Reaction #1

What, in your own words, is Social Darwinism? How was it used to explain a variety of circumstances (e.g. economic and racial/ethnic) in the late 19th century? Do you hear any of the same sentiments echoed today? Evaluate the theory. Do you find it valid? Why or why not?

Social Darwinism, the way I understand it, is the concept of "survival of the fittest" and "natural selection". This means that those with the ability to excel will, and those who are less qualified will not. It explains society in relation to animals in the wild. Only the strong survive and with this definition it is accepted that some are simply meant to prevail while others are destined to perish or stay at the bottom (the working class and poor). This theory easily justified the existence of slavery: slaves were inferior individuals who failed to rise to the occasion whereas slave-owners grasped the opportunity to excel and became the superior group. In the same way, the rich were better suited and were successful whereas the poor did not seize the moment and were to blame for their own predicaments. Upper classes did not believe government programs needed to be developed to aid the poor because their beliefs told them that they could better themselves with dedication and hard work. Like our textbooks state, “society faced two and only two alternatives: ‘liberty, inequality, survival of the fittest; not-liberty, equality, survival of the unfittest’”. Thus began the debate of whether or not we should abide by the beliefs of Social Darwinism and accept the inequality, or limit liberty and advance the ‘unfit’. This idea is definitely still around today: it is taught in schools and still believed in by many. Informed or oblivious as to what Social Darwinism means, people everywhere are familiar with the concept of survival of the fittest. It is the reason some nations perished and others thrived. It is the reason we in the U.S. flourish while other nations struggle to endure. Some things cannot be thoroughly explained with anything but Social Darwinism. I accept this theory and believe in it to an extent. I think that there are those who are naturally selected to do better than others, but to blame the problems of the less fortunate solely on their own actions is a bit extreme. So I agree to a certain level but I also believe in charity and progressing as a whole. I believe in those with more helping out those with less, I believe that it is our duty to take care of those who need help or cannot take care of themselves. Social Darwinism may exist but it does not mean we, as a people, cannot do better.