“These classes... contain the people who complain that they are starving for lack of work, though they will never perform any work that is given them.”
That sentence, or a variation of it, is repeated on FR every week; I hear it daily among business and professional people. The reasons are just as Havelock Ellis stated them: “inborn laziness, lack of vitality, and unfitness for organized activity”.
Some people were meant to live a subsistence existence in an agrarian environment — watching animals, seeing that plants get adequate water, rooting out weeds, doing harvest work. For thousand of years, that is how people lived. The industrial revolution changed all that; unable to adapt (feeble-mindedness?) these people became superfluous. We in civilized Europe and America have provided a safety net of welfare for these people, but what do you do when the economy contracts and these people keep breeding?
The problem is made worse by the fact that large numbers of these people are congregated in cities. A few years ago, I looked at murder statistics for my state. Almost all the murders take place in the most populous counties. Smaller (and much poorer) counties seldom have these crimes. Why?
I don't have a solution. I don't think anybody on earth does. The solutions proposed by Ellis and Sanger, as you point out, led straight to Nazi race theory. However, if you ignore the problem, you get the Paris mobs of the French Revolution, the Bolshevik chaos of 1917, and appeals to disaffected masses in Africa, Asia, Europe, and yes, the United States by Islamofascists (2008).
“Even so, come, Lord Jesus”
Do you mean 'unfit' in the evolutionary sense, i.e., genetically?
We in civilized Europe and America have provided a safety net of welfare for these people, but what do you do when the economy contracts and these people keep breeding?
If you say that these people "breed", then you must mean that they are a genetic or evolutionary variant of man, different from the rest. I.e., they are paupers genetically, and pass down their pauperism genetically. This is much like R.A. Fisher, who argued that upperclass British twits and the lower class are two different evolutionary variants of man. Upon reflecting, do you think any of this is true?