From watching the NFB documentary “Paris 1919” and looking at the book it is based on, by Canadian historian Margaret McMillan (and “1919 Versailles: The End of the War to End All Wars”, by Charles L. Mee Jr. [pub. New Word City, 2016, ISBN 978-1-612307-56-5, Kobo, Abe Books, Apple Books, Amazon], which I had read beforehand), which were about the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 after World War (part) One, which made World War (part) Two inevitable, and, through its errors, suggested ways to do better after that later war ... which were undone by Big Powers Politics (i.e., the demands of the USA, UK, France, China, and the USSR for greater status/power [and thus permanent status on the UN Security Council, with an absolute veto power there], and the start of the ideological fanaticism of the Cold War).
That led me to another book by that author: “The War That Ended Peace: How Europe Abandoned Peace for the First World War” (Profile Books, 2013, eISBN 978-1-84765-416-8; Kobo, Booktopia, Apple Books, Amazon), and that - amongst other things - emphasised the significance of something I had come across previously, but without giving it adequate weight:
social Darwinism
Here are a few links on that phrase:
- “social Darwinism - social theory” https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-Darwinism “The theory was used to support laissez-faire capitalism and political conservatism. ... At the societal level, social Darwinism was used as a philosophical rationalisation for imperialist, colonialist, and racist policies, sustaining belief in Anglo-Saxon or Aryan cultural and biological superiority. Social Darwinism declined during the 20th century as an expanded knowledge of biological, social, and cultural phenomena undermined, rather than supported, its basic tenets.”
- “Social Darwinism Theory: Definition & Examples” https://www.simplypsychology.org/social-darwinism.html “Social Darwinism has been heavily criticised and widely rejected by the scientific community for its lack of adherence to Darwinism, as well as in its use in justifying social inequality, imperialism, and eugenics.”
“Social Darwinism” https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Social_Darwinism&oldid=1286098053 “Social Darwinism is a body of pseudoscientific theories and societal practices that purport to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology, economics and politics. Social Darwinists believe that the strong should see their wealth and power increase, while the weak should see their wealth and power decrease. Social Darwinist definitions of the strong and the weak vary, and differ on the precise mechanisms that reward strength and punish weakness. Many such views stress competition between individuals in laissez-faire capitalism, while others, emphasising struggle between national or racial groups, support eugenics, racism, imperialism and/or fascism. ... Social Darwinism declined in popularity following World War I, and its purportedly scientific claims were largely discredited by the end of World War II—partially due to its association with N_ z_ sm and due to a growing scientific consensus that eugenics and scientific racism were unfounded.”
This all, as the saying goes, rings a bell when I consider issues such as cruelty, toxic masculinity, social status addicts, populism / perversions of nationalism, fascism, and so on.
I’m still getting to grips with this so I won’t try to elaborate on the above points, however ...
- I suspect this term could be quite a useful phrase (in terms of accurately conveying problems such as the arrogance of oligarchs/elitists) phrase;
- it provides another way of examining situations - a bit like adding a facet to a diamond, or adding a face or point to a crystal - not necessarily significant on its own (although that is possible), but may add a crucial weight of insight; and
- it also provides a useful tool for focusing the BPM work of this blog.
I may add more to this post over time - for instance, I am thinking some of my posts could be of use, and there is the possibility of expanding some of the content.
Any others who can contribute in some other arena, however, should definitely do so.
Possible flaws
Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:
- there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”;
- I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below, and there’s also other options.
Note that I am cutting back on aspects of my posts - see here.
(Gnwmythr is pronounced new-MYTH-ear)
Remember: we generally need to be more human being rather than human doing, to mind our Mӕgan, and to acknowledge that all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk & accept that all insistence on the use of “trans” as a descriptor comes with commensurate use of “cis” as a descriptor to prevent “othering” (just as binary gendered [men’s and women’s] sporting teams are either both given the gender descriptor, or neither).#PsychicABetterWorld and may all that I do be of value and actively BPM used for and by the nonphysical BPM
Copyright © Kayleen White 2007-2025 NO AI
I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence
(AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or
other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to
reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise replicate any part of
this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typo’s
may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product.
Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative
Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
.jpg)
