So if someone reads this, tracks you down, and stabs you painfully to death in an alley with a dagger
and gets away with it!
Then that would be okay, cause may the best survive!!!
Well, he certainly has a knack for stalking and murder then. Murder however is wrong even if you don't belive in absolute morality. On a societal level other ppl have a lets say negative attitude towards a individual who uses such means, as it is detrimental to society as a whole, therefore they will expend resources to aprehend and dispose of said individual in order to preserve themselves. Thus you have laws, even if not perfect. Left to itself society naturally tends towards the removal of aspects which are detrimental to the survival of the species. This includes individuals, groups and ideas. Even if you overload society with weak or criminally inclined individuals, systems based on bad ideas, the collapse of the support structure is assured based on the agregate of individuals being contrary to it's stability, ie it implodes. The chaos then ensures a rebirth, which can only happen through the elimination of those elements which were harmful. (natural reballancing)
Also, about your quote.
If the inferior outmanouver the superior by imposing democracy on them.
Isn't that an indication that the so called superior is inferior overall?
I wouldn't call it outmanuvering, ppl wo simply can are not really stopped by democracy. It mucks up merotocracy, as far as government goes, but unless you impose true democracy aka communism and enforce it at a cultural level, no. I am still king of my property and I can freely engage in the market to a certain extent, ofc it is to be resented that larger organizations, such a corporations would use government in order to gain an advantage over smaller businesses and individuals, which is why government is part of the problem, tho group competitive advantage is nothing to snease at either. Even under a theoretically ideal system, such as comunism ppl will try to game the system, those in charge will inevitably do so and have done so in the past (which is why these things never work out). If nobody is in charge, then there is a power vacuum to be filled eventually by someone... and so it will be filled.
After all the only reason that someone is superior in that sense,
is because you hold other traits up high than the one that in the end won the day.
Sort of like in the game of rock, paper, scissors.
Rock may bitch all day about it's natural superiority of hardness, but paper beats it everytime,
regardless of it not being hard at all.
Demand creates supply, supply creates competition, competition creates excelence and plenty. Traits we find valuable are so, because they are in demand. People who can supply them have an advantage.
Intelliegence for example is such a trait. It is highly prized (great demand) and anyonene who can supply it has an advantage over others, therefore is superior.
IQ 180 > IQ 120, especially if the individual can put it to use and create value for society.
You can make a good argument however in favor of sharing some of the created value in order to prevent forcing other indiciduals into having to stalk and murder ppl. Generosity can be a trait which is advantagious, even if you don't believe in deontological ethics. Parasitic behaviour however is detrimental to this and it is a trait which cannot be valued, hence it being very low on the higherarchy of valued traits.
Non arbitrary higherarchy is how nature functions. Humans have empathy, altruism, language, lower physical strength but higher IQ, capacity for reason etc, because these have been found valuable by a process of evolution, given the environment the species lives in.
