How would a Darwinist explain leftist weakness?

Answer 1

I don't know. Many believe in Darwin with evolution, but then want social programs for all. I don't understand that

Answer 2

well, according to logic, we would first have to accept your proposal that the left is weak.. seeing as how many of us do not, and you have provided 0 proof... the argument isn't valid. But, assuming you could claim that leftist was weak, a Darwinist could then argue that it is merely the perception of the fading right that says leftists are weak, seeing as how leftists are the next step in evolution and better adapted to lead the world as well as populate it.... and in that light Conservatives would eventually be bread out of existence, much like Neanderthals were.

Answer 3

easy, a creature replaced into born with the mutation of a young ridge above its eyes, it replaced into much less probably to be blinded than it quite is family so the genetic trait replaced into surpassed directly to the subsequent era and grew to develop into dominant. How do you clarify why animals exist with each in-between point of eye progression. From some mild soft cells, dents which could experience mild course, by pin-hollow cameras, ideal as much as lensed variations. Why is it that a number of those creatures carry the comparable gene sequence that controls eye progression if we aren't proper? ...i think of you neglected the entire area of evolution. The mutation did no longer have a objective, it basically became out to be sensible, helped the creature to outlive, so replaced into surpassed on. The creatures that had mutations that weren't sensible all died... get it? No, i did no longer think of so.

Answer 4

Leftists believe in the power of the community to ensure survival of the species, rather than the right's idea that a few strong people will perpetuate the species and will be stronger if they let the weaker ones die. In nature, you'll find that both ways work.

Answer 5

I would like to know your position on the working poor. Conservatives do not want minimum wage raised, yet who do you think cleans toilets, sweeps streets, changes bedpans, etc. These are all very lowpaying jobs, yet essential to the overall functioning of our society. You think it is weak to acknowledge we have a need for people in these jobs, and the we might need to make accomodations for them? You don't seem to think things through. Do you think everyone can be the CEO? And what about the physically and mentally handicapped? Or those who care for them? You want to kill off all those who don't contribute to your machine? A sad society, you paint.

Answer 6

Leftist doesn't wish for anyone to pay the price. Everyone is entitled. That is one reason the 1st world's economy is going to collapse when the dwindling fossil fuel energy crisis collides with the baby-boomers retirement bill.

Answer 7

What is the leftist? The Communist movement has died in the U.S. some time ago and the new left is a bunch of radical middle Americans who wand health care for all, education for all, A government that don`t lie us into wars and a government that will protect our industrial might from economic terrorist that are shipping that might out and a social safety net their in case of of our fellow Americans falls down.

Answer 8

This kind of thinking died shortly after WW2
Social Darwinism in the most basic form is the idea that biological ideas can be extended and applied to the social realm. However, the term has generally been used by critics rather than advocates of what the term is supposed to represent (Bannister, 1979; Hodgson, 2004). It has been applied to the claim that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection or by "survival of the fittest" can be used to understand the evolution of society: just as competition between individual organisms drives biological evolutionary change (speciation), competition between individuals or groups in human societies drives social evolution.

Several social theorists influenced by Darwin including Petr Kropotkin, David Ritchie, Thorstein Veblen and Lester Frank Ward proposed that the course of evolution could be consciously directed by human beings. Accordingly, governments can implement policies that would guide human evolution in a positive direction. One might here include proponents of eugenics, who argued for selective breeding of people or a human guided "artificial selection" to replace the "blind" or ineffective processes of "natural selection" in the human realm. However, a number of social scientists influenced by Darwin, including Veblen and Ward, were opponents of eugenics.

Several authors drew such parallels between competition and conflict in the biological and social spheres, particularly in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Such ideologies did not necessarily reflect Darwin's views, and though he did introduce Spencer's term of "survival of the fittest" as an alternative phrase for "natural selection" in the 5th edition of The Origin of Species, he subsequently rejected it in The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871). Modern social science usually distinguishes between the ideology of Social Darwinism from the scientific theory of evolution developed in The Origin of Species (1859).

The term "Social Darwinism" first appeared in an 1879 article in "Popular Science" by Oscar Schmidt, followed by an anarchist tract published in Paris in 1880 entitled "Le darwinisme social" by Émile Gautier. However, the use of the term was very rare - at least in the English-speaking world (Hodgson, 2004) - until the American historian Richard Hofstadter
published his influential Social Darwinism in American Thought(1944) during World War II.

Answer 9

How do you exist with your IQ? Honestly I thought you would have gotten date-raped by mohammed by now. Seriously. Maybe Darwin should tag-team.

Answer 10

Darwin would have a different definition of 'fit'

Answer 11

The same as an I.D. guy...The Meek shall inherit the Earth.