SUBJ1

Your saying so does not make genetic engineering safe. "We can always just fall back to cloning" is nothing but baseless hand-waving. What it does is it displays you are in denial. It is not at all an unreasonable assumption that there can be safe genetic engineering besides eugenics.

A regime that practices democracy, bringing many advantages.

Modified genes have already escaped into the wild, with effects that will not be known for a while. Even if you limit the discussion to engineering the human genome, there is still a risk of undesirable side effects. Assume it could be made safe; safe for what proportion of the population? How soon? At what cost?

I think you meant a regime that proclaims democracy. Plenty of examples of how that can go. Advantages to a small circle of friends, perhaps. Perhaps you believe you will be one of the select few?

Details aren't really significant. This exercise was designed to show that genetic engineering is desirable. If it becomes safe and available to a couple they will gladly use it. This will not leave their urges untreated and turn them into anarchists. In the light that eugenics is low-tech genetic engineering, why should a poorer couple reject eugenics?

What kind of benefits you think an Eugenics Party could deal out? Remember, Japanese pornography is not based on reality.