If Darwinism is true, what does it say about people who live in third world countries?

Question

If Darwinism is true, what does it say about people who live in third world countries?

Answer 1

It would suggest that they are inferior...

one reason a lot of people don't support it.

Answer 2

It says that they are alive. Since they are alive, they are fit. Survival of the fittest. : P

Besides, human social patterns and economics are not related to DNA. They were just unlucky to be born in poorer countries which tend to be poorer because rich countries are exploiting them.

You obviously have not read anything of Darwin's since you asked this. So why don't you go back to flipping burgers and leave the intellectual theories to smart people.

Answer 3

They are more human

Answer 4

That question is best answered by Adolf Hitler, who wrote in Mein Kampf, as I paraphrase;

"the aryan people who are superior, deserve to live in wealth because they are a valuable biological organism that is intelligent and strong, and therefore deserving of the best life has to offer.  However, the superior aryan peoples should feel no pity or compassion towards the inferior peoples of the world any more than a fox has compassion for a goose or hens, or any more than a lion or tiger has compassion for antelope.  Warfare is the most noble occupation of the Aryan race, because it culls the weak from the herd, and the poverty of the inferior peoples of the world is due largely to their weakness and stupidity."

In a nutshell, that was Mein Kampf, which used a lot of Darwinist ideas, and, it answers your question.  Hey, you asked what it says, and that is what it says.

I however, do not agree or condone the view, which could be argued is largely entrenched in American society.  That is why corporations do what they do, why some people tamper with DNA tests and refuse to apologize for two years, it is all rooted in darwinist beliefs programmed into their subconscious mind by the school system.

Am I calling Americans n***s?

Well, let me just say much of Hitler's ideology came from the United States.  First of all, and that the school system Hitler proposed valued athletics more than academics.

Sound familiar?  Read Mein Kampf, and experience the chilling horror for yourself, and see the true nature of this culture, and this country.

Food for thought.

Answer 5

This bears quite a bit of relevance actually.

I'm not being racist, these are facts gathered from unbiased surveys.  Third world countries tend to be populated with people of darker skin colours.  This isn't a coincidance.  

Darker skinned people are often more present in physical events such as the olympics, and tend to have a higher chance of victory.  As a rule, darker skinned people have a lower average IQ score and a higher physical talent proportion than caucasian people.

This is visa versa with Asians and the like.  They have a higher average IQ (accounting for the fact that all the awesome technology comes out of Japan and so on :P) but have a lower physical capability.  It is rarer to see Asians in sporting events than caucasian or darker skinned people.

This makes perfect sense, considering how quickly Japan and China's economy has completely boomed recently with a rise percentage far greater than normal given the time span, which can be seen as a sign of higher intelligence;

while darker skinned countries have rather fallen behind economically, even taking into account natural disasters and uncontrolled conditions.

Answer 6

During the Roman era, France and England were "third world countries." During the British Empire, America and Australia were "third world" and dumping grounds for the criminals and the unwanted. What's that say about these nations today?

Darwinism operates on the macro scale. A century or two doesn't begin to have an impact. It also operates at a species level.

What about Occam's razor?  The principle that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed.

Mercantilism was a policy followed my the colonizing nations. Colonies existed for the support of the mother colonizing nation. The produced raw material, the colonizing nation made finished goods and the colony bought the finished goods. What you did not want to happen was for the people in the colony to become too educated, to build their own industries, or to become independent. The legacy of this policy was that many former colonies are poor, have few industries and make up most of the third world.

So would the after effects of mercantilism be a more likely reason for the third world's problems?

There is a phrase that was used to justify mercantilism: The "White Man's Burden." this argument was that the White race (read Europeans) were somehow more advanced then anyone else. Therefore as being so advanced they were tasked to bring civilization (European) religion (Christianity) and benefits (read workers in factories and on plantations) to the less developed peoples of the world.

Turn the issue around. If we were dumped into the third world nation and told  we were on our own. How well prepared would we be (think of language, culture, enviorment) to survive? If we didn't make it, would it be fair to say  we weren't fit to survive?

Answer 7

It would say that it's the Natural order that has made them weak.

The strongest of them will survive with time.

Aplied to politics, this means that since it's is intended to be the nature that made them weak, there is no troubles to exploit them more.

PS: this is not my point of view of course but darwinist's one.

Answer 8

It says nothing about them.  They continue to survive, don't they?  In fact, in many ways, they thrive and pass on their genes.  That's all that is required for a Darwinian definition of success.  Any value judgments we make about whose culture is superior are superfluous to the basic tenet of survive and pass on the genes, survive and pass on the genes.