The famous phrase “Survival of the Fittest” which was developed by Herbert Spencer can be interpreted in multiple perspectives of morality, religion, ethics and humanism.It is, however, an undeniable fact that this concept sounds rather cruel and harsh as it justifies that the unfit must die. This makes it extremely difficult for many to concede to this concept. God (Allah) has created humans as the greatest creatures of earth. All human beings, regardless of their religion, race, ethnicity, gender and color have equal and absolute rights to live in this world without any fear and threat from other human beings.

Hence, we categorically reject Spencer’s appalling idea of “Survival of the Fittest” both theoretically as well as in practice. But if we study and observe the world’s contemporary situations, like the ongoing wars, violence, poverty, diseases, inequality, injustice, climate change and unemployment, we realize that knowingly or unknowingly, Spencer’s phrase “Survival of the Fittest” has been operational in theworld of humanity.

We can even heed to the fact that countries have already been tagged as “fit” and “unfit”. To understand this, we must first understand Dependency Theory, which was developed in the late 1950s under the guidance of the Director of the United Nations Economic Commission for the Third World countries. Dependency theory has segregated states according to their political, military and economic power as Dominant/Dependent States or Core/Periphery States. Third world countries or dependent states are at the lowest rung of the ladder. They have low literacy levels, low capital, poor health, less economic and military power, and are dominated politically, economically and militarily by the First world states. The dominant/core states have animmenseamount of wealth, political power, good health, economic capabilities, military competences, along with being advanced capitalist as well as industrialized states.

The First world/core states are extremely advanced and are the fittest in the world order. In fact, they are the creators of world order and embody features like democracy, capitalism, free and open market economy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, secularism and liberty. The Third world/dependent states neither fit into the world order nor are they able to make their own governance system to pursue policies of self-reliance to live in peace and prosperity.Thus, the Third world countries are coercively integrated into first world country economic orders.

The Third world countries are on the edge of a civilization crisis and face ideological clashes.These nations struggle to form governance system and find them caught between western ideology, socialist/dictatorial ideology and Islamic ideology. Owing to all the confusion and miss-governance, the Third world countries have achieved neither of these ideologies. Rather, all they have accomplished is drawing them in a pool of war, death and violence.The signs of a war breaking out between US and Iran are crystal clear. Unfortunately,it still remains unclear if the dependent states are shifting towards dominant states. If this happens, then every nation willbe tagged as“fittest”in the system and as a result, will make Spencer’s theory “Survival of the Fittest” meaningless. On the other hand, if dependent nations are becoming more and more unfit and weaken to the world order and system. The weak will die and the strong will survive, and live on forever. Then, a situation where the Herbert Spencer phrase “Survival of the Fittest”will make perfect sense in reality.

In a quest to look out for countries that do not exemplify“Survival of the Fittest”, I don’t have to look very far. I am myself stuck in a country possessing that characteristic.Yes, Afghanistan is also one of those Third world countries.Our national budget has more than 60% deficit, which has resulted in a huge amount of foreign aid. It is a country which is unproductive not only in resources (food, clothes, and all other tangible materials) which satisfy human needs and desires, but also in developing constructive ideas (like forming inclusive laws and efficient governance) to prevent human loss and further development and implementation of laws, ideas and ideologies. It is completely rallying towards dominant states’ goods and services.Since 1977, war has been threatening the life of Afghans in their homeland. Therefore,it has experimented with many forms of governance from socialist to anarchy, from Sharia law to democratic. But none of them could manage affairs and resolve issues to guarantee people a quality life. In the last 40 years, it has become alarge producer of immigrants to the dominant statesin order to integrate with the fittest nations for survival.

The scarcity of resources and leadership skills, and failure of managing state affairs have weakened us and have made Afghan people unfit for survival. Throughout history, Afghans have been relying on foreign aid even to support the Afghans’fundamental needs. Once the stock of foreign aid reduces to zero, the number of wars and subsequently, the fatalities too will proliferate. Spencer had said that the strong will remain and the weak shall perish. It is certain that Afghans will die. In fact, Afghans are dying on a daily basis, slowly and painfully. According to a UN report, in 2016, more than 5,500 soldiers and 3,500 civilians lost their lives in (man-made) wars. There are many factors contributingto Afghan fatalities. Some of the common factors are war, violence, diseases, natural disaster and poverty. The astronomical rate of human loss in Afghanistan is neither God’s (Allah) orders nor wishes. Allah is kind to us. It is the incapability of humans to manage situations and prevent human loss in Afghanistan. The world’s situations is dynamic and is constantly changing, making Afghans weaker and unfit as a nation. ISIS is a new threat to Afghans’ life.According to a UN report,in 2016, more than 220 civilians lost their lives in the hands of ISIS. The Afghan government requires superior leadership skills, good governance and resources to dismantle this new threat (ISIS).

Merely in the first two weeks of February 2017, almost 200 hundredpeople lost their lives in wars and natural disasters in Afghanistan. Herbert Spencer’s phrase is perfectly suitable and correct in today’s Afghanistan .Afghans do not portray “Survival of the Fittest”; they do not fit into the world order and system; they are dying a heartrending death every day.

View expressed in this article are of the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Pajhwok’s editorial policy.

Visits: 15