Conservative transhumanism is the political position of supporting human genetic modification,
including germ-line modification (and thus being a transhumanist),
but only in a relatively limited and regulated way, being opposed to a genetic-modification free-for-all.
Paradigmatic proponents of this original synthesis include:
- Jonathan Anomaly. Influential academic philosopher.[1][2][3][4] He is in favour of human enhancement.[5] In 2024, Jonathan Anomaly published an article titled: "The radical conservative case for genetic enhancement."[6] Anomaly has described his own ideology as "techno traditionalism".[7] The concept carefully mixes liberal eugenics with traditional social conservatism. In another article, Anomaly argued for a moderate application of embryo selection and related technologies in order to keep the dangers of dysgenics at bay. This article alluded to the famous conservative concept of "Chesterton's fence".[8]
He has a blog[9] and strongly alignes with the rationalist online community, but has been very critical of effective altruism.[10] Anomaly has furthermore published in various conservative journals.[11][12][13][14]
- Leopold Aschenbrenner. Employee at OpenAI.[15] He published an influential essay titled: "Burkean Longtermism: People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors."[16]
- Richard Hanania. An eminent conservative blogger[17] that is in favour of bioaccelerationism and eugenics.[18]
Karlin
- Anatoly Karlin, who has been described as a Russian commentator and transhumanist.[19] He is a researcher in psychometrics and economics.[20] He publicizes his research mainly through his twitter[21] or blog.[22][23] In 2015, Karlin described his views as in line with "raising IQs" by genetic editing and adopting "transhuman" (reprotech) technologies or radical life extension to preserve Western culture:
"Yes, I know, they are sort of dorky and even SJWish at times. But technology has ideological load, as Michael Anissimov put it (in an article I can’t find), and it just so happens that transhuman techs are perfectly in line with Alt Right, NRx, Identitarian, and even White Nationalist agendas. Raising IQs via genetic editing will arrest the dysgenic trends increasingly affecting all peoples on the planet. Degenerating into a global idiocracy serves absolutely no-one’s interest: Not of Europeans, nor Asians, nor Africans. Automation will (hopefully) redistribute resources from the NAM-pandering welfare systems of today to something more fair and equitable. It will also probably help even the gap between indigenous and immigrant fertility rates in Europe and the US. Radical life extension will help preserve white majorities in Europe. The reason that they are declining isn’t just a matter of birth rates, but also of death rates; Europeans are simply much older than your typical immigrant “youth.” Plummeting mortality and morbidity rates – apart from their general desirability – will from an ethnic perspective overwhelmingly benefit whites and help Europeans maintain majorities in their historic homelands."[24]
Kirkegaard
- Emil O. W. Kirkegaard, a quantitative social scientist and blogger,[25] who prominently self-identifies as a transhumanist.[26] He has been focusing on how to reverse dygenic trends that would otherwise make a transhuman singularity impossible.[27]
