Wednesday, April 11, 2012

The difference between Social Darwinism and Laissez Faire

by Richard A. Epstein

  • With biological evolution, death follows from the failure to marshal resources.
  • Under laissez-faire, bankruptcy is the fate of those unable to succeed in the market.
  • Unlike laissez-faire, Social Darwinism takes a decidedly hostile attitude to private charity.
Comment:

It looks like an emotional comparison since bankruptcy isn't death.  Here's the key point:  Social Darwinists are more like Nazis than libertarians.  Nazis wanted to get rid of the weak by killing them, or letting them die.  Libertarians aren't opposed to private charity- quite the opposite, actually.  Libertarians are opposed to public charity, as it implies coercion, and believe that individuals should help each other according to their own conscience.  Hopefully, enough people can discern the difference, and not fall for this political ploy.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

It may appear emotional because you do not understand the history of bankruptcy. In US courts, the bankrupt was originally held in civiliter mortuus, or "civil death." That status has evolved over time and the term is not in common use, but when Social Darwinism was introduced, so to speak, bankruptcy was a kind of death.