Libertarianism and Social Darwinism

[MrFun]

It seems that libertarianism is a political adaptation of the ideology underlying social Darwinism in that if you play by the rules and you end up losing you are screwed and undeserving of any government assistance and/or protection -- even if you lost out due to some unfair or unjustified element of the system.



Or am I talking out of my ass?

[Kuciwalker]

even if you lost out due to some unfair or unjustified element of the system.

In libertarianism, there aren't unfair or unjustified elements of the system.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The extreme version of libertarism is what you describe, I'd say.

[Imran Siddiqui]

In libertarianism, there aren't unfair or unjustified elements of the system.

Um... he is talking about unfairness in Capitalism (you know "Life's not fair") such as getting fired because you dated the boss's daughter or something.

[Kuciwalker]

That's not "unfair" (or at least not unjustified) - it's his money.

[GePap]

A Liberterian would say that the reason no one can or should be given STATE aid is because this would be using people's money without their approval to help others- a redistribution of wealth which they would label theft.

They are not against private charity, IE, people chosing to give aid on their own. So moraly we are not talking about a social darwinian system by design.

NOw, if private charity is really sufficient to care for folks, that is a question is realities vs moral systems- and liberterians are more concerned about moral systems.

[Imran Siddiqui]

That's not "unfair" (or at least not unjustified) - it's his money.

So what. Doesn't mean it isn't fair! It could be his money all he wants, he has the right to be unfair as well.

[Sandman]

I dunno. There may be some libertarians who believe in it for social darwinist reasons, but it seems likely that there's at least as many that are in it for other reasons. These include their weird notions of moral purity, their belief that we'd actually be better off under libertarianism, and constitution-hugging nationalism.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

In libertarianism, there aren't unfair or unjustified elements of the system.

Um... he is talking about unfairness in Capitalism (you know "Life's not fair") such as getting fired because you dated the boss's daughter or something.

I give this strawman a score of 2.3 out of 10.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by GePap
A Liberterian would say that the reason no one can or should be given STATE aid is because this would be using people's money without their approval to help others- a redistribution of wealth which they would label theft.

They are not against private charity, IE, people chosing to give aid on their own. So moraly we are not talking about a social darwinian system by design.

NOw, if private charity is really sufficient to care for folks, that is a question is realities vs moral systems- and liberterians are more concerned about moral systems.

True -- I suppose social Darwinists are even more cold-hearted and cruel than libertarians by rejecting even the option of private charity organizations.

[Kuciwalker]

Social darwinists don't reject private charity at all! If you're capable of getting others to give you money, then you deserve it.

[MrFun]

No -- would not the social ideological slant of the biological science behind "survival of the fittest" mean that to give any kind of charity to those in need of it is undermining better attainment of human society overall?

[Kuciwalker]

Social darwinists don't believe in survival of the fittest - in fact, if there were any correlation at all between monetary success and number of children, it'd be a negative on - but success of the fittest. And in this case, the relationship between success and fitness is that same as that of survival and fitness in darwin - those who succeed are the fittest, by definition.

[GePap]

What?

Ah, NO. Social Darwinists seek am overall improvement of the "fitness" of society- its not enought for the better to "succeed"- once they die, their money go off who knows how and could be very well be wasted by some lesser individual- they seek methods to improve the herd over time. It isn;t just about individual success- its about getting rid of the inferior once and for all.

[MrFun]

But then those who are eeking out survival through charity are not successful and hence, not fit.