The Severe Downsides of 'Transhumanism' Paranoia

"Conservatives have long struggled to find an ideological enemy to replace communism. It's easier to define yourself when you know what you're up against. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and others want transhumanism to be that defining foe. But transhumanism is a fringe notion that looms larger in the minds of conservatives than it does in reality. It is not the great threat that faces the country. It simply makes for a good enemy to advance a "respectable" form of right-wing populism."

"Conservative Partnership Institute program director Rachel Bovard defined transhumanism in her NatCon speech as "the belief that technology can enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities beyond current human limitations." She then claimed that the ideology is "not cool," "not interesting," "stale," and "boring"-all while insisting it's "an existential threat to human dignity straight from the mephitic boardrooms of hell.""

"Hawley expanded on the topic in his NatCon speech, connecting transhumanism to eugenics and declaring it a threat to the working man. In his opinion, the ideology is fundamentally anti-democratic and un-American. America is a nation founded on the idea of the common man. The American republic is premised on his worth and his liberty. But the transhumanist ideal rejects the common man's worth. And artificial intelligence thre"

National Conservative Conference speakers warned about transhumanism, portraying it as an existential threat to human dignity and democratic values. Rachel Bovard defined transhumanism as the belief that technology can enhance human capacities and labeled the ideology an existential danger. Senator Josh Hawley linked transhumanism to eugenics and argued it rejects the worth of the common man, calling it anti-democratic and un-American. The framing of transhumanism functions as a readily identifiable enemy for conservatives seeking a replacement foe for communism. The danger posed by transhumanism is portrayed as overstated and largely rhetorical.

Read at The American Conservative