Keith Hudson wrote: > Besides the theme of competition, they both shared another important one -- > the importance of the environment. In Darwin's case it was the natural > environment. As the number of life-forms increased (that is, more varieties > of potential food) then this forced more and more specialization -- and thus > more species -- to come into existence. And, within each species, > individuals competed. 'Unfit' individuals who couldn't raise enough > children to replace themselves died out.
Darwinism is NOT "Social Darwinism" (applied to human societies)! Also because those who end up as the "most fit" today, are usually not fit at all in the Darwinist sense (e.g. Dick Cheney had 5 bypass surgeries and wouldn't survive a week in the wilderness -- even with a gun (shooting at his lawyer instead of a quail.) > Marx's main evidence came from one person, Friedrich Engels, a > rich business owner -- and, paradoxically, a fox-hunting capitalist! That's not surprising, because Marx' "theory" is a literally red herring BY AND FOR Predators, deflecting attention from the Predator/Producer dichotomy that matters. Also, the "Soviet" "Revolution" was funded by NYC bankers, and if you look at the outcome -- a transfer of the people's wealth and resources to a few billionaire oligarchs --, you can understand why. Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
