Be warned: this post is rather controversial. More controversial than (almost) anything I’ve written in a weblog to date. (Well, apart from that time I called out [name withheld] in an angry rant. Here’s hoping she’s been exposed for the [noun withheld] she really is.)
A while ago – I think it was the weekend before last – I had a rather interesting call from an Internet acquaintance. There were all kinds of weird things being thrown around, but at some point we got talking about people who “ought to be killed”.
After that phone call, I began to think…
Who would I kill, if I had the choice?
Before I continue, I wish to stress that I’m not advocating killing whatsoever. I’m not telling anyone to go out and take people’s lives. However, we all have had moments – even split seconds – when we’ve thought that the world would be a better place if certain people were taken out. Yes, you have!
If you consider issues of overcrowding, ever-strained resources and stories of “wastemen” and “wastewomen” (or wastegash!) deliberately starting families and living off the government on benefits, I find myself frighteningly convinced that the only way to solve our global issues is to have some kind of mass cull.
There are of course many problems with this approach. The first is in determining who exactly to cull. After all, who is anyone to decide who lives and who dies? Besides moral and religious implications, while it might be desirable to get rid of “stupid people”, they also happen to be big businesses’ main means of survival. And we’d have a hard time determining what constitutes a “stupid person”.
The second, which is something we might overlook until it actually gets to that stage, is that we’re quick to make exceptions once we decide on criteria. Usually, because we know and love a “stupid person”.
After great thought, here is my list of ten groups of people (in no particular order) of who I would vote for elimination.
People who REFUSE to work
Very simple. If you’re someone who lives off government benefits, and refuses to go out and look for work – and especially if you’re offered a job and refuse to take it – you have to go. No exceptions.
As much as people in the UK want to complain about the “invasion” of people from eastern Europe, China, India etc., they are (usually) here because British people won’t do the kind of work they will.
This is right at the top of my list, because – if it ever came into play – you’ll see just how quickly people in this category will find themselves a job.
People who have ever appeared on Jeremy Kyle/Jerry Springer/Maury Povich/similar show, as a participant
Regardless of whether the guests are real or fake, if you have to resort to going on television and making a fool out of yourself to resolve your issues, you gots to go. The fact there are so many people wanting DNA tests and cheating on their partners is rather disturbing, but how can they live with themselves afterwards?
I’d also extend this category to people in the studio audiences of these shows – and especially the ones who give out shit advice – because they’re encouraging the whole thing.
Slow walkers / people who deliberately get in the way
Right now I can be compared to a hippo: I weigh upwards of 250lbs (not proud of that at all), but I move faster than you might think. It frustrates the heck out of me to be held up by people walking slowly and aimlessly, creating queues and crowds in their wake.
If you’ve ever experienced being in a hurry while using public transport, you’ll see these people all the time: they take ten seconds to get off or on a train or bus; they stand in the doorway; they huddle themselves into a small crowd right to give the impression that the vehicle is full; they walk into you at inopportune times; they block the escalators and stairs with their zombie-like pace.
Don’t get me wrong, there are always moments when one walks too slowly, or gets in someone’s way. But these people do it consciously. (If you want proof, just see how fast they move if they’re behind you and you have to open a door.)
People who pretend to be single when they actually have a partner / people who pretend to be taken when they’re actually single
The dating game is hard enough, with all the lies and silly little games people play, without introducing outright misrepresentation. I’ve experienced this in a night club once, but this category is specifically based around speed dating – at least four times out of the 31 there have been participants who were in relationships.
I also read somewhere a while back, about a site that sells fake engagement rings, used to deter men from chatting up women. I don’t know about you, but I find those kinds of things very disturbing.
I can understand if saying “no thank you” – or telling someone in plain terms – doesn’t work, but if misleading someone is your first resort then you have to go.
People who use silent treatment as a first resort
I hate silent treatment. Silent treatment (as a first resort) says to me that, rather than accept responsibility and face issues, the person who gives it is someone who ignores and runs away and hides from them.
If I’m supposed to be responsible for everything that happens to me (and according to some people, things I have no involvement in, but get blamed for anyway), I want to be around people who take responsibility for what happens to them. I have a feeling that most of those people would be men. 
People who won’t take responsibility for themselves, and want handouts
This acquaintance of mine also mentioned a documentary on television, which featured this overweight teenage girl who was about to have a baby. Despite being told about the risks to her pregnancy, apparently she refused to lose weight or give up smoking, and even to have a natural birth. In addition she refused to look for work to support the baby.
This category is very broad, and – from my own life – includes people who expect others to do things for them without lifting a finger, and those who have done nothing to deserve the handouts (financial or otherwise) they demand. People from my high school, I am talking about you.
I came so close to going on a tirade about people who refuse to accept responsibility for choosing to go out with that jerk/slut. They probably won’t even realise that they qualify for this category.
People who have have kids/pets, knowing they don’t want/can’t afford to look after them
The next step down from people who live off the government and the taxpayer, are those who deliberately have children with the view that someone else will pay for them to be raised. Quite a few people have talked about teenage girls who admit to having kids as an easy way of getting on the property ladder.
What really disgusts me are those people who have large families (upwards of three kids) and expect the government, or some rich fool, to give them money. Just this morning I caught a glimpse of a story in the Metro, about a woman who had 13 kids – and wants twins.
There was also a story recently about someone who went to jail for something involving puppies and a suitcase.
Stories of people mistreating pets and kids sicken me, because there’s absolutely no reason to bring these things into the picture if they’re unwanted. There also no reason to keep the people who commit these atrocities alive.
People involved in the “expenses scandal”
Given that this has been happening during the so-called “credit crunch”/”economic meltdown”/”recession”/bullshit price hiking/whatever you want to call it, what these people are communicating is that maintaining their lifestyle is far more important than the state of the world. And I’m not just talking about the government – anyone who decided to inflate their prices to make a profit is included. As I’ve suggested a couple of times before, this so-called “recession”/”credit crunch”/”economic meltdown” is a result of inefficiency at the top.
People who have reached here and think that Drew is advocating murder
You deserve to get one in the head, because you obviously can’t read.
So-called positive people
So-called positive people – and I’ve mentioned and talked a lot about them recently – may be fun to be around when life is good, but in reality they are nothing more than delusional negative people. In my book we have to get rid of these kinds of people, long before we even think about doing away with regular negative people.
I would argue that it’s the so-called positive people who created most of the mess we have now, by way of manipulating, using and abusing other people, just to please themselves. Although negative people do this too, the big difference is that negative people are at least aware of being negative to some extent; so-called positive people are convinced they are making the world a better place.
With the 70-80% of the population being eradicated, we will have plenty of dead bodies to use for fuel – thus solving the world’s energy crisis and providing enough soap and fresh meat for everybody.
</tongueincheek>
Tags: Cull, Exceptions, Exposed, food, Global Issues, Groups Of People, Means Of Survival, Overcrowding, people, Phone Call, problems, Rant, Religious Implications, Stupid People, Stupid Person, Vote, Weird Things
Comments
One response to “Drew’s 10: People Who Have To Go”