February 22, 2025

Survival of the fittest is supposed to mean corrupters acquire their power through their inherent worth, when it is destructivity, not worth, that gets them there.

Corrupters rely upon domination to generate social worth. They want nothing standing in the way of their domination to prevail. Then when they encounter endless obstacles to their domination, they assume something unfair is going on.

Domination is the basis of all corruption, because no one can function constructively being dominated by corrupters. The obstacles to domination include all human activity, because for every winner there is a loser in pitting force against force.

Corrupters assume the force which emanates from themselves is the good and necessary force, while other forces than their own are corruptions. They assume they have good reasons for doing what they do, so when other persons oppose them, they must be getting something wrong. They can't grasp the concept of everyone having different reasons for producing different forces.

The net result is a pitched battle for acquiring status through force. The winners are supposed to be worth more than the losers, which corrupters assume to be survival of the fittest—a concept borrowed from biological evolution.

Nothing could be worse than disrupting the battle for worth, in the view of corrupters. All attempts to correct the destructive nature of force and violence are viewed by corrupters as misalignment of social worth—putting misfits above the worthies. Whoever does the most destroying is supposed to be worth the most.

The most significant examples of producing improper worth in the assumption of corrupters are the attempts to produce laws through government to prevent the destructivity of force and violence.

Laws of government give corrupters the impression that someone is attacking them unfairly. Why aren't the laws applied to their enemies instead of themselves? The concept of rationality applied to objective reality as being the acceptable standard is beyond imagination to corrupters, because they cut themselves off from objective reality in relying upon force and violence to be winners.

Then there is the more broadly applied disruptive influence over corrupters' process of making themselves winners through destructivity, which is the altruism of providing assistance to the needy. It interferes with the attempts to prevail against the persons being assisted in addition to elevating supposed misfits by giving them assistance.

For those reasons, corrupters assume survival of the fittest requires destroying vulnerable persons. Otherwise, misfits are allowed to prevail over the fittest and turn the social order upside down.

That attitude becomes starkly visible in the demands of corrupters in destroying misfits and opposing assistance to the needy. If it were a slug fest, no philosophy would be involved; but the arguing by corrupters shows they direct an ethic toward the necessity of winners dominating and view social assistance to be disrupting the process.

It seems like an insult to intelligence to point out the need to avoid force and violence for accomplishing anything constructive.

Summarizing the process goes like this: What flows out of corrupters must be all that is right, because corrupters are clueless about anything outside their bubble. Any attempts to change that result must be the ruination of man. Laws and opposition must result from aberrant persons leading people astray.