Don Boudreaux thinks this article is sexy. I think it's a stupid argument. Social Darwinism has nothing (per se) to do with the size of government. It has everything to do with how to handle inequality and socioeconomic differences. I don't think it's particularly unfair to call out some Republicans for social Darwinism because they're not huge fans in (at least, some notable ones aren't fans) of helping the poor achieve higher levels education - actually, some have pointed out how education is stupid (indoctrinating, I think is the word Santorum used).
It's stupid to call Obama a socialist, a Muslim, Kenyan, or the anti-Christ because he isn't (with regards to the last one, I don't think he's demonstrated in any way that he is). You won't get exercised if a social Darwinist is a social Darwinist. While it might be "offensive", doesn't mean you can't call someone out for being one. I'm happy to tell someone that they're racist to their face if they indeed are. While the Ryan plan isn't blatantly social Darwinist, the emphasis on the "free market" which has screwed over the poor demonstrates scant attention to the welfare of the poor (despite what the words might construe in the plan). At the very least, it shows how little these people really know about bringing people out of poverty, and mentioning their suffering without actually attacking the problem is unfortunate.
No comments:
Post a Comment