Not only am I pro-capitalism, but my husband and I own a company called WebDoggs (more on that later).
What I take issue with is corporations who buy laws to benefit themselves and screw the average person.
Everyone should have a fair shake at a decent life. Sure, some are smarter and some are stronger, but most of us agree that it’s wrong to take advantage of, or in any way injure, those who are dumber or weaker, and we make laws for the purpose of leveling the playing field.
In nature, the doctrine of “survival of the fittest” reigns supreme; the strong live and the weak die. But human society has evolved beyond the simple need to eat and reproduce, which redefines what it means to be “fit.”
An elderly person, frail and infirm, who has surpassed their usefulness in a hunting and gathering society, still has a lot to contribute in ours.
Wisdom, love, companionship, and sentimental value have little meaning in nature, but are vital to the survival of complex societies, and to each person’s quality of life, which is why we strive to preserve these values when they come into conflict with the doctrine of “survival of the fittest.”
When corporations lobby to reverse the regulations that prevent them from destroying the lives of individuals in their pursuit of strengthening themselves, they like to argue the “survival of the fittest” doctrine and say that it is in the best interest of society that they are allowed to destroy those who oppose them, when it is really only in their own best interest.
Wisdom, love, companionship, and sentimental value are in the best interest of society and the best interest of each individual. People live longer, healthier, and happier lives when they are not in a constant state of fighting to survive.
Viva la evolución