blevkog

The fact that you take anything on that site seriously says everything about you, Ex-Dip, (that and the fact that you can't spell Chamberlain - idiot) Oh - and you screwed up appeasement too.

ExNDIP,

Why the continuous off-topic slander all of the time? If you are actually formerly NDP, they're all the better for having you on the other side. It makes them look more rational.

I mean, as we all know, nobody on the Right side of the political spectrum ever believed stupid shit, right?

Besides, as odious as it is, to say that social darwinism was only embraced by the left is an outright lie. It underlies every paragraph of Ayn Rand's odious prose.

Not to mention how eagerly eugenics and social darwinism were embraced by Herr Himmler and the SS, a single example of the Nazi racial obsession. I think it has been rather firmly established by posterity that regardless of the use of 'socialist' in 'National Socialist German Worker's Party', they had very little to do with the socialism that exists today.
In fact, I don't get where you're coming from at all, EX-NDIP - Social darwinism seems to me to be the polar opposite of any concept of social welfare - it advocates for the gradual elimination of those deemed 'unsuitable'. A far cry from advocating on their behalf. Herbert Spencer, the sociologist who coined the phrase 'natural selection' prior to Darwin, posited that the poor were poor for a reason, that they were intellectually and biologically inferior. He was a product of his times, and an embarrasing footnote in the study of Sociology as a discipline.
Casual rhetorical associations of bad people with those you disagree with is cheap, and shows a complete lack of thought. An Ad Hominem attack is one thing, but an Ad Hominem attack based on a false premise tells me a lot about where you're coming from.
If you can produce evidence to support spurious assertions, fine, I'll look at them, but don't expect me or anyone else to cower to your apparent sense of 'moral superiority'.