||"dawnbreak in the west"|
Friday, September 14, 2012
Darwinism versus ecological stewardship
Darth Randall writes in Ace's comments:
I can't believe liberals claim to believe in Darwinism and survival of the fittest and then scream "Ah, we must save this endagered spider!" Adapt or become extinct for pete's sake.
I think it's a troll. To the "morons'" credit, they seem to agree; they didn't react. But over here as an Ace demiexile I'll react!
Liberals do not believe in "survival of the fittest" as an ideal. They believe that Darwin was right that "survival of the fittest" is just a fact, the state of nature. Liberals believe that there exist species that require protection against that species which Liberals see as Darwinially superior; which is the human species. (And liberals are entirely correct up to this point.)
By the way this explains the Progressive sect as well. If Mr Randall had read Jonah Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism", he'd know that the Progressive sect fought against the "social Darwinism" of the late 1800s, applying this to weaker members within the human species. I am not getting into the full Goldberg thesis here. What I do need to point out is that Randall has not come to terms even with soft liberalism. Randall has not acknowledged that even a soft liberalism can accept Darwin's findings and at the same time desire to protect a weaker species from Darwin's cold nemesis.
But I have been on Ace's site long enough to know that Mr Randall has had exposure to the works of Mr Goldberg, amongst others.
Mr Randall is playing gotcha. He's trolling.
On this site
Property of author; All Rights Reserved