You are a walking talking god-complex that presupposes infallibility into all of your ideas.

Irrelevant, ad hominem attempt to "knock me down a few pegs".

Theres nothing original about you nor you thoughts.

Ad hominem irrelevancies aside - show me where or from whom you would claim I got them.

You amend my idea by trying to slyly put forth the notion that I suggested that the genesis assumes force or control... no, this is only possible if its arrived at independently thats the hypothetical, otherwise its just a retrogressive delve into policing of thought... you’re falling back into old habits...

How many people do you think believed they were so right that if people were as smart as they are, they'd come to the same conclusion. I'm not assuming anything - I'm telling you that your hypothesis is shit - ok as a fantasy but don't try to sell it as philosophy. It's politics. You want what you want and society isn't giving it to you.

Your hypothetical fantasy where people just happen to toss their priorities, beliefs and sacrifice their lives to do what you think they should and reach the same conclusion you did - not gonna happen. What's the point of such a hypothesis, other than just wishful thinking? Or trying to figure out a way to get everybody where you want them?

And what "old habits" are you referring to? I bet that sounded good in your head but, since you don't know me from Adam, it's...well...I don't even know what you're trying to imply there -

The rest is just a blanket condemnation and more wishful thinking.

You're assuming there's something wrong with reality. You put reality on one side, your ideas about how it should/could be on the other and judge the "defect" to be in reality and, as if that's not enough, you then hypothesize that it would have the "potential" to improve or fix or otherwise "right" itself, according to your ideas of what's right - i.e. to your specifications - i.e. to be dis- and reassembled to suit you.

Do you hear yourself?