The main proposals put across by Social Darwinism is that people in a society – and societies themselves – must compete for survival. Also, that some individuals within species are more predominant than others due to their inherited characteristics and favourable traits. Therefore, when these concepts progressed from the public view into European politics, it gave an all too easy motive for combatant nations to become aggressive. At the time which Social Darwinism became popular in politics, the nations of Europe were entangled in a colonial battle.
Nations and political leaders believed the terms of this principle gave them justification to conquer inferior lands. When mitigating colonialism, politicians such as the German Kaiser Wilhelm II alleged that it was their entitlement as large, wealthy, and ‘fit’ nations to dominate the less ‘fit’ races of their colonies. Where Germany was concerned, Social Darwinism played a considerable role in their forge in policy as an up-coming power in Europe. In 1890, when the Kaiser forced PM Otto Von Bismarck to resign, his fairly cautious policy of Realpolitik resigned with him, leaving vacancy for the Social Darwinist induced Weltpolitik of the Kaiser. This world policy collided with all conservatism, Kaiser Wilhelm II and claimed that Germany should become a German Kaiser world power with a strong 1888-1918 army and large colonial empire – with naval power to protect it. The Kaiser saw it as Germany’s right to compete in the colonial market, as they were competent and deserved a share in the less ‘fit’ nations.
The Essay on social darwinsim history
Social Darwinism and its use to Justify Business Practices of the 19th and Thesis: The need for a justification of enormous wealth of a few and an unimaginable poverty of millions was, as many tend to believe, fulfilled by the emergence of a theory called Social Darwinism, which on one hand was regarded as a primary defense of business activities, and on the other, was I. Definition and origin of ...
Above all, the Kaiser wanted ‘a place in the sun’ for the German people. The problem was the only places left were in the shade. There was very little room left for new colonization in the early part of this century. This caused tension on several levels. Germany was left with but the remnants of the colonial crusade.
She was vengeful towards Britain especially, resentful for her vast empire and powerful European status. Propagandist movements such as the Pan-German League and the German Colonial League churned out propaganda to influence the German people and the Kaiser, that Germany would become a second rate power if she did not make imperialistic actions. Through Social Darwinism, this would mean succumbing to the more ‘powerful’ nations, and failing to compete in the struggle for survival. Britain on the other hand (also other significant powers such as France and Russia) felt threatened by the rise of this challenging and aggravated nation.
Germany had already upset Europe’s ‘balance of power’, and proved herself to be a prevalent power in Europe, now she set out to conquer other parts of the world and to contest with Britain’s status. Where the large powers were not concerned, the colonies were feeling strangled and also felt resentment towards their over-lords. These ill feelings left Europe in two rival parties, contending for European and world dominance. It also lead to such events as the 1908 Bosnia-Herzegovina crisis and the 1911 Agadir incident.
All of the above factors lead to the alarming military build up and mobilisation of the European powers. Social Darwinism had so far justified why the nations colonized the ‘inferior’ nations and races, but along the way, had caught Europe up in a tangled web of deceit and antagonism. The nations were now ready to expand their navies, armies, and prepare to engage in war. Germany and Britain proved to be the major competitors in the arms race, each intensifying their fighting machines to a phenomenal level.
The Term Paper on Social Darwinism In American History
... moulded and eventually evolved into a theory known as Social Darwinism. Social Darwinists believed that people, like ... among the several States, or with foreign nations” (1890 Sherman Trust Act). The act ... capitalistic corporations such as banking. Consequentially, the power of the United States government favoured ... the period before and during the Civil War, and had experienced many hardships later ...
Up until the year in which war broke out, the powers increased military spending in order to remain the ‘fittest’ of the European nations. Social Darwinism had played its part in the initial aggravation of these opponent nations, by claiming that life was a competition for supremacy and survival of existence. Nations attempted rapid take-over of foreign lands to obtain the largest of empires. They then endeavoured to have the most prevailing armed forces to be the strongest and most fervent and capable of war. Social Darwinism created hatred and jealousy between and within nations, initiating divisions and thus, was perhaps a key factor in laying the foundations for the First World War.
SIGNIFICANT ADVOCATES OF SOCIAL DARWINISM THE PRE WORLD WAR ONE SOCIAL DARWINISTSThere are many different strains of Social Darwinism and the concept possesses numerous approaches. It is a complex theory which involves proposals and implications on evolution in human society. Many scientific and philosophical studies are attributes of Social Darwinism, such as hereditarianism, evolution, and natural selection. Many people contribute to the founding of this notion, and many to the advocation of its principles to the public and society. BRITAIN – HERBERT SPENCER (1820 – 1903) A British social philosopher who is often regarded as one of the first sociologists.
Spencer played a fundamental role in the promotion of Social Darwinism, and was the founder of the term ‘survival of the fittest’. Spencer was in thought over evolution in society when Darwin was still completing his Origins of Species. It was after its publication that he embraced Darwin’s theory of natural selection and made it an application of human societies. Herbert Spencer It was through Spencer’s manipulation of Charles Darwin’s theories that Social Darwinism was born and its theories were used to justify social injustices and imperialist policies. If not for these actions, European adoption of these policies may not have occurred, nor would have the aggravation which led to the outbreak of war.
FRANCE – JOSEPH-ARTHUR, COMTE DE GOBINEAU (1816 – 1882) A French diplomat, writer, ethnologist and social thinker whose theory of racial determination had an enormous influence upon the subsequent development of racist theories and practices in Western Europe. He was a member of an aristocratic royalist family, which may explain his fondness of the principles of Social Darwinism, because according to these, he was ‘fit’ by means of his wealth and social status. Gobineau was a writer of stories, history, and literacy criticism, but by far his most influential work was his ‘Essay on the Inequality of Human Races’. Here, Gobineau asserted the superiority of the white race over others.
The Essay on Social Darwinism Civil War
During the Civil War both the north and the south had separate goals and ideas for winning the war. The South used slaves because they provided a cheap source of labor and because slaves knew their place on the social chain. On the other hand the North had their own reasons for war. The North wanted to preserve the union and of course demolish slavery. Differences over slavery led to what is known ...
He advanced the theory that the fate of civilisations is determined by racial composition, and that the more the civilisations racial character is diluted by interbreeding, the more likely it is to lose its vitality and sink into corruption and immortality. Although he himself was not a racist, his works contained obvious racist implications, and influenced others to be racially prejudiced. These opinionated views were fragments of Social Darwinist ideals, which led to the domination of ‘inferior’ nations by powers which believed they possessed the right to do so by these principles. GERMANY – FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE (1844 – 1900) The son of a German pastor and Professor of Classical Philology.
The basis of his philosophy was a feeling of despair at the meaningless process of change in the universe. To Nietzsche, it seemed that the only hope for man was to impose his will upon the chaos of existence by violence. In place of Christianity, whose doctrine of humility and love he despised, deeming it Friedrich Nietzsche inculcating ‘slave mortality’, he put forward the claim of certain individuals whose ruthless strength qualified them to govern the rest. This claim fell right in alongside Social Darwinism. So to did Nietzsche’s anti-Christian orthodox views. Although Social Darwinism did not advocate heathenism, it collided with the belief of Creationism and divine intervention, by evolution.
Nietzsche was avidly influenced by Gobineau, and obviously held similar views with Social Darwinist principles of the ‘fit’s’ right to dominate the ‘weak’. Due to promotion of such ideas by Nietzsche, society began to believe the phrase that ‘might was right’, which eventuated in conflict. SOCIAL DARWINISM AND THE OUTBREAK OF WORLD WAR ONE THE PRODUCT OF THE CONCEPT Social Darwinism and its principles had aggravated the nations of Europe into a state where war was inevitable. By encouraging the powers to compete in terms of imperialism and militarism, Social Darwinism had escalated the rivalry between nations and races by claiming that the ‘fit’ would prosper. Each nation then strove for ‘fitness’, and conflict evolved due to competition.
The Essay on Why Nations Go To War
There are often people who ask the big question, “Why do nations feel the need to go to war? ” One of the main reasons for this question comes from the loss of life that comes with it. However, on an opinionated theory I have concluded that a larger portion of why a nation decides to go to war would be to expand their territory. They could even be trying to gain freedom for their nation. Many ...
By 1914, this competition had come in the form of colonial rivalry, military advancement, and continuous bouts of nationalism from oppressed nations and racial groups. By implying that only the strongest would survive to continue to exist and dominate, Social Darwinism had insinuated that nations – even those which already prospered (e. g. Britain and Germany) – would then need to conquer all those whom opposed them or in anyway threatened their existence. This only feed into the hunger for war, which by now, each European citizen was craving for. They were eagerly awaiting to prove themselves the supreme dominating nation in the ‘survival of the fittest’..
