xviii Preface
wouldcall intoquestionthe accusationthatbigotryandracismare furtheredby either
free-marketadvocacyor the applicationof biologicaltheoriesto the socialsciences.
Of specialattentionis the natureof the Naziregime.As theyarguethatthe free-
marketadvocacyof SpencerandSumnerinevitablydevolvedintoeugenicistlegislation,
the supportersof the welfarestateextendthatallegationfartherto implicateSpencer’s
andSumner’s free-marketadvocacyas the inspirationfor the eugenicistandgenocidal
policiesof the ThirdReich.Numeroussupportersof the welfarestateassertthe following
accusations:
- The regimesof BenitoMussoliniand the Nazisalikeput fascisminto practice.
- Capitalism,takento its logicalconclusion,is fascism.
- Therefore,accepting 1 and 2 above,capitalismultimatelychangesitselfintoNaz-
ism. - Big businessbroughtMussoliniandHitlerto politicalprominence,andas big
businessrepresentscapitalism,capitalismitselfbroughtMussoliniandHitlerto
prominence. - Capitalism,fascism,and Naziismare all politicallyright-wing.
- Spencerand Sumnerappliedevolutionarytheoryto arguein favorof capitalism.
- Nazisappliedevolutionarytheoryto arguefor theirracialbigotry.
- Accepting 5 as correct,it followsthatSpencerandSumnerappliedevolutionary
theoryto advancea right-wingconclusion,andthatNazisappliedevolutionary
theoryto advancea right-wingconclusion.Giventhat Spencer,Sumner,and Nazis
wereuniformlyright-wing,it is reasonableto inferthatthe applicationsof evolu-
tionarytheoryby Spencerand Sumnerwerewhatinspiredthe right-wingapplica-
tionsof evolutionarytheoryby the Nazis. - TheThirdReich,beingextremelyright-wing,possessedno featuresin common
withsocialism,Progressivism,the regulatory-entitlementstate,or any ideasor pol-
iciesassociatedwiththe politicalLeft.
PartII shallqueryintowhetherany or all of the abovepropositions— 1 through 9 —are
accurate,and to whatdegreetheyare accurateor inaccurate.
PartIII of thisworksummarizessomefinallessonsfor thistrilogy.If Spencerand
Sumnerdid not cite evolutionarytheoryin orderto rationalizeindifferenceor cruelty
towardthe poor,thenthe readermayinquire,“In whatmannerdid Spencerand Sumner
reallyattemptto applyevolutionarytheoryto theirstudyof socialsciencein generaland
freeenterprisein particular?” In the finalpart,chapter11 shallexaminethe specificsof
howSpencerandSumnersoughtto applytheirknowledgeof biologyandevolutionto
theirconvictionsabouthuman society.Thischaptershallalsoexaminethe extentto
whichthe free-marketeconomists,evolutionarypsychologists,and ComplexityTheorists
of the late twentieth-andearlytwenty-firstcenturieshavebeeninfluencedby theories
pioneeredby SpencerandSumner.I shallalsocometo conclusionsaboutthe degreeto
whichsuchfree-marketeconomists,evolutionarypsychologists,andComplexityTheo-
ristshavebeenfair or unfairin theirforcefuldisavowalsand repudiationsof Spencerand
Sumnerevenas theyseeminglybenefitfromthe workthatSpencerandSumnerdid
beforethem.Chapters12 and 13 thenrevisitsometopicsthat BookOneexplored.Consid-
eringthatthe entiretrilogyhas arguedagainstgovernmentoverreach,a numberof pur-
porteddefendersof capitalism—so-calledlibertarians—proposethatthe bestmethodof
guardingagainstgovernmentoverreachis for Westernsocietyto adoptanarchywhole-
sale.Chapter12 will considerwhetheranarchyis a viablealternativeeitherto governism
or the nightwatchmanstate.Thischapterrefersbackto the discussionfromBookOne
aboutthe fact thatbeforeanyoneaccusedof spoliationcan be justlypunishedfor such
spoliation,thatpersonmustreceiveDueProcessif thatsocietyis to maintainfreedom.