Antifa: need to know

[GMDino]

(08-22-2017, 11:05 AM)Dill Wrote:
"Simple biology" hardly accounts for the historical diversity of human behavior and social organization. Offhand I cannot think of any recorded human society in which "the strongest, dominant males got the first crack at any food and the most desirable mates." Maybe you know of some, or at least one, and can cite an example. Maybe you have also heard the term "social Darwinism," which, back in the 19th century, projected an oversimplified conception of "survival of the fittest" into the human social world to justify corporate power and oppose redistribution of wealth.  It was then that people began imagining the stronger caveman taking food and women away from the weaker like animals--all biology, no culture.

I think most contemporary anthropologists and ethnologists would agree that cooperation and sharing offered humans a better chance of survival than a bunch of atomistic individuals competing against each other. Why couldn't one say that letting some people live off the labor of thousands without themselves working, while others who do work starve, is "completely at odds with every instinct we possess"? That claim would square better with current ethnology and social history.

I wonder where you learned that there is "no incentive to achieve" under Communism. Was it in a US public school? You may not remember. Would it be fair to say that at some point you could "see for yourself" that Communism does not work?  I am guessing you learned about all the "hard wiring" more recently.

Weird to people still talk about "survival of the fittest" in 2017.  As if we haven't evolved to the point where science has allowed even the "weak" to reproduce.

If we could get past our primal urge of greed perhaps we could learn to help each other and make it a better world for all.

I know that's a nirvana pipe dream...but still better than just accepting that there are aholes and so we to all be aholes.