The Effects of Evolution's Racist Roots on Students

Fruits of Evolutionism
From Sir Srthur Keith's "Evolution and Ethics:

Chapter 3

The Behavior of Germany Considered from an Evolutionary Point of View in 1942

VISITORS TO GERMANY IN 1934 FOUND AN emotional storm sweeping through masses of the people, particularly the more educated. The movement had much in common with a religious revival. The preacher in this case was Adolf Hitler; his doctrine was, and is, tribalism; he had stirred in the emotional depths of the German people those long-dormant tribal feelings which find release and relief in mutual service; men and women who had been leading selfish lives or were drifting aimlessly were given a new purpose in life: service to their country the Third Reich. It is worth noting that Hitler uses a double designation for his tribal doctrine National Socialism: Socialism standing for the good side of the tribal spirit (that which works within the Reich); aud Nationalism for the ethically vicious part, which dominates policy at and outside the German frontiers.

The leader of Germany is an evolutionist not only in theory, but, as millions know to their cost, in the rigor of its practice. For him the national "front" of Europe is also the evolutionary "front"; he regards himself, and is regarded, as the incarnation of the will of Germany, the purpose of that will being to guide the evolutionary destiny of its people. He has brought into

10.

modern life the tribal and evolutionary mentality of prehistoric times. Hitler has confronted the statesmen of the world with an evolutionary problem of an unprecedented magnitude. What is the world to do with a united aggressive tribe numbering eighty millions!

We must not lose sight of the purpose of our visit to Germany; it was to see how far modern evolutionary practice can provide us with a scientific basis for ethical or moral behavior. As a source of information concerning Hitler's evolutionary and ethical doctrines I have before me Mein Kampf, extracts from The Times covering German affairs during the last twenty years, and the monthly journal R.F.C. (Racio Political Foreign Correspondenee), published by the German Bureau for Human Betterment and Eugenics and circulated by that bureau for the enlightenment of anthropologists living abroad. In the number of that journal for July 1937, there appears in English the text of a speech given by the German Fuhrer on January 30, 1937, in reply to a statement made by Mr. Anthony Eden that "the German race theory" stood in the way of a common discussion of European problems. Hitler maintained his theory would have an opposite effect; "it will bring about a real understanding for the first time." "It is not for men," said the Fuhrer, "to discuss the question of why Providence created different races, but rather to recognize that it punishes those who disregard its work of creation." I may remark incidentally that in this passage, as in many others, the German Fuhrer, like Bishop Barnes and many of our more intellectual clergy, regards evolution as God's mode of creation. God having created races, it is therefore "the noblest and most sacred duty for each racial species of mankind to preserve the purity of the blood which God has given it." Here we have expounded the perfectly sound doctrine of evolutionary isolation; even as an ethical doctrine it should not be condemned. No German must be guilty of the "greatest racial sin" that of bringing the fruits of hybridity into the world. The reproductive "genes" which circulate within the frontiers of Germany must be kept uncontaminated, so that they may work out the racial destiny of the German people without impediment. Hitler is also a eugenist. Germans who suffer from

11.

hereditable imperfections of mind or of body must be rendered infertile, so that "the strong may not be plagued by the weak." Sir Francis Galton, the founder of eugenics, taught a somewhat similar evolutionary doctrine namely, that if our nation was to prosper we must give encouragement to the strong rather than to the weak; a saving which may be justified by evolution, but not by ethics as recognized and practiced by civilized peoples. The liberties of German women are to be sacrificed; they must devote their activities to their households, especially to the sacred duty of raising succeeding generations. The birth rate was stimulated by bounties and subsidies so that the German tribe might grow in numbers and in strength. In all these matters the Nazi doctrine is evolutionist.

Hitler has sought on every occasion and in every way to heighten the national consciousness of the German people or, what is the same thing, to make them racially conscious; to give them unity of spirit and unity of purpose. Neighborly approaches of adjacent nations are and were repelled; the German people were deliberately isolated. Cosmopolitanism, liberality of opinion, affectation of foreign manners and dress were unsparingly condemned. The old tribal bonds (love of the Fatherland, feeling of mutual kinship), the bonds of "soil and blood," became "the main plank in the National Social program." "Germany was for the Germans" was another plank. Foreign policy was "good or bad according to its beneficial or harmful effects on the German folk now or hereafter." "Charity and humility are only for home consumption" a statement in which Hitler gives an exact expression of the law which limits sympathy to its tribe. "Humanitarianism is an evil . . . a creeping poison." "The most cruel methods are humane if they give a speedy victory" is Hitler's echo of a maxim attributed to Moltke. Such are the ways of evolution when applied to human affairs.

I have said nothing about the methods employed by the Nazi leaders to secure tribal unity in Germany methods of brutal compulsion, bloody force, and the concentration camp. Such methods cannot be brought within even a Machiavellian system of ethics, and yet may be justified by their evolutionary result.

12.

Even in that result we may harbor a doubt: can unity obtained by such methods be relied on to endure?

There are other aspects of Nazi policy which raise points which may be legitimate subjects of ethical debate. In recent years British men of science have debated this ethical problem: an important discovery having been made a new poison gas, for example is it not the duty of the discoverer to suppress it if there is a possibility of its being used for an evil purpose? My personal conviction is that science is concerned wholly with truth, not with ethics. A man of science is responsible for the accuracy of his observations and of his inferences, not for the results which may follow therefrom. Under no circumstances should the truth be suppressed; yet suppression and distortion of the truth is a deliberate part of Nazi policy. Every anthropologist in Germany, be he German or Jew, was and is silenced in Nazi Germany unless the Hitlerian racial doctrine is accepted without any reservation whatsoever. Authors, artists, preachers, and editors are undone if they stray beyond the limits of the National Socialist tether. Individual liberty of thought and of its expression is completely suppressed. An effective tribal unity is thus attained at the expense of truth. And yet has not the Church in past times persecuted science just in this Hitlerian way? There was a time, and not so long ago, when it was dangerous for a biologist to harbor a thought that clashed in any way with the Mosaic theory of creation.

No aspect of Hitler's policy proclaims the antagonism between evolution and ethics so forcibly as his treatment of the Jewish people in Germany. So strong are the feelings roused that it is difficult for even science to approach the issues so raised with an unclouded judgment. Ethically the Hitlerian treatment of the Jews stands condemned out of hand. Hitler is cruel, but I do not think that his policy can be explained by attributing it to a mere satisfaction of a lust, or to a search for a scapegoat on which Germany can wreak her wrath for the ills which followed her defeat of 1918. The Church in Spain subjected the Jews to the cruelty of the Inquisition, but no one ever sought to explain the Church's behavior by suggesting that she had a

13.

lust for cruelty which had to be satisfied. The Church adopted the Inquisition as a policy; it was a means of securing unity of mind in her flock. Hitler is an uncompromising evolutionist, and we must seek for an evolutionary explanation if we are to understand his actions. When the Huguenots fled to Germany they mingled their "genes" with those of their host and disappeared as an entity. The Jews are made of other stuff: for two thousand years, living amid European communities, they have maintained their identity; it is an article of their creed, as it is of Hitler's, to breed true. They, too, practice an evolutionary doctrine. Is it possible for two peoples living within the same frontiers, dwelling side by side, to work out harmoniously their separate evolutionary destinies? Apparently Hitler believes this to be impossible; we in Britain and in America believe it to be not only possible, but also profitable.

It must not be thought that in seeking to explain Hitler's actions I am seeking to justify them. The opposite is the case. I have made this brief survey of public policy in modern Germany with a definite object: to show that Dr. Waddington is in error when he seeks to place ethics on a scientific basis by a knowledge of evolutionary tendencies and practice.

Chapter 4

Human Life: Its Purpose or Ultimate End

IN THE COURSE OF GATHERING INFORMATION concerning man's morality and the part it has played and is playing in his evolution, I found it necessary to provide space for slips which were labeled "Life: Its Ultimate and Proximate Purposes." Only those who have devoted some special attention to this matter are aware of the multitude of reasons given for the appearance of man on earth. Here I shall touch on only a few of them; to deal with all would require a big book. The reader may exclaim: Why deal with any of them! What has ultimate purpose got to do with ethics and evolution! Let a man with a clearer head and a nimbler pen than mine reply. He is Edward Carpenter, who wrote Civilization: Its Cause and Cure (1889).

14.

It is from the sixteenth edition (1923) I am to quote, p. 249:

If we have decided what the final purpose or Life of Man is, then we may say that what is good for that purpose is finally "good" and what is bad for that purpose is finally "evil."

If the final purpose of our existence is that which has been and is being worked out under the discipline of evolutionary law, then, although we are quite unconscious of the end result, we ought, as Dr. Waddington has urged, to help on "that which tends to promote the ultimate course of evolution." If we do so, then we have to abandon the hope of ever attaining a universal system of ethics; for, as we have just seen, the ways of national evolution, both in the past and in the present, are cruel, brutal, ruthless, and without mercy. Dr. Waddington has not grasped the implications of Nature's method of evolution, for in his summing up (Nature, 1941, 150, p. 535) he writes "that the ethical principles formulated by Christ . . . are those which have tended towards the further evolution of mankind, and that they will continue to do so." Here a question of the highest interest is raised: the relationship which exists between evolution and Christianity; so important, it seems to me, that I shall devote to it a separate chapter. Meantime let me say that the conclusion I have come to is this: the law of Christ is incompatible with the law of evolution as far as the law of evolution has worked hitherto. Nay, the two laws are at war with each other; the law of Christ can never prevail until the law of evolution is destroyed. Clearly the form of evolution which Dr. Waddington has in mind is not that which has hitherto prevailed; what he has in mind is a man made system of evolution. In brief, instead of seeking ethical guidance from evolution, he now proposes to impose a system of ethics on evolution and so bring humanity ultimately to a safe and final anchorage in a Christian haven.

The only thing I can see is Gunga has little reading comprehension.

Let's quote from the long passage he just posted


Looks like the Fuhrer believed in the idea that God created the world to me.

OMG, Hitler was a proponent of Intelligent Design. Thanks for pointing that out to us Gunga. I will have to keep it in mind when ID is brought up in my local school district. I can TRULY compare those that promote ID to Nazis.

Fair warning, if I see another statement like that from you I'll report it; it's a violation of the A2K TOS.

Hitler was willing to pay lip service to anything at all, even the notion of the Japanese being "yellow aryans" but, as the author notes, Hitler was basically an evolutionist and his doctrines were primarily founded on evolutionist and racist dogmas. Christianity cannot serve as a philosophical basis for racism; evolution can.

So what drove the American approach to eugenics?

Don't forget the holocaust; or Rwanda; or the fervor of the suicide bomber; or. . .

The statement that christianity cannot serve as a basis for racism ignores volumes, entire libraries, of christian justification for slavery. Self-delusion is a wonderful thing.

Hitler was very much addicted to appeals to christian virtue to authorize his programs.

It was precisely Christians who got rid of slavery. Wake up.

We still have slavery for crying out loud.

And anyway it was Christians and Muslims who ran the slave trade from Britain to Africa and to America. And it was Christians who used and traded in slaves in America. Christian George Washington said his slaves couldn't be released until he died. Next???

Not in Christian countries. Yeah, Christians have their own history with slavery, but you need a history book to read about it. You can read about Muslims and slavery by opening a newspaper and in more than a couple of muslim countries you need only open the paper to the classified section. That's the difference.

Moreover the sort of slavery which existed in Christiandom prior to around 1500 was the same sort which had been around in the world forever, mainly serfdom which was universal. In fact the limit on taxes which could be imposed on serfs in the middle ages was usually 15%. What do YOU pay in taxes.....

The sort of evil slavery which you read about in history books originated in the muslim world for the most part. What happened in the mid 1400s was that Tamerlane had broken up the trade routes which the Mongols had re-established for 150 years, and Europeans started trying to sail around Africa to get to India and the spice islands and, when the Europeans put into west African ports for water and supplies, the natives assumed they were simply more muslims and opened up the slave markets.

I mean it's not as if the Europeans went into Africa looking for slaves. What you had was free-booters and business types running this slave trade which quickly developed for about four centuries and then Christians in the British parliament finally putting an end to it and enforcing that end with the British navy sealing off the slave markets on the west coast of Africa.

Evolutionists in particular did not put an end to slavery, nor would they have.

I give up.

Hitler's Creationist Quotes

[/QUOTE]"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance
with the will of the Almighty Creator."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp. 46]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without
the practical existence of a religious belief."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.152]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What we have to fight for...is the freedom and independence
of the fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill
the mission assigned to it by the Creator."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp. 125]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his
estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary,
He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.174]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but
the time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 2 Chapter 2]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"....the personification of the devil as the symbol
of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf", Vol. 1, Chapter 11,
precisely echoing Martin Luther's teachings]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Thus inwardly armed with confidence in God and the unshakable
stupidity of the voting citizenry, the politicians can begin
the fight for the 'remaking' of the Reich as they call it."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 2 Chapter 1]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The greatness of Christianity did not lie in attempted negotiations for
compromise with any similar philosophical opinions in the ancient world, but
in its inexorable fanaticism in preaching and fighting for its own doctrine."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 1 Chapter 12]

Re: The Effects of Evolution's Racist Roots on Students

Yes -- if the same is done with heliocentric astronomy, the Newtonian theory of gravity, and Eínstein's theory of relativity, all of which are similarly well-established theories.


By all means, if the same is done with the biblical rhetoric for excusing slavery, and the creationist defense of proscribing interracial marriage. My current favorite is the opinion of the Circuit Court in Caroline Country on Loving v. Virginia, which the Supreme Court opinion overruling it quotes as follows:




Fine with me -- if it is made clear that Darwin wasn't talking about human races.


That's an intriguing theory indeed. What's the evidence for it? Your source doesn't give us any, other than hypothesizing that rocket scientists will not be necessary to come up with it.


Could be -- if the author is talking about some other Charles Darwin. The Charles Darwin who wrote The Origin of Species[/url] did not write that blacks are at the bottom of the evolutionary process, and whites at the top.

[quote="gungasnake"]On the one hand students are taught diversity in schools, on the other, evolution. It's time to stop messing with our kid's minds![/quote]
Finally, a proposition I enthusiastically agree with. We must end the creationists' messing with childrens' minds, but quick!

Général Bosquet...

Thanks, Boss, my favorite, which i've posted far too often, but will again anyway, was Lord Raglan to General Canrobert during the horrible fight at Inkerman:

Lord Raglan: Nouse sommes, nous sommes . . . il y a un mot qui exprime ce que je veux dire.

Canrobert: Ah, nous somme foutus ! Mais, j'espère que non, Milord.

Knew it, but funny anyway

Re: The Effects of Evolution's Racist Roots on Students


Evolution is on vastly less solid ground than heliocentric astronomy or newtonian gravity, and relativity is not in that super a condition as we speak.

See the little item I posted on DNA and evolution this morning:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=51129&highlight=

That really sucks for the Law of Christ now doesn't it?

I can envision Gunga's argument in the class room:

Teacher: Evolution is a proces whereby species...
(johnny raises hand)
Johny: Wasn't Hitler's ideas based off of social darwinism. an offshoot of evolution?
Teacher: Why yes it was...Seeing as evolution gave rise to Hitler we must erase it from our curriculum, children. The same with German. After all it was the basis for ALL of Hitler's speeches. We should get rid of history too. I mean Hitler often looked towards history's figures like Charlemagne in his policies. From now on only creationism, english, and Bible stories will be taught.

Yes, because evolution is real life, and it's never going to change.