The problem is that’s actually the opposite of how that works. If you refuse to care for the weak in your community, you foster this atmosphere of sociopathy and mistrust that causes the group to destroy itself.
Why the hell do you think there are only two Sith in Star Wars?
I can not understand how people can be social darwinist and still support inheritance, even tax free inheritance. If you want just the fittest to survive, everyone needs to start the same. Same education, same situation at home, same connections of the parents. Social darwinist should support that all children are taken from their parents and be brought up in the same orphanages and are given exactly the same tools.
That said, I can not understand social darwinists at all. Whoever is dumb enough to support this idea is hurting the herd and according to social darwinists…
When I confronted my very Repub dad about the discrepancy between inheritance being okay and giving poor people things for free was bad for them because bootstraps etc, his reaction was “It’s their money, they can give it to whoever they want.”
But I don’t see why social darwinists would support raising children under identical conditions. A level playing field isn’t part of their creed. They just don’t believe in hampering the superior to take care of the inferior. My dad left me and my sister ample inheritances, and if anything I think he would see that as a sentimental flaw he was entitled to. But if he thought we were the type to blow the money on blackjack and hookers he probably would have donated it to Republicans, thinking that in the long run it was best for us…
To me it feels like social darwinism mentality - the belief that helping the weak survive weakens the herd. AKA “hard choices”.
The problem is that’s actually the opposite of how that works. If you refuse to care for the weak in your community, you foster this atmosphere of sociopathy and mistrust that causes the group to destroy itself.
Why the hell do you think there are only two Sith in Star Wars?
I can not understand how people can be social darwinist and still support inheritance, even tax free inheritance. If you want just the fittest to survive, everyone needs to start the same. Same education, same situation at home, same connections of the parents. Social darwinist should support that all children are taken from their parents and be brought up in the same orphanages and are given exactly the same tools.
That said, I can not understand social darwinists at all. Whoever is dumb enough to support this idea is hurting the herd and according to social darwinists…
When I confronted my very Repub dad about the discrepancy between inheritance being okay and giving poor people things for free was bad for them because bootstraps etc, his reaction was “It’s their money, they can give it to whoever they want.”
But I don’t see why social darwinists would support raising children under identical conditions. A level playing field isn’t part of their creed. They just don’t believe in hampering the superior to take care of the inferior. My dad left me and my sister ample inheritances, and if anything I think he would see that as a sentimental flaw he was entitled to. But if he thought we were the type to blow the money on blackjack and hookers he probably would have donated it to Republicans, thinking that in the long run it was best for us…
“The rich are passing down superior wealth just as they pass down superior genes.”
It’s all a crock of shit, but I’ve met people who believe it.