Is Social Darwinism the way?

Why should we let people starve if there's more than enough food to go around? Why should we let people die from diseases if we can treat them? If we can keep an old feeble man alive for another five years why not?

Social Darwinism is edgelordism dress up as "cuz nature".

>it's natural for a naturally social being to be asocial
No

>>1860360
/thread

Besides, darwinian selection between societies happens all the time.

It's why republics have beaten the shit out of everyone.

>>1860327

In a sense yes, all human social processes are subject to Darwinian evolution and natural selection; but what knobheads don't understand is that 'fittest' doesn't mean 'biggest douchebag'.

I would argue in fact that the modern capitalist mode of labour and resource allocation, despite being defended as 'survival of the fittest' is perhaps the most enfeebling form of human social organization that we could live under, and has a significant chance of resulting in our eventual extinction.

Remember: animals both compete and cooperate to survive. Do one at the expense of the other and perish.

File: IMG_1208.jpg (58KB, 400x444px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 400x444px

>>1860374
>It's why republics have beaten the shit out of everyone.

My subversive theocracy would disagree.

>>1860345
Why should we subsidize useless people to the point where the only way to afford having kids is to suck at the government tit? why should retards be allowed to make me work for them 3 months out of the year because they don't want to, or in the extremely rare cases absolutely cannot work.