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
- McMenamin1999,72, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007.
- Du Bois,“Germanyand Hitler,”PittsburghCourier, December5, 1936,in Du Bois1995,735.
- Orwell1941,73–76. Huber1994,61, 72, broughtthesestatementsof Orwell’s to my attention.
- M. Parenti2004,118.
- P. du Gay2000,49.
- McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007.The 14 percentunemploymentfigure
for January 1936 comprised2.5 millionpeople,andthe “2.5 million” figurecomesfromKershaw2000,
paperback,582. - StephenRoberts,citedby McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007;andC.
Webberand A. Wildavsky1986,461–62. - StephenRoberts,citedby McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007;andC.
Webberand A. Wildavsky1986,461–62. - StephenRoberts,citedby McMenamin1999,73, accessedonlineMonday,June18, 2007.
- Kershaw 2000 paperback,450.