I'm not hijacking this thread, you are refusing to acknowledge that "Social" equals what you wrote above, "Social ... is an ideology concept of socio-political philosophy" but refuse to say where the second word, "Darwinism", derives from. You are also refusing to stop talking about Hitler... why?
All you need to do is tell me where the D-word comes from in Social Darwinism, and I'll stop.
Admit it, Social Darwinism is a social construct that comes from Darwinian/Spencerian theories concerning the evolution of human races. Why is this so hard to understand?
This thread is about biogeographical evidence “for evolution”, not “for Social Darwinism”, so yes, you are hijacking this thread.
Plus, Charles Darwin never called his theory or the mechanism after HIMSELF as “Darwinism”.
The actual name is “Natural Selection”, not “Darwinism”.
As I kept telling you, and that so dishonestly refused to acknowledge is that Natural Selection is a purely biological mechanism about biodiversity of life, over time, and the driving forces for the “changes”, are due to changes in the environment, eg climate changes, changes to terrain, the availability or scarcity of food sources.
And Natural Selection concern with all life form, animals, plants, fungi, bacteria and archaea, not just of modern human (
Homo sapiens sapiens).
Other evolutionary mechanisms, beside Natural Selection, include Mutation, Genetic Drift, Gene Flow and Genetic Hitchhiking.
Since you are only interested in talking about Darwinism, the Evolution that related to Charles Darwin, hence Natural Selection, then Natural Selection doesn’t concern itself with social or political ideology, like political cultures or agenda, as Social Darwinism do.
Social Darwinism would falls under the category of social science, ot natural science.
The division between natural science and social science are quite clear.
Social science would include anything relating to human culture (eg anthropology, humanities, social customs, sporting activities, music, religion, etc), human activities (eg urbanization, politics, laws, legal procedures, wars, etc) and human behavior (eg psychology, behavioral science, etc).
None of social science applied to other life forms, other than applying to humans.
As I have repeatedly said to you before, Natural Selection doesn’t concern itself with politics or any social issues, or with racism, wars, genocides, etc.
Social Darwinism is again irrelevant to Natural Selection. Jews and Germans may be of different races and of different cultures, they are not of different species.
Are you so lame that you cannot grasp the differences between genus/species and races/cultures?
Natural Selection is biology, and it isn’t just about human biology, is biology that concern with other mammals, and with animal kingdom, such as reptiles, birds, amphibians, fishes, as well as plant life and fungi.
If you want talk about Social Darwinism then start a new thread.