How Orchid's Designer Babies Will Create a World Far Worse Than 'Gattaca' Ever Imagined

The 'Tall Trees' Will be Cut Down, Whether They Like it or Not...

Boss Ross is at it again, once more trying to tackle the most pressing issue of our time: Gay Space Fascism and the Thieloids trying to install it as the new operating system of the US government (with significant success thus far, it should be noted). This time he dipped his toe into the GSF discourse by interviewing the head of one of the more notorious genetic screening companies to pop up in recent years: Orchid Biosciences.

A company founded by Noor Siddiqui, a woman on a mission to mainstream the practice of genetic screening of IVF embryos prior to implantation. To create a world where, in her words, “Sex is for fun, and embryo screening is for babies.”

Somewhat unsurprisingly, Siddiqui got her start as a Thiel fellow and founded Orchid soon after (which Thiel has directly invested in). In addition, Orchid has reportedly been used to screen at least one of Elon Musk’s four children with his favored concubine Shivon Zilis (it is genuinely unclear to me what else one can describe her as at this point), and they are just getting started.

What Orchid does, in a nutshell, is the eugenic ranking of a customer’s lab-created embryos using a ‘score’ created by the company to help predict their likelihood to develop certain diseases as well as a host of other genetic traits, including IQ. Thus, while the tech thus far does not allow Orchid to directly ‘edit’ a particular embryo, it offers customers the ability to choose the ‘fittest’ of any particular batch of embryos.

Obviously, discovering this seems to have been most disturbing for our boy pundit, and he didn’t take it lying down. Instead, he launched into an hour-long discussion/debate with Siddiqui, at least 45 minutes of which was him engaging in various kinds of tedious hairsplitting about terminologies and moral grammars (such as the technical moral status of particular ‘embryos’ and the acceptable methods of their demise), which almost no one outside the Beltway pro-life movement really finds compelling or interesting in any way. This is classic Douthat, who, as the Times’ only house moral and religious conservative, has developed a characteristically awkward and janky debate style designed to carefully avoid directly addressing first-order moral disagreements in hopes of making headway on second- or third-order issues (where he hopes his liberal interlocutors may be more amenable to good old scholastic reason).

This has served him well as a columnist, a job I should say he excels at, and certainly helped him keep his job even during the height of woke mania; however, it is not a very good method to use when confronting duplicitous Gay Space Fascists like Siddiqui (who, intellectually speaking, are best understood as a kind of ‘predatory super liberal’).

Hence why I found it so maddening when he finally got to his only truly interesting question of the entire interview, the transparently dangerous societal consequences that will obviously follow closely in the wake of this tech, but was then forced to allow Siddiqui to get away with a profoundly unserious blow-off response due to lack of time.

But it is precisely this question—the question of the creation of a new explicit genetic caste system within the United States and its vassal states—that is urgent. The creation of which is a primary cultural and political goal of Thiel and his allies in the medium to long term, and, as we can see with Orchid and other Thiel-backed bioengineering startups, is currently taking place right now before our very eyes.

So let’s dive in and discuss exactly what the consequences of Thiel’s genetic revolution will be for the Western societies that will inevitably embrace it.

‘Gattaca’ or Rwanda? Why the Latter Is Far More Likely Than the Former

Inevitably when the societal consequences of gene editing and/or embryo selection are brought up, the fictional example that is almost always cited is ‘Gattaca.’ If you haven’t seen the film, which is likely for many as it came out in the late 90’s, the story is simple as it attempts to portray the consequences of discrimination based upon one’s genetic status in a near future setting and the genetically imperfect protagonist’s attempt to overcome this reality. Though, to be honest, the story would have been a bit more intriguing (and funny) if the genetically ‘imperfect’ protagonist would have been played by someone who looked more like, say, Steve Buscemi instead of Ethan Hawke, but I digress.

Regardless, the thing that struck out to me about Gattaca is how nice everything looks. I know it’s supposed to be giving off a sinister ‘too good to be true’ or ‘what’s lurking under the surface of this thin veneer’ vibe, but in many ways the society seems extremely attractive, especially in comparison to our own (even if it does suffer from poor lighting), if for no other reason than that it seems both orderly and futuristic at the same time.

If this is the future gene editing has in store for us, then maybe it won’t be so bad after all!

And of course, in a way, ‘Gattaca’ is at least a rough approximation of the world the Thieloids want—a technologically advanced world with a strict genetic and social hierarchy (which they are, naturally, at the top of)—and in this sense the world portrayed in the film is quite optimistic.

However, it is also a somewhat absurd projection of the future given the current state of American society plus what the historical record shows us concerning the fate of past societies built upon strict genetic hierarchies (real or perceived).

Let’s first begin by going back and examining Siddiqui’s response to Douthat’s question regarding a potential ‘’Gattaca’-style future:

Douthat: $2,500 per embryo. If this technology works as well as you say it does, then you are essentially advancing toward a future where there will be a caste system in terms of how rich people versus poor people are genetically sculpting their offspring. Is your view that you are ushering in that kind of future?

Siddiqui: No, I don’t think so. And I think that society fundamentally rejects that idea because it is fundamentally so disgusting. We’re moving toward a world where IVF itself is something that is going to hopefully be covered for everyone. It’s a really sad history, I think, for the last 40 years that rich people get to have babies, and poor people who can’t afford IVF don’t get to. That’s a fundamental human right that I think was violated, and I think it’s nice that we’re finally seeing steps toward that being corrected, where everyone will be able to have access to IVF.

In addition to that, hopefully we’ll be able to get access to screening technologies like Orchid. Because it spurs such moral outrage, this idea that something that would create such an advantage, such vastly different outcomes—I don’t think that’s something that Americans will choose to only leave to the few that can afford it. I think it’s something that in the very near future, hopefully, we’ll be able to mobilize enough excitement around so that it’s something that’s going to be covered for everyone.

Douthat: So essentially, you need a kind of socialism to avoid the genetic hierarchy, eugenic dystopia—

Siddiqui:I think it’s just insurance coverage. I mean, it’s insurance coverage for a very nominal amount. We’re currently covering, in the last year of your life or the last two weeks of your life, extremely expensive life support machines and medical procedures that are extending your life by a few days.

I think that even today, with the money that we have, if we spent it more appropriately, if we spent it more in line with what people’s actual preferences are, we could already afford this for everyone in America today. It’s just a question of will. That’s why I’m so excited to talk to you—

The thing to notice here, aside from her shameless bullshitting, is just how inherently juvenile her mental model of the outside world actually is. It is as if Douthat is having a conversation with a 12-year-old, and not a particularly bright one at that.

However, this assessment assumes she’s being sincere, something that is entirely unwarranted. Siddiqui is deep in the Thielverse, a place that is profoundly hostile to egalitarianism in almost any form, no less to the out-and-out socialism she pretends to advocate for in the interview. The entire mental model of the Thielverse, from seasteading to SpaceX to the Cybertruck to Palantir to genetic screening, is premised upon an inevitable and intractable conflict between the virtuous few and the envious (and dangerous) many. A war between Eloi and Morlock, in which the former, though outnumbered, can triumph through the application of superior technological forms of violence and control, thus maintaining and defending the higher forms of ‘aristocratic’ life (the only kind worth living) from the threat posed by the envy and lust of the teeming masses.

Siddiqui knows this, hence why we can safely dismiss her socialist gesticulations as the smoke up the ass they actually are. Nevertheless, let’s try and take her claims somewhat seriously here, as such nonsense is also frequently parroted by other Thielworld propagandists (such as

Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm

) when attempting to defend genetic embryo screening.

Suffice to say, the conceit that some new kind of ‘socialist’ redistribution, or even merely a more ‘market friendly’ solution like the rising tide of lower prices via automation lifting all boats and thus eventually increasing access to the tech in question, is openly moronic and ridiculous.

Over the past several decades the cost of medical services in the United States, of all types, has gone up consistently and astronomically. This is not exactly a secret; it is also something that shows no signs of stopping in any kind of near- or medium-term future. In addition, merely having the service technically mandated for coverage via, say, a new regulation does not mean that the service becomes suddenly affordable, as there are many procedures and drugs that are technically ‘covered’ under various health insurance plans but are still prohibitively expensive.

Again, this is all stupidly obvious, as is the fact that the US will not be adopting any kind of universal health care system in the next several decades, as the coming fiscal battles over existing entitlements, already projected to run out of funds by the early 2030s, are already set to be quite vicious and zero-sum.

However, all of this doesn’t really matter, as the inherent issue of the creation of a new genetic caste system remains whether or not some kind of socialized medical system suddenly snaps into existence tomorrow. The same basic set of issues remains.

There are a few reasons why this is the case:

1. Natural conception will always be cheaper and easier than any and all IVF alternatives for the vast majority of people. This is another obvious fact; even if the cost of IVF and genetic screening were somehow reduced to zero overnight, this would not change the reality that it’s still far more work than the natural alternative. One has to go to a consultation (likely many consultations) and have uncomfortable discussions with people named things like ‘Noor Siddiqui’; one then also has to undergo egg retrieval (not exactly something that can really be described as painless or pleasant in any way), likely multiple times. One then has to also finally select a single embryo out of the dozens that were created based purely on the ‘genetic score’ created by Orchid and companies like it. An endeavor that seems at least somewhat emotionally fraught, at least for the vast majority of non-psychopaths.

2. People who are willing to go through such an elaborate and stressful process (again, assuming the cost has somehow magically become zero) are going to skew to being a small subset of, generally speaking, neurotic upper-middle-class strivers. The kind of people who worry constantly about how to maximize their hypothetical future 1.5 children’s prospects of getting into Stanford and see a little gene editing as the best possible way of getting a head start on the competition.

3. While undoubtedly some individuals with a longstanding family history of certain types of genetic diseases will use genetic screening (whom it is impossible to not feel profound sympathy for), most will, in fact, be motivated by the aforementioned desire to give their children a step up in the ongoing meritocratic arms race. Furthermore, while this new dynamic will surely increase the overall rate of usage of genetic screening, particularly by the ever-striving upper middle class, it is also very likely to have an overall depressing effect on the national birthrate as a whole. As if it becomes common knowledge that in order for one’s children to have a shot at a decent life, one must undergo an invasive series of IVF treatments and genetic screenings, many of what we can term more ‘casual’ would-be parents may just give up on the entire endeavor. After all, why bother bringing children into a world in which they will be doomed to be slaves due to the circumstances of their birth?

4. Perhaps the most important point: the entire aim of genetic screening is really the conferral of advantage. Thus, even if a certain ‘level’ of screening were somehow made available free of charge to all Americans, a new level would immediately then need to be created. One that would be more expensive and more exclusive and claim to confer even greater genetic advantage on the purchaser. Whether it actually would confer this advantage for the child in question in 10 or 20 or 30 years is immaterial and ultimately doesn’t matter. What matters is that people will believe that it does and act accordingly.

Thus, even in a magical future land of universal Thielcare, the emergence of a genetic caste system is all but inevitable, if for no other reason than that some (an upper-class minority) will choose to pursue genetic screening with abandon while a majority (the religious and the lower classes) will continue with traditional methods of reproduction. Left unchecked, this will develop into an explicitly two-tiered society in which a small number will lord over the many (in a way far more extreme and cruel than we witness in Western societies today, however ‘unequal’ they may seem now) and use the narrative of their supposed innate genetic superiority to justify this state of affairs. A techno-genetic ‘mandate of heaven.’

And, as I alluded to previously, this is the future the Thieloids are preparing for: an all-powerful Palantir that can be used to constantly surveil and thus control the genetically inferior Morlock classes. Such technology will be a necessity for the societal future Thiel and his fellow travelers are pushing for, in which extreme genetic and financial inequalities are explicitly formalized. A situation commonly referred to as ‘Techno-Feudalism’ or ‘Neo-Feudalism’ but which we here simply refer to by its proper name: ‘Gay Space Fascism.’

However, it is unclear if such a scheme can actually work in the long run, or even the short run for that matter.

Genetic Screening and the Problem of Societal Myth

The real problem for the Gay Space Fascist vision, in the long term at least, is that there is no obvious compelling mythic narrative that will be able to morally justify the world they are creating. Of course, in Alex Karp’s ideal world, this doesn’t really matter, as the mouth breathers will simply be kept in line via the aggressive application of technological and kinetic force, the manifestation of which will persuade the vast majority of the foolishness of ever opposing the ‘strong horse.’

Now this all sounds very nice and ‘cool,’ especially if you are an earnest young Thieloid or a variety of semi-moron tech investor imagining the glorious future you will soon be a part of. However, it will likely remain largely a fantasy, at least when it comes to actually maintaining societal order and cohesion in the long run.

This vision hasn’t even really worked in Gaza, the most bombed and surveilled open-air prison on earth, and it certainly isn’t going to work in the United States, a place infinitely larger and far more culturally anarchic than anywhere in the Gaza Strip. Hence why even a seemingly more benign attempt at technological control (at least compared to the situation in Gaza), such as an American version of the Chinese surveillance state, also will likely fail: the cultural, legal, and historical preconditions required for its success simply don’t exist here.

One of Plato’s most famous insights from The Republic is that of the ‘Myth of the Metals,’ i.e., that social stratification, while necessary, also must be justified via an appeal to a noble lie. A narrative structure that can justify and contextualize vast inequalities for those experiencing them.

Most societies throughout history, especially pre-modern ones, have had some form of this (the Divine Right of Kings, etc.). The United States today also has this kind of myth: the myth of meritocracy, which posits that most of those in positions of power and wealth got theirs through a combination of hard work, determination, and natural ability and that, at least in theory, ambitious future fortune seekers can likewise expect to have access to the same prizes if they just work hard enough and perhaps catch a lucky break or two.

Now American meritocracy has plenty of problems, chief among them being that more and more people simply no longer believe its premises nor put any faith in its promises. However, as Walter Sobchak famously observed, “At least it’s an ethos.”

An ethos that will, for better or worse, pass from the American scene once and for all in the next 10-20 years, as the boomer race slowly fades out into non-existence, just in time for the new order of Gay Space Fascism to take its place.

Of course, this is a hard pill to swallow for most people. It would actually be far easier for them to imagine something that seems to be more catastrophic (some kind of brutal civil war or zero hedgesque ‘collapse’ of the system, both very unlikely events in the near term) than to simply project out logically into the future given the few things we do actually know about demographics and technology.

One of the more humorous things about American-style apocalypse stories is how much trouble they have actually imagining the American way of life coming to an end; the imagined future may involve hordes of zombies or soldiers engaged in dramatic firefights, but all the action still takes place on a cul-de-sac, and when the ragtag gang of survivors inevitably makes their way to a grocery store, the shelves are, inexplicably, still bursting with goods.

Hence why the future being promoted by GSF seems to raise so few serious alarms: it is simply too strange and foreign to contemporary Americans to seem like a real danger.

Still, if the past 10 years have taught us anything, it should be that things actually can change, and change far faster than people think, even if boomers (both literal and spiritual) are unable to mentally process these changes.

However, these radical changes will take place ‘out in the open,’ as it were, without the benefit of a longer transitional period that would otherwise enable things to be culturally ‘settled’ in a more traditional manner. Hence why there will be no effective mythology that will be able to be birthed along with Thiel’s new genetically engineered vampire elites.

They will just ‘show up’ one day in schools and workplaces and begin to instantly beat out the competition via a combination of superior abilities and the assumption that they have such abilities due to their superior ‘breeding.’ It is worth noting again, I think, that whether or not they actually are genetically ‘superior’ to a ‘natural,’ all things being equal, is beside the point; the point is that they will be perceived to be so, which is all that matters.

Once that assumption is embedded into cultural expectations, which won’t take long at all, the natural thing to happen next is for the mass of remaining ‘naturals’ to experience a combination of mass despondency and mass resentment. Despondency because there will be little use in any longer ‘putting in the work’ to advance oneself, especially if one already knows that the few genuinely sought after ‘elite’ spots remaining (let us not forget that AI will also soon be making many, many traditionally ‘white collar’ roles obsolete in the very near future) will be reserved for ‘enhanced’ individuals. And resentment because this is simply the most natural human reaction to experiencing the change from a society in which things were, by any historical metric, surprisingly egalitarian and at least somewhat meritocratic to one in which things are suddenly openly and unapologetically neo-feudal in nature, with a genetically engineered caste of ‘elites’ suddenly appearing on top of the social pyramid.

This will almost inevitably result in violence on a significant scale. Even now we are likely seeing the first green shoots of this new tendency as American society transitions from the lifeworld of the ‘end of history,’ with its most characteristic act, the anonymous, nihilistic mass shooting, giving way to, once again, targeted political violence and assassination, which we can see in high-profile cases like Luigi Mangione and Elias Rodriguez.

However, the future is likely to be far bleaker in this sense than the present, as with the passing of the Boomers and the new reality of deglobalization and AI, life in the United States will likely become far more miserable and significantly materially poorer than it is now. A state of affairs that will pour gasoline on top of a fading liberal society struggling to conceptualize how exactly to deal with the new genetic reality it has created for itself.

The biologically ‘enhanced’ will likely be targeted for assassination on an individual level and will also become subjects of active hatred and derision from much of the populace. In response the new genetic elite will turn inward, doubling down on its own power and privilege with legions of private security patrolling heavily guarded compounds while a Palantiresque AI works overtime to ‘preempt’ violence against the ‘enhanced’ via an all-pervasive mass surveillance system. A move that will only breed further resentment amongst the rest of the populace and continue the cycle of violence.

How this conflict will end is uncertain, but either potential outcome (the creation of a tyrannical surveillance state that enforces genetic apartheid with the boot, the bullet, and the drone or the physical liquidation of the ‘enhanced’ class by a ‘natural’ uprising) is equally bleak.

Now one could easily accuse me of hyperbole here, but the thing is, the historical record indicates that I’m probably right.

We have examples of past societies based around some kind of racial apartheid in which the ruling class is considered innately racially, that is to say, genetically superior (which, it must be noted, is significantly different than the old aristocratic European idea of having ‘noble blood,’ etc.), and they almost all end in some kind of extreme bloodshed and societal collapse. France controlled Haiti, South Africa, Rwanda, the American South, and the list goes on (do I even need to mention that, uh, most famous example here?).

Again, to drive this point home, a big difference between the coming Thieloid genetic caste system and, say, the Indian caste system is that the latter had hundreds and hundreds of years to develop and is also deeply couched in Hindu metaphysics, and the former will be forming in the course of maybe a couple of decades and completely divorced from any kind of soothing mythology.

Also, I think it’s quite telling that China has so far apparently chosen not to embrace this technology, which is somewhat surprising if one assumes it confers such a massive technical advantage. China is, of course, culturally distinct from the West and, importantly, also doesn’t have any comparable myth to the Nietzschean Übermensch (such a story would make little sense in the Chinese mental universe). However, the real reason they have likely avoided embryo selection tech is simply because they see the massive potential for societal destabilization it poses in the medium to long term.

But perhaps the most simple way to explain the problem is with a simple question: Can you ‘murder’ someone who has become ‘transhuman’?

After all, if one has elevated themselves beyond the merely ‘human’ and posited that the same rules no longer apply to them, it stands to figure that they may also no longer be due the same courtesies either.

However society decides to ultimately answer this question in the coming centuries, it is certain that Thiel and his comrades will discover that, to their chagrin and consternation, in the meantime it’s going to be very much up for debate.