Of course, it would never be you, would it? It's always be them, over there, the rabble, the scum, who would be on the receiving end. Elitist bastards. Marxists might belong to the most murderous non-religious cult in history, but they do have a point about class war.I know that many ordinary supporters of the cradle to grave state have damn good intentions, but whatever the truth about the morality and pragmatism of this system, heck I'm not sure about that myself, the real eugenicists (whose aim is dumbing people down, not building them up) have benefited tremendously from it. Yet it's funny, all those breeders on benefits, and we still can't acheive replacement fertility?
That is the real eugenics, and all you self righteous presumably middle class types who wouldn't mind sterilising the unworthy peasantry, you are yourselves victims of it. Eat up! Every mouthful you take from your BPA lined plastic containers and cans makes you a little more infertile. Who's laughing now? Well it's certainly not your children 'cause you won't be having any. Not so funny! Malthus finds it Hitlerious though. It's for the Earth, you understand. Hurry up and die so you stop consuming things you don't really need, like oxygen.
Eugenics is the product of people who have lost respect for human life and do not see themselves as being interconnected with the rest of humanity. Soulless creatures. Not atheists, just negative eugenicists.
PS: I don't use the term 'eugenicist' as a pejorative because really everyone is a eugenicist in practice - partner selection is a blatantly eugenic process. So I specify state eugenics, i.e. forcing people to comply with eugenic processes, and I emphasise both conventional negative eugenics (the sterilisation or worse of 'unfit' individuals) and what I describe as 'real eugenics' (the actual aim of most social engineers, which is to REDUCE the health and intellect of a society, not INCREASE it like the naive popular conception of eugenics says), as being the evil eugenics that we rightly consider to be nefarious. Why would tyrants want to kill off the 'weak'? No, they want to kill off anyone who might resist them. That's what the Commies did. That's what the school system's real purpose is.
Posts
.jpg)
2 comments:
In Canada up until the late sixties it was common to sterilize folks with developmental disabilities and native children. While native children are mostly now allowed to procreate there remains a strong social impulse to sterilize women with developmental disabilities. And why not? Should folks who are incapable of caring for themselves, and are sexually active, not be prevented from becoming pregnant? But as you point out the target is now the poor and marginalized - schemies living on benefits.
While upwardly mobile power women decline to reproduce, they take umbrage with taxes they pay to support unemployed, undereducated women who are rewarded with higher benefits for producing more and more children.
These barren bitches believe they are entitled to the fruits of a society that depends on the next generation to survive, but refuse to provide that next generation. The solution for them is simple: eliminate the breeders. The savings on maternity hospitals, schools, benefits etc ... would be substantial. But how to ensure future generations of workers? Immigration.
Get rid of the native population of unproductive parasites and replace them with a transient population of wage slaves. Eu - topia.
I have nothing more to say to that scunnert! [claps]
Post a Comment