Alabama Gazette - The people's voice of reason

Survival for the Misfittest

 

February 1, 2018 | View PDF



Just about everybody now understands the law of natural selection. It is very simple and obvious—the strong survive and reproduce; the weak perish and die out—what we call “Survival of the fittest.” But in the beginning, when Charles Darwin first introduced it, many people became very angry and claimed that it was blasphemy and against the Word of God.

In the early 20th century, people in America were taking interest in eugenics—selectively breeding people to promote the propagation of the strongest and most intelligent while discouraging the proliferation of the less desirable. It was getting strong public support until Adolf Hitler came along and gave the idea a distasteful reputation. Today, in spite of the huge potential benefit of eliminating hereditary defects, most people still reject the concept of improving humankind in this manner.

Instead, we now suffer from political policies that turn natural selection onto its head—in other words, upside down. How? Our welfare and public assistance programs reward the people who are lazy, unproductive, and even criminal, and penalize (tax) the productive sectors of society. These programs are often so generous, that some productive people who are tired of the taxes and regulations decide to quit and join the welfare crowd. And the one detail that makes these policies really dangerous is that the more children they bear, the greater the rewards.

We have ample statistics to prove that poverty, crime, and single parent households are on the upswing and that married, responsible, two-parent families are declining.

Recently, Dennis Pratt on http://www.Quora.com made some points on this topic and admitted that it was his most controversial political opinion—controversial because many people, perhaps a majority, are too misinformed to comprehend the ramifications of our current public assistance policies.

Pratt said, “Taxpayers should not be forced to incent nonproductive people to multiply… the use of government violence (through laws) to force productive people to pay for nonproductive people to have children is, not only unethical, but society-destroying.”

The ethical and productive people limit the sizes of their families to fit within their budgets and available time and to provide an optimum development environment for their children. The welfare programs entice people to do just the opposite—to abandon working for their livings, and instead, recklessly multiply with the incentive of greater and greater benefits and paychecks. With each new generation, they become a larger percentage of the population. The declining producers are forced to pay increasing taxes to support this rapidly growing mushroom cloud. In as little as two or three generations, the support will become impossible.

There are two other items to consider:

IQ is largely genetic. By encouraging the propagation of low IQ components, the IQ of the whole is diminished with each successive generation. People become less capable of taking care of themselves.

Environmental factors of IQ also diminish. The abilities of the lower IQ parents to provide also dwindle with each generation. At some point, the parents are unable to provide at all.

Each new generation becomes less capable of finishing school, getting jobs, staying married, and practicing responsible family planning.

To quote Dennis Pratt:

“Government welfare-for-children programs have caused some of the most horrendous problems in our society, including multi-generational welfare families, the growth of teen pregnancies, the obliteration of the black family, a welfare cliff disincentive to becoming productive, and a victimized, ‘can’t-do’ mentality.

“This is akin to a government-sponsored reverse eugenics program—a dysgenic program, if you will. It progressively reduces a society’s ability to produce wealth, impoverishing a nation through a government selective-breeding program.”

In other words—survival for the misfittest—provided by government intervention at the expense of the fittest—that is, until there is nothing left but the misfittest, and then there is nobody left to support them.

 

Reader Comments
(0)

 
 

Powered by ROAR Online Publication Software from Lions Light Corporation
© Copyright 2017