louis Rossmann, TheHatedOne... which of them mirrors their content on Nostr or Mastodon? Who posts on PeerTube or maybe even Rumble? NO ONE. They’re all deep up Google’s ass because it’s all about the money for them. So much for being "anti-establishment."
https://blossom.primal.net/9c910621423406a1217fb6582ae075161dd4823595f2dfaa0af3092c72e05fe5.jpg