Republicans are Classic Darwinists

[SoCalDem]

They may profess to be creationists, but they are Darwinists at heart.. Evolution from slime, to slug, to frog, to lizard, to ape, to man may not be the way they see it, but they practice it every day..

If you are the "fittest" at business, you can be and should be rich..
If you are the "fittest" in the bank account arena, you can have anything your heart desires..etc..

But.. if you happen to be on the other side, well.... you must deserve it and you should disappear or die..

That's pretty much it..

They see no responsibility to help anyone, other than each other..(they do that all the time)..

Theirs is a stratified world.. If you "serve" them or "clean up" after them, you DO have a place in their little world...but you better STAY in that place.. They see no gray area where both sides can dialogue and mix..

They are they overlord party and everyone else can just accept it or face the consequences..

They are sure of themselves in such an dangerous way, too.. They see themselves doing NO wrong, and see others as ONLY doing wrong..

The republicans of old, (think Eisenhower) are gone forever.. This newly "evolved" republican is the velociraptor of the political world and he is one "hungry, hungry critter"..

[opihimoimoi]

1. Yup, 10 4 on that lady. FRom slime to big time

face song of theirs::: Me me me me me mine mine mine mine

[Friar]

2. this is known as "social darwinsm"

and has been thoroughly discredited by every respectable sociologist since Hitler went down in flames.

[SoCalDem]

3. It may have been "discredited" but they LOVE it ....

[jafap]

4. Spencer for hire

Social Darwinism as well as the phrase "survival of the fittest" are Herbert Spencer's interpretation of Darwin, rather than straight Darwinism.
To take the "tooth and claw" metaphor into the economic world is a choice, not a necessity, and it can also be evaluated as to whether it increases the human race's chances of survival.
If the economic system and civilisation collapse because of soil depletion, climate change, a severe oil shortage, or some kind of revolution, then my money is on Randy Weaver rather than Bill Gates. For them to rise to the top, a working system is required.
Yet it is also hard to see how JR would be considered more "fit" than I just because his grandfather was much wealthier than mine. He got where he is by his grandfather's position, not his own drive or talent.
Still they are definitely trying to make things harder for those at the bottom and to help those at the top. One of humanity's great failings is our tendency to be more ruthless than nature. Velocoraptors might be brutal to their prey, but they generally will not kill other velocoraptors much less engage in genocide, nor will they kill more than they need to eat just for sport.

[fabius]

5. Societies evolve too.

Evolution includes not only the organism but its society, its technology, its domesticated species, and its culture.

This is what the Repugs don't get. It ain't just about competition. Species evolve such that cooperation and competition are both necessary to survive.

I'm not totally full of BS here, my sister is a PhD biologist and she lectures me all the time.

Actually it would not be true that in the US the "strong and the fit" do better, it is the "greedy, rapacious, lucky, and mendacious" who thrive. Look at Ken Lay, Bernie Ebbers, Dick Cheney, and Shrub.

[AlienGirl]

6. Social Darwinism

Yes, in the real world characteristics like rapacity and lying allow people to advance far beyond their natural talents would suggest; and yes, evolution is not about being "most fit" so much as it is about finding a niche that is the best fit; and yes, evolution depends at least as much upon cooperation as competition. But Social Darwinists don't think about the real world--they think about the world as seen through their lenses, where the a priori assumption is that the rich must have talent and determination, and the poor must be lacking in *something* other than money.

It's a simplistic ideology that doesn't match either the sociological or biological reality, but rather a strangely idealized fantasy universe.

And egads, are they *thick* sometimes when you point that out to them...

Tucker

[Az]

7. Some clarifications

What you are describing is social darwinisn. A mistaken notion that surivavl of the fittest should apply to those within society. Here's the thing. Survival of the fittest applies to species in general. The species best able to survive does so. This includes all the aspects of the species.

We are a social species. Social species band together to aid each other to better survive. It is not a matter of beating each other out that makes us stronger. It is working together that does the trick. Social Darwinism is a horrible template by which to run society. It is brutal and dispassionate. Not at all what society truly is.

[rman]

8. plus it has nothing to do with science

this so called "Darwinism", "Social" or otherwise, is a highjacking of the scientific theory of evolution, for use as a political argument.

Scientific theories are *descriptions* of how things work, they are *not prescriptions* of how humans ought to behave.

[htuttle]

9. It's warmed over Calvinism

So maybe I rant about Calvinism a lot , but I think it's one of the original flaws of this country that leads to our present day illness.

Calvinism, of course, states that God blesses his favored humans with material wealth. Ergo, lack of material wealth indicates lack of God's blessing, and vice versa.

Social Darwinism is sort of a modern day, pseudo-scientific rendition of this belief.

Either way, it's mostly a bunch of excuses as to why the rich don't have to help the poor (no matter WHAT Jesus said about it...apparently Calvin was more important).