Social Darwinism: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Social Darwinism]] is any of various theories of society which emerged in the United Kingdom, North America, and Western Europe in the 1870s, claiming to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology and politics. Social Darwinists argue that the strong should see their wealth and power increase while the weak should see their wealth and power decrease. Different social-Darwinist groups have differing views about which groups of people are considered to be the strong and which groups of people are considered to be the weak, and they also hold different opinions about the precise mechanisms that should be used to reward strength and punish weakness. Many such views stress competition between individuals in laissez-faire capitalism, while others were used in support of authoritarianism, [[Eugenics]], racism, imperialism, fascism, Nazism, and struggle between national or racial groups. | [[Social Darwinism]] is any of various theories of society which emerged in the United Kingdom, North America, and Western Europe in the 1870s, claiming to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology and politics. Social Darwinists argue that the strong should see their wealth and power increase while the weak should see their wealth and power decrease. Different social-Darwinist groups have differing views about which groups of people are considered to be the strong and which groups of people are considered to be the weak, and they also hold different opinions about the precise mechanisms that should be used to reward strength and punish weakness. Many such views stress competition between individuals in laissez-faire capitalism, while others were used in support of authoritarianism, [[Eugenics]], racism, imperialism, fascism, Nazism, and struggle between national or racial groups. | ||
As a scientific concept, [[Social Darwinism]] broadly declined in popularity following World War I and was largely discredited by the end of [[World War II]], partially due to its association with Nazism and partially due to a growing scientific consensus that it was scientifically groundless. Later theories that were categorised as social Darwinism were generally described as such as a critique by their opponents; their proponents did not identify themselves by such a label. Creationists have often maintained that social Darwinism—leading to policies designed to reward the most competitive—is a logical consequence of "Darwinism" (the theory of natural selection in biology). Biologists and historians have stated that this is a fallacy of appeal to nature, since the theory of natural selection is merely intended as a description of a biological phenomenon and should not be taken to imply that this phenomenon is good or that it ought to be used as a moral guide in human society. While most scholars recognize some historical links between the popularization of Darwin's theory and forms of social Darwinism, they also maintain that social Darwinism is not a necessary consequence of the principles of biological evolution. Wiki reference: <ref>[ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism Social Darwinism]</ref> | As a scientific concept, [[Social Darwinism]] broadly declined in popularity following World War I and was largely discredited by the end of [[World War II]], partially due to its association with Nazism and partially due to a growing scientific consensus that it was scientifically groundless. Later theories that were categorised as social Darwinism were generally described as such as a critique by their opponents; their proponents did not identify themselves by such a label. Creationists have often maintained that social Darwinism—leading to policies designed to reward the most competitive—is a logical consequence of "Darwinism" (the theory of natural selection in biology). Biologists and historians have stated that this is a fallacy of appeal to nature, since the theory of natural selection is merely intended as a description of a biological phenomenon and should not be taken to imply that this phenomenon is good or that it ought to be used as a moral guide in human society. While most scholars recognize some historical links between the popularization of Darwin's theory and forms of social Darwinism, they also maintain that social Darwinism is not a necessary consequence of the principles of biological evolution. Wiki reference: <ref>[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism Social Darwinism]</ref> | ||
==Satanic ideology== | ==Satanic ideology== | ||
Latest revision as of 22:55, 17 August 2019
Social Darwinism is any of various theories of society which emerged in the United Kingdom, North America, and Western Europe in the 1870s, claiming to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology and politics. Social Darwinists argue that the strong should see their wealth and power increase while the weak should see their wealth and power decrease. Different social-Darwinist groups have differing views about which groups of people are considered to be the strong and which groups of people are considered to be the weak, and they also hold different opinions about the precise mechanisms that should be used to reward strength and punish weakness. Many such views stress competition between individuals in laissez-faire capitalism, while others were used in support of authoritarianism, Eugenics, racism, imperialism, fascism, Nazism, and struggle between national or racial groups.
As a scientific concept, Social Darwinism broadly declined in popularity following World War I and was largely discredited by the end of World War II, partially due to its association with Nazism and partially due to a growing scientific consensus that it was scientifically groundless. Later theories that were categorised as social Darwinism were generally described as such as a critique by their opponents; their proponents did not identify themselves by such a label. Creationists have often maintained that social Darwinism—leading to policies designed to reward the most competitive—is a logical consequence of "Darwinism" (the theory of natural selection in biology). Biologists and historians have stated that this is a fallacy of appeal to nature, since the theory of natural selection is merely intended as a description of a biological phenomenon and should not be taken to imply that this phenomenon is good or that it ought to be used as a moral guide in human society. While most scholars recognize some historical links between the popularization of Darwin's theory and forms of social Darwinism, they also maintain that social Darwinism is not a necessary consequence of the principles of biological evolution. Wiki reference: [1]
Satanic ideology
Satanism also intentionally panders to the atheist and scientific communities, as a recruiting mechanism for a far more nefarious agenda that serves the NAA. Satanic grooming methods manipulate those who do not understand the existence of consciousness existing without a physical body, or the consequences of giving energetic consent and authority to Satanic forces. There are many people working in our society who have the same ideological beliefs as those shared in common with Satanism, yet they are not thought of as criminals but are revered as powerful leaders in business, science and technology. Essentially, this is the socially engineered society in which we have been groomed into using the three layers of ego filter and psychologically manipulated to co-create in the materialistic Death Culture, which is an Anti-Soul Agenda. The primary main philosophies that interconnect throughout the different branches of Satanism include the following:
- Service to Self, each person should do whatever they can to advance their personal power and influence in the world no matter what the cost, no matter what kind of harm is generated. It’s either you or them.
- Moral Nihilism, there is no such thing as ethics or standards of right or wrong behavior, therefore as human beings we have the right to act upon our whims and base our actions accordingly.
- Social Darwinism, the belief that survival of the fittest and the strongest will always prevail to rule, and the focus on personal needs and survival in order to gain rulership is required by any means necessary.
- Eugenics, those that are most fit to rule are the top genetic specimens and thus, they decide how to propagate the future of the human gene pool, by deciding who lives and who dies. [2]
References