I wasn't really thinking that forced breeding to create freakish humans would be "evolutionary growth as a race." But then who agrees on absolutely everything?-->-->--> If you think about it any change in a species is evolutionary. The spectrum of change is not linear, it’s n-dimensional; so who are we to decide what change in humans is good or bad? We judge the results of selective breeding by the extent to which they serve us.-->--> All political systems include a mix of "social good" and "individual rights." How long a system lasts depends on a lot of factors. A system based on pure selfishness won't last much longer than Ayn Rand's failed little cult.-->--> More to the point, political systems are like a species in that they are ever-changing, Their development is not linear, and the balance between social rights and individualism is never acceptable to everyone, (I am willing to guess that the percentage of people fully satisfied with the blend is very small). Moreover, no one knows what development is good or bad at the time it is adopted. Contesting for a better balance according to our own priorities, needs, and secondarily our professed philosophies is the only constant of human society. In this context, permanent peace is never really achievable --> --> One final point for consideration—political systems really do not end, unless every member of that society ceases to exist. When a system fails, it fails to satisfy the needs of a large portion of that society. The system is then modified, sometimes drastically, but it never really ceases. --> --> I am not sure where all this speculation is going, but the journey is fun.-->-->