Ya know, I like this but it's very incorrect. I'm not objecting mind you, but it's like a convenient lie. You shouldn't tell a fat person that they are fat. ... unless there is something they can do something about it, but certainly then.
You want social justice. I want social justice, but much of this essay is nonsense. You need another approach, one aligned with the way it really is. Most of what you say here is based on the premise that we are all equal. We are not. Nature doesn't work that way. You are correct about it being a moral issue, but it is also a moral choice.
There are two moral systems available to humans. The one of blind competition commonest in nature and the one based on cooperation that humans needed to develop when we left the trees (that corresponds to rapid brain development). Nature's strategy of blind competition is win-lose, brutal, blunt, stupid, and inefficient. The cooperative strategy is potentially win-win, more efficient and all those other social justice type things you like. Both instincts can be found within yourself, others and any human institution. Just look and you will see them. Fascism, as a morality is just part of that blind competition strategy. Nature has no objection to it... She's never shown herself to be very nice or caring.
So, if you want the cooperative strategy with social justice, which I happen to think is the only strategy that can make humans more than animals or even able to survive long term, how do you do it? The first thing is to understand the two strategies objectively and their outcomes. Just because one may lead to social justice doesn't necessarily mean it is better. The problem with fascism is that it leads to a dead end, especially if it can use IA as a tool. Cooperation at least offers a potential future for humanity. It is not guaranteed, though people have been fighting for that for many thousands of years. If we didn't instinctively think cooperation was a better strategy, we would have settled on fascism long ago and the idea of social justice would never be considered.
There's still a problem though. Everything I've said here is about strategy. The article repeatedly mentions DNA. No, DNA is not equal. To shorten things, I'll say that in my work on human survival I state that the ethnic variation of humanity is the greatest wealth we have and the only chance we have to survive in a world changing rapidly towards an uncertain future. I'm all about ethnic variation and equality, not because I think it's some ideal of good, but because it is the only chance for survival. (OK, I'm biased, I like social justice as well.) BUT NONE OF THIS IS GOING TO WORK UNLESS THERE IS SOME GENETIC EQUALITY. (Please excuse the shouting, but no one is going to listen anyway.) Denying that there is genetic inequality is not going to help. It's a convenient lie. Now that might be required if there was no fixing it, but we can and have to. First off, we are entering a new world., We need to genetically adapt and what we call human progress is the removal of natural selection. No species can survive that. We can ethically and economically introduce artificial selection to replace the brutal hand of natural selection. It is our only chance for survival and can provide social justice. We don't really need to be equal, but we do all need to have health, beauty and brains. We all need a chance, which many people don't think they or their children have now. Generation by generation we could accumulate the greatest wealth imaginable, genetic wealth, that our children can inherit with no taxes. Genetics are additive. This is not just for some elite. Everyone that reproduces using DNA faces the same problem. Think of the economic value. Countries measure health care costs as percentages of domestic product. What would be the monetary value if the average IQ was raised by just 10 points and the potential is for far more than that.
Biology lesson 201 - Nature is a thermodynamic process that doesn't care about you, fascism or social justice.
Biology lesson 202 - Nature is horribly inefficient and its main tool, natural selection is red of tooth and claw. Humans can be far more efficient and select for children getting the best genes from both parents, something that nature simply cannot do. Humans can, based on the work of Dr. Dagan Wells and others.
Morality lesson 201 - If you want social justice, you need to know what it is in terms of instincts and potential outcomes. You also need to know about its genetic foundations.
I am still working on the strategy parts, but you can see an older YouTube version of "Genetics For A New Human Ecology" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjVieFKevMk or you can read the more up to date book. It's short and cheap and is at https://www.amazon.com/dp/1544900996
