In his 1955 book "Social Darwinism in American Thought," Richard Hofstadter examines how Darwinism was interpreted and applied in American society. He argues that Darwinism, while neutral, was often used to justify competition and force. The rugged individualist interpretation of Darwinism became dominant in America until the 1890s, as it reflected the values of American society, particularly the middle class. However, this philosophy was unstable and led to negative consequences for the less skilled or unlucky. Over time, the middle class rejected this philosophy, leading to the rise of critics of Darwinian individualism. As Darwinian individualism declined, Darwinian collectivism, particularly nationalist and racist varieties, began to take hold. This shift was influenced by the growing tensions of imperialism and the need to justify international competition. The phrase "survival of the fittest" was used to support both domestic business competition and international expansion. However, the outbreak of World War I led to a revulsion against international violence, and Americans began to reject the idea of racial aggression and militarism. By the end of the war, social Darwinism had largely disappeared from American thought. While some individuals still held onto Darwinian individualism, it was no longer a dominant philosophy. Hofstadter concludes that social ideas are shaped by economic and political changes, and that truth and logic are less important than suitability to social interests. He also emphasizes that biological ideas like "survival of the fittest" are not useful for understanding society, and that social improvement comes from technological and organizational advances, not from selective breeding or elimination. Ultimately, Hofstadter argues that moral sanctions can be used for the common good, even if they are not rooted in nature.In his 1955 book "Social Darwinism in American Thought," Richard Hofstadter examines how Darwinism was interpreted and applied in American society. He argues that Darwinism, while neutral, was often used to justify competition and force. The rugged individualist interpretation of Darwinism became dominant in America until the 1890s, as it reflected the values of American society, particularly the middle class. However, this philosophy was unstable and led to negative consequences for the less skilled or unlucky. Over time, the middle class rejected this philosophy, leading to the rise of critics of Darwinian individualism. As Darwinian individualism declined, Darwinian collectivism, particularly nationalist and racist varieties, began to take hold. This shift was influenced by the growing tensions of imperialism and the need to justify international competition. The phrase "survival of the fittest" was used to support both domestic business competition and international expansion. However, the outbreak of World War I led to a revulsion against international violence, and Americans began to reject the idea of racial aggression and militarism. By the end of the war, social Darwinism had largely disappeared from American thought. While some individuals still held onto Darwinian individualism, it was no longer a dominant philosophy. Hofstadter concludes that social ideas are shaped by economic and political changes, and that truth and logic are less important than suitability to social interests. He also emphasizes that biological ideas like "survival of the fittest" are not useful for understanding society, and that social improvement comes from technological and organizational advances, not from selective breeding or elimination. Ultimately, Hofstadter argues that moral sanctions can be used for the common good, even if they are not rooted in nature.