Date: 04 Feb 1999 15:06:00 +0200
From: I-AFD_2-AT-anarch.free.de (Nico MYOWNA)
Subject: Re: baby food


Hi Jonathan,

> I never said I was a Social Darwinist, I said I believed in the survival of
> the fittest as it occurs in nature; the two are not the same, because
> Social Darwinism assumes that there is a genetic basis to capitalist
> success and that survival in the marketplace is the same as survival in
> nature, two tenets which I DO NOT believe.

The Survival of the fittest don't occurs in nature. It's occurs only in  
your brain, if you generalize *a myth* about the nature of nature.

On the other hand are there to kinds of Social Darwinism: First, Social  
Darwinists who believe in the survival of the fittest as it occurs in  
nature (see the early German Gymnast Movement; "A fit spirit live only in  
a fit body"; see further the right-wing Ekology movement). Second, Social  
Darwinists with a rassist background (see the Nazi and Neo-Nazi movement).

The Survival of the fittest is for it part not well-founded in science or  
Darwinism: Darwin only wrote about the *chance* of the fittest to survive,  
not about the *certainty* of the fittest to survive.

Well, you will have a better chance some fit person to survive in nature  
-- but that's all, you cannot be certain to survive better as an ill  
person....
>
> Humans do band together for mutual aid - that's what tribes are.

I think, you have misunderstood the nature of tribes. Related Humans (of  
the same language) do band together for mutual aid - that's what tribes  
are.

If the sentence above should be a new definition of tribe than you must  
notice this in future.

Nico






## CrossPoint v3.11 ##