Social Darwinism In The Turn Of The 19th Century

In the turn of the 19th century, a psychologist Herbert Spencer branched off the thought of Darwinism and promoted the evolutionary thought of social Darwinism which differed from the original idea of survival of the fittest (Goodwin, 1995). Social Darwinists believe in the idea that humans, like plants and animals, struggle for the existence of natural selection results in “survival of the fittest.” Spencer claimed that, evolution must be unchecked because of its natural and inevitable forces that can be harmful when tampered with by humans. Social Darwinists create a huge gap between the rich and the poor and say that “if successful then fit” which differs from Darwinisms belief that “if fit then successful.” At this point in history under
social Darwinists guidelines the people who were superior above all were wealthy white men. Many people believe that this concept explains the philosophical rationalization behind racism, imperialism and capitalism. An example comes from Spencer's claim that the government should in no way provide any services for the poor because it is the individuals fault they are unfit and therefor suffer poverty. In opposition to this the wealthy should not be penalized (taxed), because their wealth instead shows fitness. Most American psychologists at the time, especially with an interest in mental testing agreed with this social Darwinist mindset (Goodwin, 1995). I think that this idea was prominent and believed by a wide range of people at the time because still there had been little research done on individual differences and America was still stuck in the mindset that white males dominate all. Class stratification was justified on the basis of “natural” inequalities among individuals and the control of poverty was said to be a correlation of superior and inherent moral attributes such as industriousness, temperance and frugality. This looks like a clear case of the wealthy using a scientific theory as a metaphor to justify their predatory behavior and avoid paying more taxes. At this point in time in American history, colored people and women were looked down upon as not being as competent and this coined phrase “the survival of the fittest” inhibited unrestrained and ruthless economic competition.
Parallel to that idea was that positions for jobs and who received them was not close to fair. If you were born rich and inherited your parents wealth you were born with an immediate advantage among a lot of other people despite what positive attributes they might posses. Due to the lack of research on individual differences it was largely believed that a persons future was determined at birth with both flaws and advantages inherited. This lead to the belief held by social Darwinists that there was no point in helping the less competent because nature would deal with them itself. When America began to shift in to its time of the Progressive era, the decline of social Darwinism began to dwindle. During this point in time, business monopolies were bring attacked with the leader of the business just at risk of being called a robber as a hero (Goodwin, 1995). Labor unions spoke out and fought back with their dissatisfaction of how hard they worked and little they received. This lead to significant gains for this group of people and the federal government was forced to make regulations and guidelines that helped the average American and programs that helped the less fortunate or
“unfit”. This lead to the progressive education movement lead by John Dewey and a more functionalist movement and mindset amongst society. Since the 19th century, America has moved forward in equality and making opportunities for everyone. We are now built around ideas that everyone has the same chance as the next person to be successful and fit in society. Today, there is still a huge gap between the rich and poor and I don't see it closing significantly any time soon but at least there are programs in efforts to get people out of poverty and in to a better life style including welfare, more healthcare options and education opportunities for those who can't afford college. I think the idea of social Darwinism these days would be thought of racist and discriminating. It is awesome to see how much we have progressed in the psychology field and we are continuing too with new research methods and technologies being developed.