In effect, if something is too weak to survive (Not physically) then it's going to end up dead... If you have a retarted person driving a car, chances are they will crash and die sometime. It's self fulfilling. Back in nature, it was how strong you were and how well you could adapt, now it's how well you can manage your assets and be more manipulative than other people. The rules have changed since Darwin.
Social Darwinism presupposes that all human bengs have an equal opportunity to succeed, and therefore those who do not succeed, deserve what they get because they are either lazy or untalented. This of course is not true, which is why Social Darwinism fails. Essentially it was an idea which emerged with the rise of the bourgeoise and the industrial revolution, which sought to justify the massive inequality which existed in society. It's not really applicable.
Social Darwinism is not totally un-true. I will agree that some people try to succeed but do not, that is a fact of life. I will propose this however that changes the landscape of Social Darwinism: there has been a trend in education and society where no one's feeling can be hurt. Some schools have even gone as far as to remove grades from the curriculum so no child will be left behind, or poked fun at for bad grades, along with this some social norms are changing. Traditionally if you WIN a contest, game etc.. you might get a trophy or award of some sort. Now aday's parents and leaders are giving trophies to children and young adults FOR LOSING, so their feeling don't get hurt. So where am I going with this?
The children and young adults that I mentioned above now graduate school, being babied through life and given praise even for failure. They get a job and miss the deadline that their boss gave for a report. The boss fires them for inadequate work and not making deadlines. Being praised for failure their whole life the become depressed, for ACTUAL FAILURE and decide to move back in with mom and dad, or never go out and collect unemployment. I think that that qualifies as lazy. They got what they deserved because they gave up, thus proving that Social Darwinism has some truth to it.
Granted this is an extreme case, and seeing how the individuals react in society has not yet been proved, it still stands true.
1. "Kill the Weak!" Sounds like a very Neo-Nazist thing to say. We don't need any more Hitlers.
2. Without weak, those who would be considered strong would be normal, and then you would kill the weakest out of those, and the weakest out of those, and so on, until everyone is dead except for one, and they will perish too.
Social Darwinism is the theory which causes so much greed, hatred, and money-worship. People will justify being greedy because "the strong make it." Nazi's used SD to justify exterminating the Jews, because the Jews were supposedly weak. Capitalists and CEO's use it to justify their huge salaries while paying workers crap.
People will use SD to get ahead in life, while throwing the needy to the side. SD tells us that if you are poor, you must be lazy, so you must be a bad person. SD is a plague.
Hey Mrs.jones, would love to help you with the groceys your to weak to carry into your house, but instead, I'm gonna kill you. So byeeee!
Sounds horrible dosn't it. Darwanism is the back bone of abortions. Killing babys, which are the weakset. It is the same as killing an old lady in front of you at walmart, becuse she took to long to find $8.50 in her purse which she dropped 5 times.
And then the emotionall factor. How would children feel, how would the older generation feel? Becuse knowing one day you would be killed for being weak, instead of by natural causes.....tahts sick.
