Biology Says People On Welfare Should Die
TroubleMaker: Hi Charles, thanks for taking the time to sit down with us today for this interview at Return Of Kings. Please, tell us a bit about yourself and why you’ve agreed to this interview.
Charles Darwin: I am the naturalist behind the ideas of evolution and natural selection, the culmination of my life’s work. When I published my work, I faced criticism from large groups such as the church refusing to accept my theories. Over time, the Darwinism movement gained steam and natural selection is now considered by many to be an acceptable explanation for evolution. I feel you gentlemen are fighting a similar battle here at ROK; you are a small minority going up against giants in feminism and the mainstream media, both of which have more power and resources that you.
TM: Let’s dive right in. We’re going to discuss how the government in the United States has essentially negated the actual process of natural selection. To start, natural selection, in short, is the process of nature in which only the best organisms survive to reproduce and pass on their genetic line. Your theory of evolution can be summed up well in four points:
- Variation exists amongst the individual organisms of a species
- Organisms reproduce more than the environment can handle
- There is competition amongst individuals in a species
- Finally, the best organisms will live to survive and reproduce. The weak die.
Can you tell us how the first point relates amongst humans?
CD: Obviously if you look around at people, everyone is different. No two individuals are exactly the same. You have fat people, skinny people, ugly people, and beautiful people. People with motivation, and people without it. “Variation” is not purely physical, though I would argue beautiful people are more desirable amongst all for their genetics. We are programmed at a biological level that mating with an attractive person increases our status as individuals, and gives our offspring the best chance for survival. Some of the natural variations we see in humans may or may not impact the individuals survival. Hair and eye color are good examples of this. However, some variations DO help survival: a healthy body, good skin, and confidence. The fat woman who is using a power chair to get around Walmart isn’t going to have a healthy child with you, no matter how superior your genetics are. This brings us to the second point:
Organisms reproduce more than the environment can handle. There are a limited amount of resources that have to be spread across our society. Money is at the root of all of it. The people who are more intelligent, more educated, and better socially adept (often because they are physically attractive) are going to have more of it. The people that don’t have money line up in the welfare line and take the money from the rest of us. It’s a matter of scarcity, and everyone is competing for what we have. Unfortunately, the government has intervened with nature. Biologically, our species wants the scum mooching from the rest of society to be buried six feet under. They are contributing nothing to society except sitting on the corner asking for a handout, taking money away from the people who worked hard and earned it.
TM: Naturally then, there is a lot of competition for the high-status, attractive people.
CD: Exactly. What the government has done though is throw a lifeline to the crappy genetics. They are keeping these lines of genes alive, they then continue to reproduce at mass levels, which only makes our environment more resource starved. Yes, sometimes a gem comes out of these bad genes, but it is the exception, not the norm. Nature wants what is best for it’s species survival. This brings us to the fourth and final point of my theory on evolution, which can be summed up in a common phrase: survival of the fittest.
For example, let’s take a pride of lions. Let’s say one lion suffers an injury while hunting one day. Suddenly, he is no longer able to hunt down fresh prey. Because he is in a pride, he will not starve. The other lions will pick up the slack and bring him back food. He will be given the chance to nurse his injuries until he can return to the game of hunting down prey and contributing to his herd.
Let’s say a girl at the tender age of 19 gets knocked up by the bad boy. Rather than engaging in provided services for birth control prior to having sex, she gets knocked up and gives birth to a bastard child. The father is a deadbeat and doesn’t make his child support payments. So of course, the pride(taxpayers) pick up the slack, providing her with food, shelter, and other services for her. However, she is never forced to get back into the game. The prideprovides endlessly because the government takes the money out of those who work hard and gives it to the deadbeats who contribute nothing to society. For the next 18 years, her basic needs are met. If she wants to continue, she can get knocked up a couple more times along the way, and the government will simply increase the size of the checks being deposited into her account. She contributes nothing to society except for Facebook statuses of, “How tired she is after taking care of little Johnny all day,” and Instagram photos of her eating out at the latest trendy “foodie” place with her government checks.
Do you think the lions would bring back food for the injured lion for 18+ years while he contributes absolutely nothing to the herd?
TM: He would have to get off his ass and figure out a way to survive for himself. Either that, or he would simply be left to starve to death. He doesn’t have a government that will baby him and give him things so they can secure his vote in the next election.
CD: Welfare is when the government loves one stranger (and the collective votes) so much, that they are willing to steal from another stranger to help them out. As Abe Lincoln said, “You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves.”
As long as the government continues to subsidize programs for single mothers, and dead-beats who need food stamps, housing assistance, etc, for extended periods of time; they will continue to piss off those with superior genetics, which will simply lead to society burning down over time as the inferior genetics simply outnumber those with superior genetics.
TM: Thanks for your time and your thoughts, Charles. I hope you don’t roll around too much in your grave as our government continues to encourage, fund, and celebrate the survival of inferior genetic stock.