A Review of Might is Right
Might is Right, or Survival of the Fittest, is the iconoclastic polemic treatise published under the pseudonym, Ragnar Redbeard, in 1890. In terms of style, it is perhaps one of the most unapologetically damning works of literature ever written. Centering on the thesis that true goodness was determined by a man’s ability to maximize his power, status, and possessions, through force or cunning, Redbeard proceeds to take a sledgehammer to practically every contemporary religion, value system, and political philosophy of his day. He praises history’s conquerors and shrewd rulers who exemplified strength, power, pride, aggression, and cunning while oozing contempt for the weak, disempowered, humble, meek, and credulous. He explicitly bases this assertion on Social Darwinist thought, and undertones reminiscent of Friedrich Nietzsche are laden throughout the text. In all, Might is Right is an unreserved and incendiary work that weighs the value of moral ideologies against natural imperatives, and concludes that the former are nothing more than illusions, impediments, and oftentimes, safe havens for the weak and unworthy. Redbeard interprets history as a process of the strong dominating the weak, a process that finds its justification as the fundamental process of nature, by which organisms adapt and improve through rigorous and unceasing conflict.
Might is Right is loaded with uncompromising assertions that most readers, especially modern-day ideologues, would find unbearably harsh, bigoted, and abrasive. Indeed, nearly anyone, including religious types, American patriots, liberals, etc. is bound to be offended by the book’s merciless blasphemies against their hallowed beliefs. Even if some convictions are not entirely abrasive in one era, it is bound to strike against the sensibilities of another. For instance, when the book was first written in 1890, most readers would have perhaps agreed with Redbeard’s white supremacist convictions and blatant anti-Semitism, while pouring condemnation upon his lengthy attacks on the Christian religion. Today, it is more likely to be the reverse among much of the populace. Redbeard cared for neither sort, and his only goal stated in the text was to free would-be great men[1] from the bonds of encumbering beliefs and encourage their impulses toward power, wealth, and domination.
Disclaimers and Discrepancies
Might is Right makes several valid claims about the human condition as a phenomenon exclusively grounded in nature. According to Redbeard, the soul is a myth, and our existence has no ties to any higher purpose. He is a staunch materialist and derides any belief in the immaterial or supernatural as a sign of mental feebleness. This position ties in well with nihilist, existentialist, and even Satanist currents. Many of his related arguments connected to this central premise are at least worth a good look.
However, the long-since debunked racist position that Redbeard takes throughout the text is grounded upon discredited pseudoscientific observations and a rather specious understanding of history. His belief in the innate superiority of the Anglo-Saxon race is predicated on nonsense that boasts of the superior anatomy of the Anglo-Saxon race. This does not conform to the presently-held beliefs that different human groups developed specialized adaptations according to their respective environments.[2] His condemnation of racial mixing as a degenerative trend is debunked by more modern data that report greater height and intelligence among children of mixed races.[3] He also refers to the supposed Jewish conspiracy to rule the world as if it were a universally accepted fact, a concept that lacks any real credibility.
Points Made: Extracted Value
Once the racist themes are separated from the rest of the text, however, the book does offer several useful viewpoints worthy of consideration. Redbeard’s rejection of not most, but all moral ideologies in favor of a Darwinist – or more accurately a Social Darwinist – approach to value attributions, makes up the foundation of the book. It is an attempt to appraise values and conduct within the context of the objective course of nature, rather than the subjective social constructs that make up the dominant value systems of today. Judging survival, prosperity, and propagation as what is best for all organisms and thus what is also best for humans, he justifies the qualities that best fulfill this criterion. Such traits include pride, selfishness, aggression, cunning, and ruthlessness.
It is easy to see how Redbeard’s observations clash with the value systems of his time, and even those of today. Pervasive ideologies such as patriotism, Christianity, liberalism, socialism, and utilitarianism all promote humility and submission to an ideal or hierarchical superiors. They endorse the reject self-interest for the sake of the common good. They call their adherence to abandon the pursuit excellence, opting instead to wallow in complacent mediocrity. They promote concepts of chimerical utopianism over concrete practical goals. In all cases, the naturalistic criteria required for individual success, that is, conquest, rule, and possession, are willfully discarded by “principled people”, relegating them to the degenerative status of slaves. Such moral systems and political philosophies go directly against the proper course of nature. Therefore, all those who embrace these value systems and their associated patterns of behavior can be assured –rightly, as Redbeard would assert– of a pitiable life of failure, abject servitude, and in the long run, genetic degeneracy.
Might is Right promotes a version of history that in somewhat similar in Karl Marx’s view of history, as they both interpret it as a process of class warfare and exploitation. However, their assessment of this interpretation places them on opposite philosophical poles. Marx condemns this pattern as an inherently unhealthy process destined to eventually resolve over the course of history through a dialectic process. Redbeard, however, views struggle, competition, and exploitation as an eternal historical constant necessary for the improvement of the human species. While Marx views the end of struggle as a favorable conclusion to strife and society-driven dehumanization, Redbeard considers this conclusion as the vain hope of the weak, that, if it were possible, would only lead to the atrophy and devolution of humanity. According to Redbeard, ruthless competition and strife are necessary catalysts for growth, without which, no organism could thrive, grow stronger, or maintain its current prowess.
It is a biological fact that faculties well used by organisms grow stronger, and that those left idle eventually fade. This can be observed in nature from everything between the diminutive arms of a T Rex to the shrinking fifth toe on the human foot. Hard labor strengthens muscles, and active problem-solving sharpens the mind. In the larger picture, the challenges that nature presents to organisms ensure that only the best and strongest pass their genes to the next generation, leaving weaker, atrophied life forms to fade into extinction. Thus, a positive approach to challenges and strife, rather than an aversion to it, is the pathway to health, power, and excellence. In this sense, Redbeard’s analysis acknowledges that humanity is neither exempt from natural laws nor the pressures that enforce them, and both individuals and societies would be prudent to embrace, and even seek out, struggles and challenges.
Point of Departure
This author, considering the course of history, along with universal organic processes through nature, agrees with Redbeard’s assertions over the enslaving and degenerative effect of our contemporary moral systems. I also agree that the endorsement of the values of strength, power, and cunning lays the psychological foundation for achieving mastery and dominance. Both religions and political ideologies make slaves of anyone who accepts them. They make them tractable, credulous, and suited for manipulation at the hands of the elite few who are above such illusions. In the vein of thinkers like Max Stirner and Nietzsche, clinging to prescriptive value systems of any kind is a sure path to self-negation and individual decay.
However, Redbeard’s argument that man’s highest achievement is the maximization of power and wealth is an overly naturalistic premise that is blind to man’s condition as a reasoning and acutely self-aware being who hungers for meaning beyond this criterion. Dominating the social hierarchy is absolutely preferable to a subservient role in it. Yet even those who dominate, direct, and control society are still bound to it. Politicians are shielded by bulletproof glass. They are transported to and fro in armored cars, and are flanked by security. They are forever targets of both their rivals and of certain disgruntled individuals among the public. Even most of those elite rulers who live out of sight of the public are hopelessly dependent upon the perpetuation of the status quo. For if the standing social order were to go into an unbearable flux or crumble, all their status and power would dissolve with it. Therefore, the greatest degree of success is not the pursuit of social status or material prosperity, but the cultivation of independence and self-sufficiency, even to the degree by which one rejects social power, wealth, and status altogether. Only through this maximization of independence can one consider themselves freer and better off. The ultimate highest achievement in social life is not to rule over society but to overcome it altogether.
This pursuit of freedom is one of the chief aims of The Human Animal newsletter. Redbeard’s condemnation of ideology is an important step in the development of a free individual since uncoupling oneself from the constriction of slavish moral philosophies is essential to finding one’s own moral center. His praise of the unencumbered pursuit of power as not only a healthy lifestyle, but as a historical reality that fools reject at their own peril, is also helpful, in that it provides a purely naturalistic view of human life. However, this author does not believe that Redbeard’s highest aims lead to the summit of human potential. Nor does it offer any sense of meaning or purpose to the individual.
Rather, the path toward self-actualization is best approached 1) through the acknowledgement of human society is essentially hierarchal and constant, and often in violent flux, 2), that adversity and challenges must be faced head-on and overcome to get and stay strong, 3) that human society is a man-made ecosystem build over a natural one, and may approach as such, and 4) that the pursuit of power through the maximization of independence and the cultivation of skills is the path toward transcending the bounds of society and affirming ones life as distinct, free and unfettered by social parameters. This is to achieve a state above and beyond the master/slave dichotomy integral to human society.
[1] Here, Redbeard is speaking only of men. Might is Right is overtly sexist, and Redbeard explicitly and forcefully supports the subservience of women to men.
[2] https://humanorigins.si.edu/research/climate-and-human-evolution/climate-effects-human-evolution#:~:text=There%20are%20many%20ideas%20about,known%20as%20the%20savanna%20hypothesis.
[3] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/jul/02/diverse-parental-genes-lead-to-taller-smarter-children-says-extensive-study