Please note! This essay has been submitted by a student.
We can see that Darwinism was used significantly to encourage human competition to oppose intervention in the natural human order and was the idea that humans compete for the struggle of existence Charles Darwin came up with the theory of natural selection called survival of the fittest the main idea of social Darwinism is that the status and privileges enjoyed by the wealthy and powerful members of society are the results of their personal characteristics and traits evolving through natural selection those who did not possess these traits were found to be powerless and poor members of society and it was widely believed that it would be best for the human race to let these individuals and groups struggle for survival and later fall out of existence the belief that the small percentage of the wealthy at the top with a more evolved class of people was significantly advocated by Herbert. The rich men also known as the robber barons were perfect examples of this idea Darwinism john d rockefeller the founder of the Standard Oil Company believed that the growth of a large business is merely a survival of the fittest” to claim that the fortune he amassed by giant Standard Oil Trust was « merely a survival of the fittest… the working out of a law of nature and a law of God.”. What the text emphisis in is that Darwinists believed the same evolution should happen with humans this led them to oppose government handouts safety regulations and laws restricting titled labor such actions would help the weak to survive which would be unfit to natural selection, not everyone believed that they were rich and empowered because they were superior human beings in the evolution process. We can understand that the social darwinism is a kind of racism, and defenetely against democracy. This is the opposite of evolution: ”the median incomes of Americans are stagnating and the ranks of the poor are increasing, these ideas are moving us rapidly backward. ”
The conservative movement wants to be against evolutionary Darwinism, despite the fact that it was not against the idea of Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism, for example, morally justifies rejecting social insurance and supporting tax cuts for the rich. This ideology of social Darwinism considers it legitimate that the weakest beings disappear and give way to the most powerful beings in order to survive, it is in full contradiction with the Christian ethic which has governed Europe until then. She also advocates eugenics, that is to say, the improvement of the human species by selection at birth or conception, the way cattle breeders have done from all eternity.Some oppose the Bible to Darwin, they deny evolution in favor of creation, others claim that the world is too complex not to have been created by an intelligent being ”Intelligent Design”. The text says that this conservative movement has grown and that they are taking over from state and local school boards, so that, for example, Kansas’ new biology standards now label evolution a ‘controversial theory.’ ‘. Since the ” good citizens ” of Dover just fired the school board responsible for this, the term ” good citizens ” shows how biased the text is. He uses humor to reinforce the idea and to make fun of their actions ”summoning a warning from Pat Robertson that they have no right to expect God’s help should disaster befall them”.
When the robber barons controlled much of American industry, the gap between rich and poor turned into an abyss. John D. Rockefeller, for example said that his fortune was ‘Simply a survival of the fittest… the making of a law of nature and a law of God.’ But if it all started with Adam and Eve, it seems unlikely that societies would evolve according to the logic of survival of social Darwinism. The modern conservative movement rejects part of Darwinism, but uses Social Darwinism as a moral justification for rejecting social insurance and supporting tax cuts for the rich. Robert Bork says the ‘rich’ earned their higher incomes through intelligence, imagination and hard work. Any transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor thus undermines the moral fiber of the nation. They don’t see us all equal ”Allow the virtuous rich to keep more of their earnings and pay less in taxes, and they’ll be even more virtuous. Give the non-virtuous poor food stamps, Medicaid, and what’s left of welfare, and they’ll fall into deeper moral torpor.”