Social Darwinism From 1933 To 1945

To descend briefly into political philosophy, even before the term “Social Darwinism” was coined to justify systematic, self-serving sociopathic behavior, there have been predators amongst us. These Individuals did not —and do not— accept the notion of a social compact. An implicit agreement of mutual cooperation that sets self-enforced limits on individual freedoms and desires in exchange for the protection and happiness of the whole. Whatever their stripe, whatever their place in the social order, these individuals view all others as either competitors, temporary allies, or chattel. They view themselves as stronger, faster, smarter, and craftier than all others. And so, logically, they believe themselves to be entitled to take what they wish, when they wish, and are free to destroy all who stand in their way.
Unbridled, unconstrained entitlement is no more than …show more content…
With few exceptions —no matter our individual uniqueness or accomplishments— most of us, most of the time are indistinguishable from most others when viewed from a sufficient emotional distance. Evidence abounds —whether you be executive, manager or employee— that testifies to the proposition that we can all be replaced, up to and including the very organization within which we currently inhabit. We are all expendable and interchangeable in the jaundiced eyes of others.
There is something unpleasant about the idea that organized humans are nothing more than cogs on the wheels of a very large machine. It is not unlike the contemplation of human mortality and the inevitability of individual death. It is palatable within the context of the great generalized human mass, but considerably less pleasant when applied to