Tuesday, December 13, 2005

More on Social Darwinism

Social Darwinism is a concept that I find quite intriguing. After reading the article posted below in reference to a speach given by Barak Obama, I began to do a little research into the concept of Social Darwinism. Here are some links that provide a little insight and history into the concept:




Let me know what you think.


BlackLabelAxe said...

Alternate definition:

Social Darwinism: An easy term to explain to the masses, it's the new buzz word for "man your battlestations" in the new class warfare. Anyone who believes in freedom, and is therefore not a subscriber to socialist progressives' (the far left) ideology is now called a "Social Darwinist".

If this is "Social Darwinism", then I support it:

A man who will not work, but is able, should not get a paycheck. A man who spends his entire paycheck every week for his whole life and saves nothing deserves nothing once he stops working.

I eagerly donate to the Red Cross, and the Salvation Army, sometimes so much that it hurts. These organizations help people that cannot help themselves, and just need a little boost to get them through. I don't beleive in government-sponsored charities, and I don't beleive in free rides.

Remember this:

"Hungry people don't stay hungry for long"
-Rage Against the Machine, "New Millenium Homes"

BigNewsDay said...

Currently,you have people working two or three jobs just to survive. These families can't aford to pt money in savings for retirement. The only way this country canremain srong is if we all band together and help each other out. The elite are currenly playing an evil game of divide and conquer and it is the American people that are losing. I'm not for giving a bunch of loafers hand-outs, but the rich continue to get richer while the poor are getting poorer. The middle class is slowly being elliminated. If something isnn't done soon, we will all be the cockroaches of the elite.

BlackLabelAxe said...

BND, the gap between the rich and poor is not widening. We all enjoy an amazingly high standard of living, and there are more middle class Americans than ever.

To the person working three jobs:

Wouldn't it be nice to get back the 30%+ you're having stolen from your every paycheck in taxes? Then maybe you could put the money from one job just into savings. That would require responsability on both the Citizen and the government, and God knows, we can't have that anymore. We must have someone in Washington LEGISLATE the common sense we need to make through this terrible life!

The American middle class is a strong, empowered group. Our middle class is growing stronger with the advent of the internet, which enhances our awareness. To say that we'll be cockroaches to the rich is emotional and baseless paranoia (and far left propoganda!), and has no place in a reasonable discussion.

Hey, they bond together and "help each other out" in North Korea, Cuba, and China, let's be like them! That sounds good in theory, I'd like to help everybody out too. Unfortunately the results are immense poverty, no government accountability, fascism, unspeakable crimes against humanity, and eventually war. Sign me up!

BigNewsDay said...

I guess we have a fundamental difference of opinion here. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I disagree with your opinion on what happens when we help each other. I believe that if we are all strong, our nation is strong. If we are all divided, our nation is divided. Our inner city schools ae falling apart. The kids that are fortunate enough to have books, either have outdated or damaged books. Cities are divided into sections based on class, and if you are unfortunate enough to be from the wrong section, you will have to work ten times as hard to have what those raised in a wealthier section have. I believe that is what the meaning of social darwinism is, and that is a reality in the world today.

BlackLabelAxe said...

BND, you are a genuine humanitarian, and I respect that very much. It takes one to know one. I wish we could help everybody in need. I give regularly to charities who help people who need it, and make sure not to cater to perpetual losers.

The only difference between us is that I beleive the government is the worst way to get that done. I put my money where my mouth is by giving to Church-run charities that do everything from pick up old clothes, to running soup kitchens, to running homeless shelters, to doing mission trips to bring medicine to desperately poor corners of the globe. It's not necessarily a religious thing; I'd gladly donate to Jewish or Muslim (yeah, I'd like to see this happen) charities engaged in the same humanitarian activities.

Government is the wrong way to spread charitible donations. For the Feds to accomplish a $1.50 project, they have to collect at least $13 in taxes to pay their outrageous overhead and incompetence costs. Subtract political correctness fees, and you're starting to get the point.

Alternatively, consider the Red Cross. they operate with a minimum of 94% efficiency, leaving an extremely modest 6% budget for overhead expenses. The March of Dimes is approximately 96% efficient. The government is about 12% effective in non-partisan efforts, much lower in controversial endeavors.

We work too hard to fund morons in large offices. Help is needed worldwide, and I want to bring as much blessing with my dollar as I possibly can.