because he was a loser that had no intellect that tried to live his life off of his cousin's accomplishments
>>2231227
BEV
>>2231227
this
It seems we remember him as much more amoral (for lack of a better word) as he really was.
One evolutionary biologist suggested in her book to rediscover him.
>>2232391
he was right though
>>2233324
>he was right though
At what? As I said he wasn't that extreme as people think he was
I myself thought he was the granddaddy of social darwinism but it seems he wasn't that bad
Someone like Malthus was much more into that if I remember it correctly, I think it was Malthus who was okay with the poor dying