Darwinian Economics is a branch of economics based on the principles outlined in Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species which is basically the law of the survival of the fittest.
About a hundred years ago this theory was gathering some momentum, but somehow became equated with socialism and quickly fell out of favor. I believe there to be very little relationship between Darwinian Economics and socialism and would therefore request giving it another chance, as the theory is actually quite solid and deserves some attention in light of the recent economic downturn.
Socialism basically refers to various theories of economic organization which advocate public ownership and administration of whatever means of production are in use. Socialism generally constitutes a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals under a method of compensation which calculation is based on the amount of work that any given individual has contributed to that society.
Darwinian Economics has nothing at all to do with such a form of economic organization, quite the contrary, whereas socialism involves planning and structuring of the economy in such a way as to make its resources freely available, Darwinian Economics involves no such intentional structuring. Rather, it is more of a non-interference directive that governments, whether socialist or democratic in nature, should allow the economy to grow in accordance with the laws of nature.
The government’s responsibility, as far as economics is concerned, would be relegated to designing a system where a natural economy can flourish with as little interference as possible and designing a system to protect that economy (in large part from itself) from outside interference and attempts to manipulate it.
There is, no doubt, a fine line to be drawn between what is considered necessary in such a design and what is considered necessary in its protection as many parts of many governments are so intertwined with the economy, but under a Darwinian Economic system there would be as much a division between politics and economics as there is between church and state.
A case in point is the Japan Airlines situation in Japan. Here is a weak private company that, due to Japanese perception of it as one of the many symbols of Japan, has garnished protection from the government, which includes considerable cash injections to keep it afloat. The airline is fraught with accidents, unfriendly flight attendants, striking pilots, an incredibly weak infrastructure, and very little in terms of positivity. Under a Darwinian Economic system it would be allowed to die that it may be replaced by a stronger, more effective, and more profitable company.
Interference by governments to protect one company over another reeks of favoritism and should have no place in a democratic form of government. This type of political machination weakens the economy in the long run by piping valuable resources to dead causes and thwarting the growth of otherwise stable companies.
There are many aspects of Darwinian Economics which merit reconsideration and while the examples and understanding held in these words may be quite basic and in need of clarification and or modification it all seems quite logical to me and in dire need of further investigation by those more in the know.
