Belief in social Darwinism encouraged countries to dominate others by turning conquest into something that felt “natural,” necessary, and even moral, instead of greedy or brutal.

Key Idea in One Line

Social Darwinism took Darwin’s biological idea of “survival of the fittest” and wrongly applied it to human societies, so powerful nations claimed they should rule weaker ones.

What Social Darwinism Is

  • It argued that human groups (nations, races, classes) were in a constant struggle where only the “fittest” survived and prospered.
  • “Fittest” was redefined to mean richest, most industrialized, or militarily strongest, not biologically fittest in any scientific sense.
  • This turned inequality between countries into “proof” that some peoples were naturally superior and others naturally inferior.

How It Motivated Domination

1. Justifying conquest as natural

  • Leaders claimed that strong nations conquering weak ones was just the international version of nature’s law: the strong survive, the weak perish.
  • Imperial expansion (colonies, protectorates, spheres of influence) was described as a natural and “inevitable” process of societal evolution, not a choice that could be questioned.
  • This mindset encouraged pre‑emptive aggression: dominate others now, or risk being “selected out” later.

2. Turning racism into policy

  • Social Darwinists ranked peoples into a racial hierarchy, placing European or “white” nations at the top and labeling others as “backward” or “primitive.”
  • If other groups were seen as inherently inferior, ruling them, seizing their land, or exploiting their labor could be portrayed as acceptable—even sensible.
  • This encouraged harsh colonial rule, because suffering of “inferior” peoples was minimized or blamed on their supposed unfitness.

3. Giving empire a “moral mission”

  • Many imperial powers claimed they had a duty to “civilize” less “evolved” societies—educate them, convert them, change their laws and economies.
  • Empire building could then be sold to the public as helping others progress, not as exploitation: taking over was framed as uplifting, modernizing, or guiding “childlike” peoples.
  • This “civilizing mission” made citizens feel proud of empire and less guilty about violence or economic domination.

4. Feeding nationalism and great‑power rivalry

  • Nations used social Darwinist language to argue that global politics was a struggle for survival among states: only those with large empires and strong militaries would endure.
  • Leaders warned that if their country did not seize territories and resources, rival powers would, leaving them weak or vulnerable.
  • This intensified the “Scramble for Africa” and competition in Asia, as states raced to prove they were among the “fittest” nations.

5. Excusing exploitation and violence

  • Harsh labor systems, land confiscation, and economic extraction were defended as the natural cost of progress and the price “weaker” societies had to pay.
  • Resistance by colonized peoples could be dismissed as a sign of their backwardness, while their defeat was used as “evidence” that they were indeed unfit to rule themselves.
  • In this way, social Darwinism dulled moral objections at home and made it easier for governments to maintain oppressive systems abroad.

Mini Story Illustration

Imagine a late‑19th‑century European cabinet meeting. Industrialists complain they need raw materials and new markets. Generals warn rival powers are grabbing colonies. A minister stands up and says:
“History is clear. Nations, like species, must adapt or die. Those who expand survive; those who hesitate are swept aside. We, being more advanced, have a duty to guide lesser peoples. If we do not take this region, someone else will—and they will become stronger while we weaken.” The room nods. Expansion now feels not just profitable, but necessary , natural , and even noble.

This captures how belief in social Darwinism could turn domination of other countries or regions into something leaders felt compelled—and even entitled—to do.

TL;DR:
A belief in social Darwinism motivated countries to dominate others by recasting imperialism as natural “survival of the fittest,” proving supposed racial and national superiority, wrapping conquest in a “civilizing mission,” and feeding nationalist fears that only expansion would keep their nation among the world’s “fittest” powers.

Information gathered from public forums or data available on the internet and portrayed here.