Hunting Down Social Darwinism Will This Canard Go Extinct

Did Nineteenth-CenturyCapitalistsWantthe Poorto Die? 19

countenancesit rather.Andin helpingmento helpthemselves,thereremainsabundant

scopefor the exerciseof a people’s sympathies.Accidentswillstillsupplyvictimson

whomgenerositymaybe legitimatelyexpended.Menthrownupontheirbacksby un-

foreseenevents,menwhohavefailedfor wantof knowledgeinaccessibleto them,men

ruinedby the dishonestyof others,andmenin whomhopelongdelayedhas madethe

heartsick,may,withadvantageto all parties,be assisted[emphaseshis].^82

RecallthatSpencer,unlikemyself,believesin DavidHume’s Fact-ValueDivide.We
disprovedthe validityof thatDividein BookOne.The Fact-ValueDividepresumesthat
thereis no connectionbetweendescriptivefactsandvalue-drivenprescriptivemoral
actions.Onesideof Spencer—whathe regardedas his descriptive-sciencebiologistside—
contemplatedwhetherthe collectiveof Westernsocietymightindeedbe betterservedif
particularbiologicallydisadvantagedpeopleperishedin the absenceof any opportunity
to rearchildren.On the otherhand,Spencersimultaneouslyjudgedsympathyand com-
passionto be fullynaturalconsequencesof biologicalevolution.Moreover,he considered
a compassionate,sympathetic,philanthropicpersonto be morebiologicallyadvanced
thatsomeonewhocarednothingaboutthe hardshipsof others.Uponthatreasoning,
Spencerrepeatedlystatedthathe thoughtit madesensefor someone’s desireto aid
disadvantagedpersonsto winout overany possiblebenefitsthatthe societalcollective
mayattainfromhavingdisadvantagedpersonsremovedfromthe genepool.
Sometimessomecriticsquoteout-of-contextpassagesfromotherSpencerworks.In a
bookthatdefendsthe rightof individualparentsto enhancetheirownchildrenthrough
geneticengineering—we willexplorethatideain chapter10—MeridianInstitutefellow
WalterTruettAnderson(b. 1933)attemptsto distinguishhis benignpro-evolutionistview
fromwhathe judgesto be the nastinessof Spencer’s. PredictablycreditingAllanChase
for tippinghimoff to the quotation,W. T. AndersonpronouncesSpencera “fierceDar-
winist” and resentsthatSpencer“dedicateda largepartof his life to fightingagainstany
measuresthat mightleadto whathe called‘the artificialpreservationof thoseleastableto
takecareof themselves.’” ThatquotationarrivesfromSpencer’sStudyof Sociology, and
Andersoncitesit as he falselyaccusesSpencerand T. RobertMalthusof opposingsmall-
pox vaccination.AndersonpresumesthatSpencerand Malthuswishedto blockaccessto
vaccinationon accountof theirdesirethatthe lowest-incomemembersof the population
die fromcommunicableviruses.^83 In the verysamechapterofStudyof Sociology, though—
a meretwo pagesfollowingthe passagethatW. T. Andersonquoted—Spencermentions
thathe judgesit laudableand predictable“thatparentalaffection,the regardof relatives,
andthe spontaneoussympathyof friendsandevenof strangers,shouldmitigatethe
pains” sufferedby the misfortunate.“Doubtless,in manycasesthe reactiveinfluenceof
thissympatheticcare... is morallybeneficial” andbalancesout the disadvantagesof
philanthropyof whichSpencerpreviouslyspoke.“It maybe fullyadmittedthat individu-
al altruism,left to itself,will workadvantageously.. .”^84
In fact,at a timewhentherewasstill greatcontroversyoverwhethereveryadultmale
shouldhavevotingprivileges,Spencerdelineatedin no uncertaintermsthat the impover-
ishedhadjust as mucha rightto suffrageas anyoneelse.There“is no escapefromthe
conclusion,” he said,“thatthe interestof thewholesocietycan be secured,onlyby giving
powerintothe handsof thewholepeople” (emphaseshis).Spencerthenprepareda
rejoinderto thosewhofearedthat grantingsuffrageto pauperswouldimpelthemto vote
for theirowninterestsat the expenseof the rich.Weretheresomevalidityto thatworry,
Spencerproclaimed,“the evidencewouldstill preponderatein favourof popularenfran-
chisement.”^85 It is thisfreedomfighterfor the lowerclasseswhomthe likesof Jacoby,
Black,Hofstadter,Rees,Brooks,and otheranti-individualistshavesmearedas somebody
whowantsthe destituteto succumbto theirownmortality.