Why don’t liberals believe in Darwinism and Natural Selection?

That may sound counterintuitive, or at least wrong-headed, given the number of little fish on the back of yuppie Volvos in which a big fish labeled “DARWIN” is devouring a little fish labeled with a cross.

But – think about it for a bit.

Per Wikipedia,  “Natural selection is the process by which heritable traits that make it more likely for an organism to survive and successfully reproduce become more common in a population over successive generations. It is a key mechanism of evolution.”

And we all know how fervently liberals believe in evolution.

Don’t get me wrong, I, too, believe in evolution.

And in natural selection.

But natural selection doesn’t just work in evolutionary biology. It’s at work everywhere. One realizes this when reading the annual “Darwin Awards,” people who act so stupidly as to kill themselves, thus removing themselves from the gene pool prior to reproduction. This is natural selection at work. But so, too, is market capitalism. If your company isn’t run well enough, doesn’t have a good enough product or service, lacks motivated, good people on its workforce, it dies. Natural Selection. Better companies prosper. Limited resources are more efficiently used. Better goods at lower prices result, which improves the species.

Unless, of course, Liberals decide a miserable company must be kept around for those poor workers and managers who, in nearly all cases, were the ones who screwed it up so badly to begin with.

GM comes to mind. So does California.

To repeat – what’s with liberals refusing to allow Natural Selection to work?

The marketplace ALWAYS delivers the right answer for the furtherance of the species. Whether the species is the right fish for a particular habitat or the right company for an industry or product set. And government interference in that marketplace nearly always makes it less efficient or, like now with Barney Frank and Jimmy Carter and CRA, comes close to completely destroying a market – as they nearly destroyed global financial markets and DID destroy a few trillion dollars of global wealth.

Dinosaurs ruled for 120,000,000 years, then became extinct. They could not compete in a changed world of fewer plants and prey animals. They couldn’t change with the times.

GM ruled for decades… and did not become extinct. Not because of market forces, not because of better products or services. Not because of any reason of Natural Selection. Unlike traditional dinosaurs, GM COULD have changed with the times. But their unions and poor managers wouldn’t let them. The WOULDN’T change with the times. (And of course, government interference didn’t help. CAFE standards are an oft-cited villain here, but Porsche, BMW and others chose not to worry about them and just pay the fine. GM, too, could’ve made the same decision.)

But all other car companies in America had the same level of government interference. Many survived. GM did not – not on its own.

GM survives today because liberals – of all people – refuse to allow natural selection to work. That’s just dumb. Preventing natural selection prevents using resources most wisely, which results in poverty where it is not necessary… Like in Detroit.

So, what about California?

Here is a state which has been bankrupt for decades. Yet it’s still here. Well, yeah, it has physical geography, so it isn’t going to go poof! any time soon… but – what about its continued permanence on the political system? Why hasn’t it gone belly-up?

Simple – liberal politicians won’t allow it. Liberal voters won’t hear of it.

As in Liberals working AGAINST Natural Selection.

Weird, huh?

Why, for example, do Texans pay taxes that go to Washington only to be redistributed to CA to improve the Port of Long Beach or the Port of San Pedro? That’s just exporting jobs from Houston and Galveston to Los Angeles. This is intelligent? If San Pedro can’t compete on its own, if Long Beach can’t compete with Houston, let Californians pay taxes to make their ports more competitive with those of Texas.

Natural Selection would argue that those with functioning ports exporting jobs to save ports competing with theirs, moving jobs and shipping to places that were not competitive on their own, is interrupting Natural Selection. If those dependent on a port for jobs and taxes think that port is critical, let them pay to make it competitive.

The same holds true for San Francisco, Seattle, New Orleans, Delaware, etc., etc.

Teacher unions in CA hold enormous power – and K-12 in CA has gotten worse every year since unions took over. This is not Natural Selection. It is using resources badly. Very badly. Liberals working AGAINST  Natural Selection.

Enter – Charter Schools. A better use of resources, a better output, a more-educated society.

But – again – liberals hate it. How dare the natural functioning of the world mean not selecting-out uncompetitive teachers?

So CA education… no to put too fine a point on it….  sucks… because of a lack of Natural Selection. Policies put-in-place to prevent Natural Selection, to prevent wise use of resources, to prevent the best possible outcome of time spent in classrooms: Good education.

And, who supports this? Liberals.. and ignorant Conservatives. Mostly those educated by the same unions that are destroying education now.

If an entire state can’t compete on its own – too bad. But asking successful organisms to sacrifice what makes them successful in order to save an unsuccessful organism – well, not only is that putting faith over nature (as in the faith that if we do this dumb thing long enough either it’ll get better or everything else will get so bad maybe people won’t notice), but it’s liberals doing so.

That’s scary.

It isn’t as though knowing how to make a state successful in job creation, education, growth, a sustainable environment, and on and on, is a trade secret. Texas created more jobs in 2008 than the other 49 states combined.

How to make a state competitive, unburdened by debt or high taxes (TX has a budget surplus and no income taxes), is a known thing. NOT implementing what works in order to continue doing what provably does NOT work is not a strategy for success. Under the law of Natural Selection, organisms doing so become extinct.

So – let CA and NY and the communities insisting on handouts rather than on contributing – go belly-up. Let them become extinct. Only by doing so will these political entities and those supporting them see the folly of their ways and act to succeed and exist – or not.

Liberal pretend to believe in choice. I believe in choice – let ‘em choose. But let them also pay the consequences of choosing unwisely. Don’t continue billing other citizens, taxpayers and states for CA’s choices. Those states live within their means.

Make CA do so , as well. No more handouts to CA. They have good people. They know what works. If they choose not to implement what works over what doesn’t, why is it the job of others around the country to lower their own standards of living so CA can continue to make the same dumb mistakes again and again – and draw on the monies of other states – and China at this point – again and again?

That’s just dumb.

Here’s another one: If a subspecies wants to self-implement natural selection, if a group wants to eliminate themselves from the gene pool – let them.

This is the abortion debate. If liberals want to remove themselves from the gene pool and the voting booth, why is that a bad thing? If they believe they have nothing to contribute to the species, if they believe they’d be using-up resource better used by Conservatives, why argue with their opinion?

Natural selection. Harder for Conservatives to accept in this argument because of their desire to go with faith over natural selection, but nonetheless true. The Roe effect, the voluntary removal of up to 89M liberal voters in a 40-year period is natural selection at work.

Let it work.

Uncompetitiveness is unnatural in the overall scheme of things. It doesn’t work in the animal kingdom. It doesn’t work in the physical universe. It doesn’t work in a marketplace undisturbed by government interference. Why do we allow it to happen in human affairs?

It’d be like refusing a qualified teacher to ensure the job of an unqualified one. And that, of course, is exactly why we have teacher unions. To stop natural selection.

It’d be like refusing to allow a car company to go bankrupt from decades of mismanagement and unionwork rules. And that, as we have learned, is why we have Obama and Pelosi and the UAW: To stop natural selection.

Following deregulation under Carter (of all people) many airlines went belly-up. And now we have more choice, more routes, more efficiency and far more travelers – and far better use of resources. Natural selection. Some lost their jobs – but the economy won. ALL of our standards of living improved. And those who lost their jobs because they were lousy managers or salesmen or marketeers or service people – either got better prior to their next job and brought value to their employer – or got fired again.

Or were protected by a union whose job it is to impede natural selection.

Let BofA fail. Let Citi fail. Let Fannie and Freddie fail. Natural selection. Those who follow them in their markets won’t make the same mistakes – they will use resources more wisely, make better decision, and succeed. Or not.

But don’t put valuable taxpayer dollars at risk without the consent of those taxpayers. And if they do consent, recognize they consented to the risk – and that risking sometimes means losing. If a taxpayer puts a million dollars into a Nigerian internet scam, why should that taxpayer be protected from his foolishness? Natural Selection at work.

If a taxpayer puts a million dollars into a badly-run auto company… same question?

In the S&L fiasco of a couple decades back, the FSLIC insured accounts to $100,000… and then paid-out millions to individuals just because they had millions in a single account. What part of the $100,000 limit did these geniuses not understand? Investor geniuses and Congressional geniuses?

So – let GM and Chrysler and Ford and the UAW and Citi and BofA fail. Let Fan and Fred fail. Let the market place work and everybody wins.

Except those fish who didn’t belong in the pond to begin with, who couldn’t use the resources as effectively as those who succeeded. Let them die. That’d include those who are best suited to be dog-catchers but somehow are teachers.. or Speakers of the House.

It is curious that those who can succeed in the private sector – do. And those who cannot – become politicians. Of course, no intelligent person would become a politician in a market economy – too little reward, too much trash-talking from the mal-educated in the media.

You may have noticed, though, that Natural Selection is at work in the media.

You may also have noticed that liberals want to stop natural selection here, too, with the Orwellian-named “Fairness Doctrine.”

How did the party that hangs its social hat on Natural Selection wind up as the party preventing it from occurring?

Easy – natural selection would select-out nearly all of its voters, politicians, social ideas and freedom-limiting legislation.

And they’d have only unions to keep themselves employed by preventing natural selection everywhere they went.

Imagine that.

About Alex Scipio

About Alex Scipio: Alex moved out of the People's Republic of California to the Free State of Arizona, finally tiring of the lack of the Bill of Rights, the overgrown idiocracy, and the catering to non-Americans & welfare recipients. He still wonders how America got from Truman, Eisenhower, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan to the Liberal and Conservative extremes so badly managing America today. And, yes, islam DOES need to be annihilated. And doing what he can to get folks away from the extremes of political life.
This entry was posted in Domestic, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *