During the mid - 1900’s, throughout the world supressing actions of racism were practiced. Slavery and Colonialism now are regarded as unethical, inhumane practices. So how could one allow themselves and each other to participate in such practices? These acts were justified through the theory: “Social Darwinism”. A theory created by scientist Herbert Spencer, in which applied natural selection and “survival to the fittest” to society. According to Herbert Spencer the fit and the strong should flourish and live, while the old, disabled and poor deserve to live in unfortunate circumstances.
This theory was used as a basis for the most notorious, and infamous leaders “Adolf Hitler”, who justified the genocide and mass-murders with Social Darwinism. A controversial concept that is connected with Social Darwinism is eugenics. Which is a movement that allowed for bettering the species, by selectively breeding or killing or sterilizing the undesirable humans. …show more content…
For example in 2013 London’s mayor “Boris Johnson” was drawn criticism for stating that IQ was directly related to how you can earn. To put it into perspective 0.01% of the company earn $10.25 million, and the household $51,000. I question that 0.01% is 200 times smarter than an average person’s income. But According to the theory and Johnson’s way of thinking, these people are just genetically superior and the other are genetically inferior and the social and income equality is attributed because they are just a more advanced human being. Inherited wealth, inherited social status and sheer luck are not at
This theory was used as a basis for the most notorious, and infamous leaders “Adolf Hitler”, who justified the genocide and mass-murders with Social Darwinism. A controversial concept that is connected with Social Darwinism is eugenics. Which is a movement that allowed for bettering the species, by selectively breeding or killing or sterilizing the undesirable humans. …show more content…
For example in 2013 London’s mayor “Boris Johnson” was drawn criticism for stating that IQ was directly related to how you can earn. To put it into perspective 0.01% of the company earn $10.25 million, and the household $51,000. I question that 0.01% is 200 times smarter than an average person’s income. But According to the theory and Johnson’s way of thinking, these people are just genetically superior and the other are genetically inferior and the social and income equality is attributed because they are just a more advanced human being. Inherited wealth, inherited social status and sheer luck are not at