> I'm not sure that's historically accurate I mean, my point was that it's a relatively absurd argument based on a misunderstanding of evolution, as the siblin

> I'm not sure that's historically accurate I mean, my point was that it's a relatively absurd argument based on a misunderstanding of evolution, as the sibling comment states. > it's cultural rather than socioeconomic and caste based Are castes and socioeconomics distinct from culture? (I'm working with Lévi-Strauss's definition of culture as the set of symbolic forms present across society) > both the IQ shredder and Idiocracy argument perhaps only serve a useful function when referring to the lower and middle class, and fail to account for the upper class If we consider it in this frame, it seems roughly equivalent to the "brain drain" idea that made the rounds a decade or so ago. Only difference being the ethical valence of the arguments. > evidence of an apoptotic mechanism Is this a valid metaphor? I'm unsure myself. I don't find myself agreeing with Spengler and co, but I also don't think I could muster a strong argument against it on demand.