Hunting Down Social Darwinism Will This Canard Go Extinct

(Nancy Kaufman) #1

254 Chapter 10


thosein chargesmileandsay please.” Galbraithgoesas far as rationalizingthe fact that
Chinesecitizenslargelyhad to dressalike.“Therehas beentoo muchsnobbishcomment
aboutthe uniformityof Chineseclothing.Generalappearanceis better” in China“...than
on an Americancampus.... In a poorcountryan arrangementby whicheveryperson
getstwo sets of soundbasicgarmentseveryyearat low pricesseemsto me an exercisein
the greatestgoodsense.” Galbraiththereforecontrastshimselfagainst“travelersto the
Communistcountries” whohave“beenreluctantto risk hardconclusions.Whenthings
wentwrong,the skepticsrememberedandrejoiced.Oneshouldnot be craven.The Chi-
neseeconomyisn’t the Americanor Europeanfuture.But it is the Chinesefuture.Andlet
therebe no doubt:for the Chineseit works.” In the decadessubsequentto Mao’s demise,
we haveseenthe Chinesepeople’s ownverdicton the communistpoliciesthatGalbraith
praised.Yet,speakingabouta visitto a government-runChinesemiddleschool,Gal-
braithproducesan evaluationthat evidentlydescribeshis assessmentof the trip overall—
an “unalloyedsuccess.”^133 Thesupremeirony,then,is the mannerin whichGalbraith
denouncedSpencerandSumneras ruthlessas he lionizedMaoTse-Tungas someone
whobenefitedthe Chinesepeople.
I agreeentirelywithRobertBannister’s assessmentthat“socialDarwiniststereotyp-
ing” has “clouded” the “reputations” of honestmen.^134 GeoffreyHodgsonhimselfiden-
tifiessocialDarwinism“as a termof abuse,” whichhas “servednot onlypartisanpolitical
ends,” but whichhas,for decades,“forecloseddiscussionof the importanceof ideasfrom
biologyin helpingto understandhumanaffairs.” For thatreasonHodgsonconcludes,
“Overall,the labelof ‘SocialDarwinism’ is unhelpfuland misleading.”^135 Thereis no fair-
mindedwayto hurlthe epithet.In conclusionto our huntfor socialDarwinism,the knee-
jerk denunciationof anyonewhoopposeswelfareas a social-Darwinist,racist,imperialist
fascistwhoyearnsfor the annihilationof the financiallydisadvantaged,is simplename-
calling.An exercisein deliberatelystigmatizingthe advocatesof laissezfaire,it cannotbe
classifiedas honestdiscourse.I alreadysaidthis in BookTwo,but it is worthrepeating:
Thiscanardof socialDarwinismis so unfitfor a climateof rationaldebatethat it oughtto
act in accordancewiththe implicationsof its ownname... and go extinct.
Andwhatmustnot go extinctare the insightsthatSpencerandSumnerhavepro-
vided.In partIII, then,we considerthe myriadareasin whichSpencerand Sumnerhave
contributedto evolutionarypsychology,ecosystemeconomics,andthe scienceof emer-
gentcomplexity.We alsoexaminehowSpencerandSumnerhavebeendeniedrightful
creditfor suchcontributions.Subsequentto that examination,we shallexploresomefinal
lessonsthat pertainto the entiretrilogy’s explorationof liberty.


NOTES



  1. McMenamin1999,72, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007.

  2. Du Bois,“Germanyand Hitler,”PittsburghCourier, December5, 1936,in Du Bois1995,735.

  3. Orwell1941,73–76. Huber1994,61, 72, broughtthesestatementsof Orwell’s to my attention.

  4. M. Parenti2004,118.

  5. P. du Gay2000,49.

  6. McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007.The 14 percentunemploymentfigure
    for January 1936 comprised2.5 millionpeople,andthe “2.5 million” figurecomesfromKershaw2000,
    paperback,582.

  7. StephenRoberts,citedby McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007;andC.
    Webberand A. Wildavsky1986,461–62.

  8. StephenRoberts,citedby McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007;andC.
    Webberand A. Wildavsky1986,461–62.

  9. StephenRoberts,citedby McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007.

  10. Kershaw 2000 paperback,450.

Free download pdf