The UK-A genetically and morally weakened nation?

[Vlad_Dracul]

My day to day work brings me into contact with all sections of the UK population.

The other day I went to a house in a big northern city to do a job. There were 4 or 5 young children pottering around in the garden and their mother, a young lady of perhaps no older than 21,was reclining on the settee, still in her dressing gown, watching daytime tv whilst a baby crawled around the dirty floor, its mouth smeared with the remnants of something chocolatey. Domestic chores were obviously not on the agenda that day as the house was filthy and strewn with all manner of domestic bric a brac. The time would have been about 11.00am. There was no sign of a male presence in the house, only the girls’ mother, her face haggard, obviously old before her time, no doubt burdened by her useless daughter.

I have seen similar sights so many times. Young girls getting pregnant, almost without any thought, the children usually sired by a selection of neighborhood baseball hatted chavs, the local studs, the majority breeding stock of Britain.

It did get me thinking though.

I once read an article which set out a very reasoned argument that Britain was now a country of genetically weak people.

Many good men and women of a certain character and strength had given their lives on the battlefields of Ypres, The Somme and many other battlefields of the first and second world wars.

The physically and mentally feeble and the spivs had been left behind to be the breeding stock of the post war years.. Of course many of the strong survived too.

Could there have been a gradual dilution of the physically and mentally strong characteristics of the population of Britain over the decades and if so, is that gradual backward evolution still in progress?

Surely such a situation is assisted by the state and society?

We have a situation whereby the terminally useless can feel free to spread their seed amongst ill educated and incapable state funded queen bees on inner city estates (as above) and their offspring will be brought up courtesy of the taxpayer.

But what about those who are more capable and more educated?

For example, many committed and/or married couples? They actually have to consider and plan to have a child in many cases or at least work and provide for one if one should happen along by accident shall we say.

Surely a future point will be reached whereby the offspring of the terminally useless will be the dominant group in British society and by association, a great proportion of them will also be terminally useless, lacking in spirit and strength of character.

What then will the future hold for Britain?

Perhaps it is well that we DO have a certain level of immigration from other countries for they may well be our last defence against a nation of pathetic, useless, lazy retards.

[Russ]

Yes of course, because there aren't any pathetic, useless, lazy retarded immigrants are there...

[SMG]

Dooper, What a good post, I found myself nodding in agreement, right up to the last paragraph, then I realized something.

Were` doomed.

[papa smurf]

there are 91 houses in my street ther are 7 of us with jobs ....viva la dole i go out to work 5 days aweek to maintain virgin medias network so my neighbours can all watch trisha

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by dooper786

What then will the future hold for Britain?

Hmm didn't Hitler spout the same nonsense about a gradual dilution of the physically and mentally strong characteristics of the population


Btw very few women lost their lives on WWI battle fields and if the war was the cause of our downfall of our 'prime breeding stock', surely the Spanish flu epidemic, which incidentally killed far more than the war would have evened out the situation, seeing as those weaker genetically would have been the first to succumb?


Imo the situation you describe hasn't come about through poor genetics but through not giving a toss about the consequences of your actions and laziness and I agree with you the future for this country is bleak

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Russ B

Yes of course, because there aren't any pathetic, useless, lazy retarded immigrants are there...

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by dooper786

What then will the future hold for Britain?

Survival of the fattest......

[downquark1]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6057734.stm

[SMG]

Originally Posted by Matt D

Survival of the fattest......

downquark1,

The beauty of this link is that no one will ever know how, of even if, the human race will survive the next 10 years, let alone 1,000.

[Theodoric]

Originally Posted by dooper786

<Snip>
Many good men and women of a certain character and strength had given their lives on the battlefields of Ypres, The Somme and many other battlefields of the first and second world wars.

The physically and mentally feeble and the spivs had been left behind to be the breeding stock of the post war years.. Of course many of the strong survived too.
<Snip>

Actually, it's quite easy to turn this argument on its head. It could be argued that those who rushed to join up straight away were the gullible taken in by glib politicians and the easily led (think of all those Pals battalions in WWI where there could well have been hard-to-resist peer group pressure to join up). It could then be argued that those who avoided joining up straight away were the more intelligent. Not that I'm saying that this was the case, simply that things are often more complicated than it appears at first sight.

And as for character, is there any evidence that it is inherited, that is that it has a genetic component?

And going back to WWI, yes the British forces on the Somme in 1916 were mainly volunteers but by the time of Ypres in 1917 conscription was in force so the slaughter was being distributed with a more even hand among the male population.

Finally, we are talking about 2 periods of 4 years and 6 years and, in WWII, the numbers of British casualties was much less than in WWI. So, were the losses sufficient to make a large difference in the male breeding stock? I suspect not.

[Xaccers]

Also look at America, am I right in thinking that if you were in college you avoided the draft for Vietnam?
Therefore people who were not intelligent enough or driven enough to get a college education were sent into a warzone.
Similarly today, many under-educated people with low job prospects join the US army as there is not much else for them to do.

If the argument was correct, then the lower end of the population would be reduced, not the other end who have jobs/education etc, leaving the American population very well educated...


Genetically weakened no, morally, perhaps.
When we have people who have no issue with abusing the benefits system rather than pull their own weight, people putting no value on the life of another human being, people persecuting others simply because of their skin colour or where they or their parents were born, when we have people like that in this country, it weakens the nation.

Work ethic is not genetic. It is a enviromental factor. It is not something that will be passed on and affect the gene pool of the country. There are a lot of these views around about a degrading and criminal society but we have a strong economy and a nicely educated workforce. We hit far above our size on the world stage. We are not living in a crumbling, doomed nation as posts like this seem to suggest.

What your talking about is the typical lack of education, employment in poorer areas. For some reason beyond me these form cycles which its hard to get away from, such as high rates of teenage mothers who are often too young to provide proper parenting resulting in more of the same.

To suggest its something genetically wrong with them is absurd.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Damien

Work ethic is not genetic. It is a enviromental factor. It is not something that will be passed on and affect the gene pool of the country. There are a lot of these views around about a degrading and criminal society but we have a strong economy and a nicely educated workforce. We hit far above our size on the world stage. We are not living in a crumbling, doomed nation as posts like this seem to suggest.

What your talking about is the typical lack of education, employment in poorer areas. For some reason beyond me these form cycles which its hard to get away from, such as high rates of teenage mothers who are often too young to provide proper parenting resulting in more of the same.

To suggest its something genetically wrong with them is absurd.

It's not nature, it's nurture.
People brought up being told/shown that they don't have to work or stay within the law to make ends meet, don't learn that having kids at a very young age is a bad idea when you can't even support yourself properly, aren't taught that education is important, aren't driven to better themselves, people like that are normally condemned to repeat the cycle.

So what percentage of the population are single mothers with 3/4 children by different fathers.1%? 10%? 30%? 50%?

Frankly the majority of the population work and work very hard,sometimes at more than one paying job..I think we are in no danger of losing our edge..after all we are the one country in europe that the working population works the longest working week.

Single parent mothers are a very small part of the nation and some of them actually work as well.I don't think there is any likelihood of us becoming a stupider nation.Well provided we stop believing the Sun and the Daily Mail that is.

I once read an article which set out a very reasoned argument that Britain was now a country of genetically weak people.

Many good men and women of a certain character and strength had given their lives on the battlefields of Ypres, The Somme and many other battlefields of the first and second world wars.

The physically and mentally feeble and the spivs had been left behind to be the breeding stock of the post war years.. Of course many of the strong survived too.

Could there have been a gradual dilution of the physically and mentally strong characteristics of the population of Britain over the decades and if so, is that gradual backward evolution still in progress?

You do know character is not passed on in a genetic sense? Take out the enviromental factors and a person can develop a totally different accent, personality and intellegence from their parents? Even physical strength can vary.