Survival of the Fittest: testing morals and ethics

 "A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world." ~Albert Camus

In the wilds of the animal kingdom, 'survival of the fittest' dictates that those best adapted to their environment through physical strength, strategic cunning, or social cooperation, will thrive and propagate their genes. The Darwinian concept, central to evolutionary biology, underscores the brutal and unforgiving struggle for dominance and survival. While this law of nature governs the animal world, it also provides a lens through which we can examine human societies and political systems - a glimpse into how humans, even with our elevated reasoning and grandiose sense of selves, in the evolutionary cycle of things, are still just animals.  

The animal world operates on a relatively simple principle: the strongest, smartest, and/or the most adaptable organisms will survive, while the weaker or less adapted perish. Whether it's a lion hunting in the savannah or an antelope evading capture, the struggle for survival is an ongoing contest between life and death, power being the key to success. Similarly, in the social world of humans, power is often the ultimate currency - those who acquire it can influence, control, and shape the conditions of survival of others. In our societies, this power is frequently concentrated in the hands of a few, often resulting in hierarchical structures that mirror the predatory dominance seen in the natural world - particularly totalitarian regimes, which often emerge as a manifestation of the same ruthless drive for power and control.

There is a disturbing parallel to this survivalist logic in political spheres. In such systems, power is concentrated in the hands of a single entity, whether an individual, a party, or a ruling class, which ruthlessly eliminates opposition in the name of preserving its own supremacy. Just as the predator in the animal kingdom does not hesitate to kill to ensure its survival, totalitarian leaders often take extreme measures - propaganda, censorship, surveillance, violence - to take and maintain a position of power. Here, the political arena becomes an extension of the natural world's competitive survival, where the fittest (in terms of power acquisition) dominate at the expense of many others.

Totalitarianism, like predation in nature, operates on the logic of scarcity - of resources, political freedom, and of individual autonomy. This scarcity prompts competition, aggression, and sometimes cooperation. In human societies, a similar scarcity of power often fuels the rise of authoritarian leaders who promise to secure resources or protect the group by centralizing control. However, as in the wild, the concentration of power inevitably leads to an imbalance, where the ruling elite can easily turn into predators, exploiting and oppressing those beneath them to ensure their own survival and dominance. 'The king of the jungle' asserts control over the entire ecosystem. While such a ruler may have initially risen to power by the sheer force of their will or cunning strategies, the continuation of their reign depends not on maintaining the health and well-being of the collective, but rather on convincing people that their leadership will maintain the health and well-being of the collective while subjugating any threat to their authority. The "fittest" in this context is not necessarily the one most capable of governing for the greater good, but the one most adept at silencing dissent, controlling resources, and manipulating the masses. Just as in nature, where a predator's control over its domain is rarely opposed, the totalitarian leader enforces unquestioned loyalty. Any challenge to the ruler's authority is seen not only as a threat to personal power but as an existential threat to the regime. Survival often requires the elimination of rivals and necessitates the suppression or destruction of any potential opposition, regardless of the consequences for the population at large. The ruler seeks to dominate or exploit others for personal gain. Historical examples include the rise of imperialism, slavery, and exploitation of labour - The 'fittest' are those who have the power to oppress others - a stark contradiction to the ethical norms that many human societies profess. The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few comes at the expense of the many.

In theory, democracy offers a counterpoint. Unlike totalitarianism, democracy is built on the idea that power should be distributed among the many rather than concentrated in the hands of a few. It is founded on the belief that cooperation, dialogue, and compromise are the key to a stable and just society, rather than the elimination of opposition. Yet, even in democratic systems, there is an echo of 'survival of the fittest' - political parties, special interests, and powerful elites often engage in battles for dominance. The difference is that in a democracy, these battles are, ideally, tempered by checks and balances, the rule of law, and the broader social contract. 'Survival of the fittest' in this sense involves a kind of moral fitness -- those who are better at collaborating, negotiating, and building social ties may have a greater chance of success than those who rely purely on individualistic tactics. The ethical responsibility to care for others, especially the weak or vulnerable, is seen in many cultures as a cornerstone of moral behaviour.

While the animal kingdom operates largely on instinct and immediate survival, human societies are capable of higher reasoning, empathy and the formulation of ethical systems that ideally value cooperation over conflict. The human capacity for abstract thought, reflection and compassion suggests that our survival need not equate to unchecked power, and that societies can and should evolve beyond the brutish logic of domination. Morality in humans can be seen as a way to temper the the basic instinctual drive for survival - we have developed ethical systems that encourage cooperation and fairness. Some philosophers have argued that human beings, with their capacity for reason, should transcend mere self-interest and act according to principles that benefit the greater good... competition may exist, but survival and success are not solely about domination or the elimination of others. In the wild, animals often compete for resources, but they also engage in cooperative behaviours, hunting in packs or living in social groups for protection and mutual support - In human society, cooperation is more explicit, organized, and complex. From the establishment of laws and social contracts to the development of shared cultural and ethical norms, humans have created systems that promote collective well-being over individual survival. Self-sacrifice is rare in the animal kingdom but not uncommon in human societies - parents might risk their lives to protect their children, soldiers might fall on grenades to save their comrades, and activists might face imprisonment or death to advocate for the rights of others. These actions, driven by a moral compass, defy the logic of 'survival of the fittest' and suggest that ethical considerations often take precedence over raw self-interest. Emotions like guilt, shame, empathy, and anger shape moral decision-making. These emotional responses can strongly influence behaviour, sometimes leading people to act in morally virtuous ways or to justify immoral actions.

The moral and ethical implications of human behaviour reveals the complexity of how individuals, societies, and institutions navigate the questions of right and wrong. While religious teachings, philosophy, psychology and sociology offer frameworks, real-world ethical decisions often involve weighing competing values, the consequences of actions, and the rights of the individual versus the greater good. Historical events, biblical stories, and the fairy-tales we read to our children, helping to develop our values and moral compass, are used as cautionary tales; leadership, loyalties, corruption and power, are universal themes that transcend time and conditions - the dangers of unchecked power and the consequences of self-glorification have a great cost. These stories remind us of both the potential and the peril inherent in the pursuit of authority and control. The challenge for human civilization is not to accept 'survival of the fittest' as an inevitability, but to seek the flourishing of all rather than the dominance of a few, invoking all that differentiates us from the wilds of the animal kingdom.