It is well known that human reproduction takes DNA from the mother and father and produces a new unique code, unless of course you’re a twin. This newly formed DNA code later mingles with that of another individual and yet another new code is produced. Now the more alike the parents genetic codes are the more chance there is of birth defects and even potential personality traits such as alchoholism being passed on.
To better explain this imagine playing a game of Poker with 52 cards that are shuffled, each round brings about a new opportunity to gain a strong hand. Now imagine a game being played with only sixteen cards, each of which appear twice the chances of gaining a winning hand will be significantly reduced. This is the same with DNA. The limited genetic material means that the chances of drawing a weak hand are increased and in the case of humanity this would bring about a problem such as a genetic birth defect. Then should we take this onto a further generation it would be like reducing the hand down from sixteen cards to say twelve further increasing the chances of some kind of genetic disorder. This is where Heyra has perhaps accidently made itself a giant test tube. No nation on Mundus has ever undertaken what I shall refer to as a mass breeding programme. It is my understanding that Heyra have also said that they intend this to be done only from Heyran citizens. Now by cutting out what I shall call non-native DNA the Heyrans will be confining this process to a narrower field, which if one generation is created is of little concern immediately, but should such a process continue for multiple generations we are essentially throwing away cards from our deck. This doesn’t also take into account the issues of record keeping. Should these 5,000 children not know who their genetic parents are we run the risk of accidental incest relationships in the future, essentially meaning the speed of throwing away our DNA cards is increased and the chances of mutuant genes will increase. If both mother and father had mutant versions of the gene, however, disease will result. A limited gene pool makes it much more likely that two mutant copies of a gene will show up.
Now just what will this time bomb look like. Well should Heyra continue to rule out non-native DNA the combinations of DNA available within their nation will get narrower and narrower until so close the chances of unique DNA becomes less and less. Studies on the Amish[1] population shows that their close knit community has a higher than normal infant mortality rate and incidents of Ellis-van Creveld disease, which causes dwarfism of extremities and heart conditions, is much higher than the non-Amish population[2]. Other such issues can be seen in the remote populations of certain species, for example in the case of wolves it has been shown that cases of limited gene pool can lead to lower sperm counts in the males[3] . This will further compound the problem and mean that there will be a need for further non natural intervention in producing children. Now no doubt Heyra will point to potential methods of genetic screening and or manipulation to prevent this, however that is an ethical consideration and the long term impacts of such a process are yet to be analysed even within animal species. What is known however is that by limiting what DNA they use in the programme Heyra is effectively making themselves an island and that usually does not bode well for the long term benefit of a species. Look at many animals confined to islands such as those around Paracambi, it is well known that the lemars there experience a broad range of genetic issues such as a propensity to hip inflammation and arthritis. Now imagine this taking place within a human population, the pressure placed on health care providers would be increased, and that then places a need for an even greater emphasis on creating a larger youthful workforce to care for the old, would this therefore result in greater numbers of these made to order children, something that could be said to accelerate the explosion of this time bomb.
Now this is a mere exercise in genetic thoughts, it is obvious to any reasonably well read biology student, such as those I assume I have in this hall today, that great strides are being made in genetic engineering and the possibility of designer babies is not a science fiction fantasy anymore. We have the ability to engineer a whole range of DNA within animals, one need only look at the “Spider-Goats”[4] which have the ability to produce spider silk within their milk. If such advances are already successfully taking place then this is the route that Heyra must follow to ensure a long term viability within their gene pool, but what dangers does this process have in the long term? The answer to that is that we do not know and a large scale population growth project is probably not the best test tube. These children will likely move around Mundus, taking their genetic modifications with them and while this is likely to be good for diversity it begs the question, if a corporation has invested in perfecting this process and bringing a genetically modified human into the world will they be willing to cast aside that investment. What must be done is laws put in place now to ensure that any genetically modified child is made aware of their genetic history and then has no influence exerted on them by their scientific manipulators. This could lead to a form of moral time bomb, how psychologically will the realisation of many people coming to terms with the fact that they were not naturally created sit. Imagine a scenario, especially as we sit in a world today with so many social pressures to conform to a way we look, or speak, or act, imagine then a 18 year old girl knowing she is genetically altered to conform to some way of looking to maintain a native DNA. Then imagine this girl being told by schoolmates, or social media sites that the way she looks is negative, knowing you’ve been created a certain way and still seen as not pretty, or not perfect, your nose being too big. That will be hard to accept.
It is therefore my belief that biologically, economically and psychologically Heyra are walking into a future time bomb, the manner and date of the explosion unknown, but the results eagerly watched by a fascinated scientific and academic community.
1. Wherever they are on Mundus 2. http://www.as.wvu.edu/~kgarbutt/QuantGen/Gen535_2_2004/Inbreeding_Humans.htm 3. Hedrick PW, Fredrickson R. Genetic rescue guidelines with examples from Mexican wolves and Florida panthers. Conserv. Genet. 2010;11:615–626. 4. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/science-environment-16554357/the-goats-with-spider-genes-and-silk-in-their-milk
Intro
"As you can perfectly notice my Young friends on the first slide, I'm here to talk about International Relations and its main theories. Research in international politics and international relations is traditionally dominated by three central theories, realism, liberalism and constructivism. These theories provide different interpretative frameworks for analyzing different events and events. A great explanation of why just these theories have been considered to be more prominent is their usability and that they are easy to apply to many different types of cases.
The different theories that can be found in international relations offer different perspectives and perspectives on how to view conflicts. Where some focus on overall patterns within the political system, other theories emphasize instead direct causes of conflicts or co-operation, for example, through states' actions. However, it is important to emphasize that there exist subgroups in some theories where newer perspectives have been added to develop the traditional perspective. Many times you speak for example about liberalism like the fact that there is only one version, something that misses the developed perspective of more contemporary approaches".
Realism
"Realism as an approach to studying the outside world is the most well-established and dominant perspective in international relations. The theory is based on a natural state characterized by a Hobbesian "everyone's war against all". The philosopher Hobbes claims that man, by virtue of nature, is powerless and selfish. This is developed by Morgenthau, which states that the actions of states are a reflection of these human qualities. The egoistic nature is thus applied both on domestic and international policy. The state is the most important unit for realists as it is in practice an extension of the people. The international system is characterized by the actions of states driven by national self-interest and the pursuit of power. These states act in an anarchic system, which means there is no sovereign power that can punish states that act "wrong".
Traditional realism means that organizations such as the CTO or a conduct of one world government is not an effective approach when states are not willing to give up their sovereignty and will act for self-interest rather than cooperation. Furthermore, conflict and war are something that realists consider to be inevitable. It is therefore necessary for states to be prepared for this fact. Consequently, this thought largely opposes a large part of the CTO's core parts, namely that it is through disarmament approaching peace and security.
An important concept in realism is balance of power. The term can be seen as a mechanism that acts to prevent any individual state from gaining a dominant or hegemonic position within the international system. States maintain such balance by opposing threats from other states, thus securing their own security. The goal of the balance of power is therefore not to work for peace but primarily to act for security by the own state, sometimes necessarily through war. The theory means that states will respond to dangerous power levels either by building their own resources or strengthening their abilities through alliances. Realists' perception of what can be classified as a peaceful international order is therefore quite pessimistic, when it is declared a lack of war. Finally, realists are in doubt about statements about states' gender equality and justice issues. This is primarily based on the sovereignty of states as a cornerstones in the international system. Great powers or international institutions therefore have no authority to interfere with the internal circumstances of another state, as it would cause an increased system instability."
Liberalism
"An important point of departure in the liberalist perspective is an optimistic view of the people. A good view of human beings puts a clear foundation for a strong progression. By creating good conditions and well-functioning institutions, there are great opportunities to develop the good in man and take advantage of its characteristics.
One of the early thinkers of liberalism was Immanuel Kant. He felt that the free person was the basis for a more peaceful world. Dictatorships where people were oppressed were therefore considered more aggressive and warlike. Hence, the idea of democracy spread, as international peace benefits from this governance, that is, if you want peace, you should spread the democratic mindset.
Like realism, states are seen as an important player in the international system. In liberalism, however, states are not the only analytical unit, but also include organizations, individuals and companies that interact with each other in many different types of issues. International institutions such as the CTO thus play a central role. The good view of man and his advancement provides opportunities for creating institutions that can act for conflict resolution and serve as a contributing factor to increased cooperation. This cooperation works both at a political and an economic level. Strong cooperation strengthens trust among the various players, which leads to an interdependence, a mutual dependency. The pattern of interdependence between states and actors shapes these states and actors behavior. Thus, a reduced risk of conflict is created and the benefits are maximized for all involved.
According to liberalism, problems and conflicts that arise can be solved through dialogue and contract between the parties concerned. International institutions therefore play an important role in this by developing common trust between states and pursuing an effort to achieve common goals. The creation of the CTO and similar organisations have been an important part of this Common Position. The stated goal of the former was to maintain peace and security through the promotion of trade and social and economic cooperation. In addition, social development and promotion of human rights are also permitted as stated objectives. Many would argue that it has resulted in something that approaches a global human consensus rights. Thus, CTO interventions have been used to a large extent where these rights have been clearly infringed and abandoned".
Constructivism
"The most important assumption of constructivism assumes that there are no given or natural predetermined factors. States' interests are instead created or constructed. The theory devotes great power to the question of what constitutes a state's security interests when other states perceive a completely different security interest. The explanations are usually sought in the values, norms and identities that dominate in a state. Interests are thus parts of the socially created identities. States' identities, which means how people want to be perceived by others and their own people, affect how states will act. The perceived self-image based on these identities is something that constructivism is interested in. This may, for example, be manifested in acts of great powers, as in many cases it can be explained by acting to resist threats to the perceived self-image, thus defending its maintenance. If a state has a certain culture, identity or certain norms, then the actor asks how to act in certain given situations to live up to these ideas and values.
Constructivism can in many cases be seen as a perspective that tries to weave older, static and traditional theories. Thus, the constructivist angle of incidence gives a very broad foundation. Classical theories usually take clear standpoints against a universal truth. Instead, the ambition of constructivism is to try to explain how these relationships are connected and can be explained. The theory sees the relationship between actors and structures as a mutual addiction. How states will act affects the social structures in which the state system is embedded. At the same time, these structures, often based on shared knowledge, are the basis for how states act. If past interactions between states have built on competition and suspicion, it is likely that the structure will be shaped by power struggle and self-interest. In earlier interactions based on trustworthiness and where states identify with each other, we are more likely to see structures that build more on collective security practices. History thus plays a major part in the mutual dependence between actor and structure.
An important concept in the constructivist mindset is discourse. How we use the language to categorize and define our identities, norms and ideas is essential. Through this, it is largely about defining their own identity in relation to others. Thus, a "we and them-thinking" is something that can most be said to characterize constructivism".
Structuralism
"Structuralist school education mainly focuses on an economic foundation idea of the distribution of the uneven capitalist structure. In international relations, the spread of capitalism is seen as a reason for increased inequality and injustice. The theory is based on Karl Marx's ideas about how the group controlling the means of production actually puts the agenda and thus creates distinctly divided classes. The most important analysis unit within structuralism is therefore class. The focus is on the subordinates of the lower classes and the conflict that will inevitably arise when weaker players are dominated by strong ones. It is argued that this order is maintained by political leaders and elites within their own state but also by the relevant international institutions acting on the international arena. The interests of the state reflect the interests of the dominant classes rather than the existence of genuine national interest.
Structuralists take a step back in their analysis of international events and conflicts. They mean that we must realize that the actions of individual actors can be largely understood by making their role in the global economic system visible, as well as the structure and relationship between the actors concerned. Thus, the actions and role of individual actors can only be explained by being related to the prevailing systems and structures existing in international relations. Dependency theory is an important part of structuralism pointing out this thought and became noticeable in the 1960s. The structures of the state system and the global capitalist distribution of labor produce forms of systematic underdevelopment. Stagnation in some parts of the world produces development in other parts.
Within structuralism, there has been no major focus on identity and society that can not be deduced from capitalism and class society. Instead, the system is both internationally and nationally economically divided into social classes. Conflicts arise directly from this unfair division between classes, both due to economic inequality and imperialist interests. The violence can thus be linked directly to a counter reaction to this distribution and a clear attempt to defend the interests of the lower classes and even extend them. The current economic system creates tensions which inevitably lead to conflict. Peace can thus be achieved in a more equal socio-economic system where the gaps decrease between different classes, thus preventing incentives for war".
Critical Theory
"The reason for the critical theory, like the structuralist education, has its explanation in a Marxist way of thinking. Critical theory, however, reveals a part of the initial Marxist orientation's shortcomings and has, therefore, sometimes been called "post marxism". The theory means that the logical of the Marxist project should be to include all elements of social exclusion, not just the economic one. A dialogue regarding all forms of inclusion and exclusion is therefore desirable. Two important concepts highlighted by this widening of exclusion issues are culture and ideology. Both culture and ideology are extremely important in understanding how social relationships can be maintained, preserved but also challenged. The idea of ideology's influence is based on Communist Antonio Gramsci. He believed that ideology was important both in maintaining the rule of one class, but also in bringing about social change. The elites and classes that govern states can legitimize this regime by persuading the people to be fair. If you are to make a social change then it is necessary not only to win the battle on the ground but also the battle in ideas and ideologies.
Critical theory has an optimistic view of man and its nature is not something fixed without a format and created through social conditions through history. They look forward to the opportunity of individuals to influence and bring about a change in the capitalist unfair division between classes. However, the theory does not see class as the only analysis unit, but humanity in general, regardless of gender, ethnicity, religion, ideology, etc., has a common interest in fighting for human liberation. As a result of this human liberation, the critical theory is committed to the pursuit of a higher degree of inclusion in the moral and political life of all people.
Like structuralism, capitalism is seen by nature as the source of violence and conflict. Conflict, on the other hand, can find a solution through the struggle of individuals, especially with means such as dialogue and negotiation. Critical theory, however, is pessimistic in its position regarding international institutions, as these still reflect the interests of the great powers. International relations today are characterized by power and compulsion. Through dialogue and consensus, however, one can change the rules of play for the international game not only within societies but also between societies, states and civilizations".