773

Capitalists and social darwinists literally shaking and crying rn rule (lemmings.world)

submitted 11 months ago by kay@lemmings.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

70 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 22 points 11 months ago

In case there are seriously any "~~social Darwinists~~" eugenicists here:

https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution-today/social-darwinism

https://www.northwestern.edu/onebook/the-reluctant-mr-darwin/essays/darwin-morality.html

https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2013/may/09/evolutionary-theory-gone-wrong-darwin

[-] BunEnjoyer@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

From your first article

"Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is entirely focused on an explanation of life's biological diversity. It is a scientific theory meant to explain observations about species. Yet some have used the theory to justify a particular view of human social, political, or economic conditions. All such ideas have one fundamental flaw: They use a purely scientific theory for a completely unscientific purpose. In doing so they misrepresent and misappropriate Darwin's original ideas"

So what is this post trying to do?

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

I think the post is pointing out that nature doesn't work the way social darwinists think it does. Although symbiosis between different species, as shown here, isn't the strongest argument they could have chosen. Personally I would have gone with (non-kin) altruism.