I have a friend with whom I share a rare and not-to-be-envied link; We both know what it is like to be "t-boned" in an intersection by a speeding drunk driver. We have similar names and a few similar interests as well. We both love fantasy sports and we both used to participate in lots of strenuous physical activities. I preferred basketball, tennis and volleyball, she was more into skiing and skydiving. This week I had arthroscopic surgery on my right knee in hopes of finally being capable of playing sports again after one more rehab. I have permanent nerve damage in my right leg and my left shoulder and back injuries that will limit my return to basketball to half court and will require me to be willing to reduce my court coverage on the tennis court. I'm the lucky one.
Which brings me to the subject of good and evil. My friend has devoted her life to doing Good. I can see clearly that I must do what I can to do the same. In my case, the most Good I can do is to clearly expose and publicize Darwinism as not just mistaken science but pure Evil, bringing evil and destruction everywhere it is accepted, including the church itself. As I read in the Book of Ephesians, God has gifted me specifically to follow callings that He has designed for me to fulfill. I read that I am made free from sin by His power and not by my abilities or works, but also that He has prepared me to do works for His sake!
"The great Evil of the 19th and 20th Centuries is that men believed in nothing rather than God, and therefore considering themselves accountable to no one, found themselves capable of doing anything." - Radar
Now even today the weak are sacrificed at the altar of the strong and the statements of fallible men are given more importance than the Word of God. Even now the holocaust against the unborn continues only because Darwinism is accepted as true. Evil begets evil.
Ian Thomson is chilled by The Kaiser's Holocaust: Germany's Forgotten Genocide and the Colonial Roots of Nazism by David Olusoga and Casper W Erichsen, an impressively researched account of the killing fields of Namibia
For those of you who have forgotten the links between Hitler and the Darwinists...
‘ … modern eugenics thought arose only in the nineteenth century. The emergence of interest in eugenics during that century had multiple roots. The most important was the theory of evolution, for Francis Galton’s ideas on eugenics—and it was he who created the term “eugenics”—were a direct logical outgrowth of the scientific doctrine elaborated by his cousin, Charles Darwin.’ 13
‘ … struggle, selection, and survival of the fittest, all notions and observations arrived at … by Darwin … but already in luxuriant bud in the German social philosophy of the nineteenth century. … Thus developed the doctrine of Germany’s inherent right to rule the world on the basis of superior strength … [of a] “hammer and anvil” relationship between the Reich and the weaker nations.’14
The importance of race in Darwinism
‘ … in their political system, with nothing left out …. Their political dictionary was replete with words like space, struggle, selection, and extinction (Ausmerzen). The syllogism of their logic was clearly stated: The world is a jungle in which different nations struggle for space. The stronger win, the weaker die or are killed ….’17
‘ …was captivated by evolutionary teaching—probably since the time he was a boy. Evolutionary ideas—quite undisguised—lie at the basis of all that is worst in Mein Kampf —and in his public speeches …. Hitler reasoned … that a higher race would always conquer a lower.’20
‘ … was a firm believer and preacher of evolution. Whatever the deeper, profound, complexities of his psychosis, it is certain that [the concept of struggle was important because] … his book, Mein Kampf, clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and the extermination of the weak to produce a better society.’21
‘ … its ideological fire-water. But in that concatenation of ideas and nightmares which made up the … social policies of the Nazi state, and to a considerable extent its military and diplomatic policies as well, can be most clearly comprehended in the light of its vast racial program.’22
‘One of the central planks in Nazi theory and doctrine was …evolutionary theory [and] … that all biology had evolved … upward, and that … less evolved types … should be actively eradicated [and] … that natural selection could and should be actively aided, and therefore [the Nazis] instituted political measures to eradicate … Jews, and … blacks, whom they considered as “underdeveloped”.’23
‘ … straightforward German social Darwinism of a type widely known and accepted throughout Germany and which, more importantly, was considered by most Germans, scientists included, to be scientifically true. More recent scholarship on national socialism and Hitler has begun to realize that … [their application of Darwin’s theory] was the specific characteristic of Nazism. National socialist “biopolicy,” … [was] a policy based on a mystical-biological belief in radical inequality, a monistic, antitranscendent moral nihilism based on the eternal struggle for existence and the survival of the fittest as the law of nature, and the consequent use of state power for a public policy of natural selection….’24
‘The basic outline of German social Darwinism [was] … man was merely a part of nature with no special transcendent qualities or special humanness. On the other hand, the Germans were members of a biologically superior community … politics was merely the straightforward application of the laws of biology. In essence, Haeckel and his fellow social Darwinists advanced the ideas that were to become the core assumptions of national socialism …. The business of the corporate state was eugenics or artificial selection ….’18
‘If war be the progeny of evolution—and I am convinced that it is—then evolution has “gone mad”, reaching such a height of ferocity as must frustrate its proper role in the world of life—which is the advancement of her competing “units”, these being tribes, nations, or races of mankind. There is no way of getting rid of war save one, and that is to rid human nature of the sanctions imposed on it by the law of evolution. Can man … render the law of evolution null and void? … I have discovered no way that is at once possible and practicable. “There is no escape from human nature.” Because Germany has drunk the vat of evolution to its last dregs, and in her evolutionary debauch has plunged Europe into a bath of blood, that is no proof that the law of evolution is evil. A law which brought man out of the jungle and made him king of beasts cannot be altogether bad.’28
Jews in Germany and Darwinism
‘The eugenics movement felt a mixture of apprehension and admiration at the progress of eugenics in Germany … but the actual details of the eugenics measures which emerged after Hitler’s rise to power were not unequivocally welcomed. Eugenicists pointed to the USA as a place where strict laws controlled marriage but where a strong tradition of political freedom existed.’31
Hitler’s eugenic goals
‘ … peoples to decay …. In the long run nature eliminates the noxious elements. One may be repelled by this law of nature which demands that all living things should mutually devour one another. The fly is snapped up by a dragon-fly, which itself is swallowed by a bird, which itself falls victim to a larger bird … to know the laws of nature … enables us to obey them.’32
‘If I can accept a divine Commandment, it’s this one: “Thou shalt preserve the species.” The life of the individual must not be set at too high a price. If the individual were important in the eyes of nature, nature would take care to preserve him. Amongst the millions of eggs a fly lays, very few are hatched out — and yet the race of flies thrives.’33
‘The Germans were the higher race, destined for a glorious evolutionary future. For this reason it was essential that the Jews should be segregated, otherwise mixed marriages would take place. Were this to happen, all nature’s efforts “to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being may thus be rendered futile” (Mein Kampf).’20
‘The Jews, labelled subhumans, became nonbeings. It was both legal and right to exterminate them in the collectivist and evolutionist viewpoint. They were not considered … persons in the sight of the German government.’34
Evolution used to justify existing German racism
‘Darwin’s notion of struggle for survival … legitimized by the latest scientific views, justified the racists’ conception of superior and inferior peoples and nations and validated the conflict between them.’36
‘Just as in cancer the best treatment is to eradicate the parasitic growth as quickly as possible, the eugenic defense against the dysgenic social effects of afflicted subpopulations is of necessity limited to equally drastic measures …. When these inferior elements are not effectively eliminated from a [healthy] population, then—just as when the cells of a malignant tumor are allowed to proliferate throughout the human body—they destroy the host body as well as themselves.’38
Eugenics becomes more extreme
‘ … a human type whose appearance had been described by the race theorist Hans F.K. Günther as “blond, tall, long-skulled, with narrow faces, pronounced chins, narrow noses with a high bridge, soft hair, widely spaced pale-coloured eyes, pinky-white skin colour”’.40
The bad blood theory
Evolution and war in Nazi Germany
‘Hitler’s attitude to the League of Nations and to peace and war were based upon the same principles. “A world court … would be a joke … the whole world of Nature is a mighty struggle between strength and weakness — an eternal victory of the strong over the weak. There would be nothing but decay in the whole of nature if this were not so. States which [violate] … this elementary law would fall into decay. … He who would live must fight. He who does not wish to fight in this world where permanent struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist.” To think otherwise is to “insult” nature. “Distress, misery and disease are her rejoinders”.’49
‘ … at one time man had scarcely more brains than his anthropoid cousins, the apes. But, by kicking, biting, fighting … and outwitting his enemies and by the fact that the ones who had not sense and strength enough to do this were killed off, man’s brain became enormous and he waxed both in wisdom and agility if not in size ….’ 51
Nazism and religion
‘ … organized lie [that] must be smashed. The State must remain the absolute master. When I was younger, I thought it was necessary to set about [destroying religion] … with dynamite. I’ve since realized there’s room for a little subtlety …. The final state must be … in St. Peter’s Chair, a senile officiant; facing him a few sinister old women … The young and healthy are on our side … it’s impossible to eternally hold humanity in bondage and lies …. [It] was only between the sixth and eighth centuries that Christianity was imposed upon our peoples …. Our peoples had previously succeeded in living all right without this religion. I have six divisions of SS men absolutely indifferent in matters of religion. It doesn’t prevent them from going to their death with serenity in their souls.’ 56
‘ … makes no distinction of race or of color; it seeks to break down all racial barriers. In this respect the hand of Christianity is against that of Nature, for are not the races of mankind the evolutionary harvest which Nature has toiled through long ages to produce? May we not say, then, that Christianity is anti-evolutionary in its aim?’ 58
‘ … [Haeckel] argued that Darwin was correct … humankind had unquestionably evolved from the animal kingdom. Thus, and here the fatal step was taken in Haeckel’s first major exposition of Darwinism in Germany, humankind’s social and political existence is governed by the laws of evolution, natural selection, and biology, as clearly shown by Darwin. To argue otherwise was backward superstition. And, of course, it was organized religion which did this and thus stood in the way of scientific and social progress.’ 59
‘ … upon the ignorance of men and strive[s] to keep large portions of the people in ignorance …. On the other hand, National Socialism is based on scientific foundations. Christianity’s immutable principles, which were laid down almost two thousands years ago, have increasingly stiffened into life-alien dogmas. National Socialism, however, if it wants to fulfil its task further, must always guide itself according to the newest data of scientific researches.’ 60
‘ … scientific knowledge poses a threat to their existence. Therefore, by means of such pseudo-sciences as theology, they take great pains to suppress or falsify scientific research. Our National Socialist world view stands on a much higher level than the concepts of Christianity, which in their essentials were taken over from Judaism. For this reason, too, we can do without Christianity.’ 60
‘ … going to “Central Africa” to set up “Negro missions,” resulting in the turning of “healthy … human beings into a rotten brood of bastards.” In his chapter entitled “Nation and Race,” he said, “The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable.” A few pages later, he said, “Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live”.’ 61
‘Hitler was influenced above all by the theories of the nineteenth-century social Darwinist school, whose conception of man as biological material was bound up with impulses towards a planned society. He was convinced that the race was disintegrating, deteriorating through faulty breeding as a result of a liberally tinged promiscuity that was vitiating the nation’s blood. And this led to the establishment of a catalogue of ‘positive’ curative measures: racial hygiene, eugenic choice of marriage partners, the breeding of human beings by the methods of selection on the one hand and extirpation on the other.’67
‘ … the Prussian Minister of Education sent round a circular strictly forbidding the schoolmasters in the country to have anything to do with Darwinism … with a view to protecting schoolchildren from the dangers of the new doctrines.’ 70
‘ … free-thinkers and it is easy to realize the eagerness with which the friends of the freedom of thought and word must have gathered around him in spite of his many delusions, when such measures as the school regulations mentioned above were adopted … All the more so as the outcome proved Haeckel’s justification; Darwinism might be prohibited in the schools, but the idea of evolution and its method penetrated everywhere … And to this result Haeckel has undeniably contributed more than most; everything of value in his utterances has become permanent, while his blunders have been forgotten, as they deserve.’70
‘There is little doubt that the history of ethnocentrism, racism, nationalism, and xenophobia has been also a history of the use of science and the actions of scientists in support of these ideas and social movements. In many cases it is clear that science was used merely as raw material or evidence by ideologically interested political actors as proof of preconceived notions. Most contemporary sociobiologists and students of biopolitics would argue that all attempts to use science in this manner are, in fact, mere pseudoscience ….’ 71
‘ … somewhat wilful misreading of history. The history of ethnocentrism and the like has also been the history of many well-respected scientists of the day being quite active in using their own authority as scientists to advance and support racist and xenophobic political and social doctrines in the name of science. Thus, if the scientists of the day used the science of the day to advance racism, it is simply a form of Kuhnian amnesia or historical whitewash to dismiss concern with a possible contemporary abuse of science by a claim that the past abuse was mere pseudoscience.’ 71
‘The culmination of this darker side of eugenics was, of course, Adolf Hitler’s attempt to produce a “‘master race’ by encouraging mating between pure ‘Aryans’” and by the murder of six million people whom he claimed to have inferior genes. It is hardly fair to Galton to blame him for the Holocaust or even for his failure to anticipate the consequences of his advocacy of the matter. But he was certainly the principal architect of eugenics, and Hitler was certainly obsessed with the idea. So, in terms of its consequences, this must qualify as one of the greatest scientific blunders of all time.’75
Namibian genocide—a precursor of the Holocaust (A Review of The Kaiser’s Holocaust: Germany’s Forgotten Genocide and the Colonial Roots of Nazism)
A review of: The Swastika against the Cross: The Nazi War on Christianity by Bruce Walker
- Chase, A., The Legacy of Malthus; The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism, Alfred Knopf, New York, 1980. Return to text.
- Haeckel, E., The History of Creation: Or the Development of the Earth and Its Inhabitants by the Action of Natural Causes, Appleton, New York, 1876. Return to text.
- Haeckel, E., The Riddle of the Universe, Harper, New York, 1900. Return to text.
- Haeckel, E., The Wonders of Life; A Popular Study of Biological Philosophy, Harper, New York, 1905. Return to text.
- Haeckel, E., Eternity: World War Thoughts on Life and Death, Religion, and the Theory of Evolution, Truth Seeker, New York, 1916. Return to text.
- Haeckel, E., The Evolution of Man, Appleton, New York, 1920. Return to text.
- Chamberlain, H., The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, 2nd Vol., (1st Vol. 1899), Lane, London, 1911. Return to text.
- Aycoberry, P., The Nazi Question: An Essay on the Interpretations of National Socialism, 1922–1975, Pantheon, New York. 1981. Return to text.
- Beyerchen, A.D., Scientists Under Hitler, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1977. Return to text.
- Stein, G., Biological science and the roots of Nazism, American Scientist 76(1):50–58, 1988. Return to text.
- Tobach, E., Gianusos, J., Topoff, H. and Gross, C.G., The Four Horsemen; Racism, Sexism, Militarism, and Social Darwinism, Behavioral Publications, New York, 1974. Return to text.
- Clark, Robert, Darwin: Before and After, Grand Rapids International Press, Grand Rapids, MI, 1958. Return to text.
- Ludmerer, K., Eugenics, In: Encyclopedia of Bioethics,Edited by Mark Lappe, The Free Press, New York, p. 457, 1978. Return to text.
- Keith, A., Evolution and Ethics, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York, p. 230, 1946. Return to text.
- Tenenbaum, J., Race and Reich, Twayne Pub., New York, p. 211, 1956. Return to text.
- Stein, Ref. 10, p. 53. Return to text.
- The Nuremberg Trials, Vol. 14, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., p. 279. Return to text.
- Stein, Ref. 10, p. 56. Return to text.
- Poliakov, L., The Aryan Myth, Basic Books, New York, 1974. Return to text.
- Clark, Ref. 12, p. 115. Return to text.
- Hickman, R., Biocreation, Science Press, Worthington, OH, pp. 51–52, 1983. Return to text.
- Tenenbaum, Ref. 15, p. vii. Return to text.
- Wilder-Smith, B., The Day Nazi Germany Died, Master Books, San Diego, CA, p. 27, 1982. Return to text.
- Stein, Ref. 10, p. 51. Return to text.
- Jackel, E., Hitler’s Weltanschauung, Wesleyan University Press, Middletown, CT, 1972. Return to text.
- Rauschning, H., The Revolution of Nihilism, Alliance Book Corp., New York, 1939. Return to text.
- Keith, Ref. 14, p. 230. Return to text.
- Keith, Ref. 14, p. 105. Return to text.
- Schleunes, K., The Twisted Road to Auschwitz, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL, 1970. Return to text.
- Schleunes, Ref. 29, p. 33. Return to text.
- Jones, G., Social Darwinism and English Thought; The Interaction Between Biological and Social Theory, The Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, NJ, p. 168, 1980. Return to text.
- Hitler, A., Hitler’s Secret Conversations 1941–1944, With an introductory essay on The Mind of Adolf Hitler by H.R. Trevor-Roper, Farrar, Straus and Young, New York, p. 116, 1953. Return to text.
- Hitler, A., Ref. 32, p. 116. Return to text.
- Whitehead, J, The Stealing of America, Crossway Books, Westchester, IL, p. 15, 1983. Return to text.
- Gasman, D., The Scientific Origin of National Socialism, American Elsevier, New York, p. xiv, 1971. Return to text.
- Schluenes, Ref. 29, p. 30–32. Return to text.
- Poliakov, L., The Aryan Myth (translated by E Howard), Basic Books, New York, 1974. Return to text.
- Chase, Ref. 1, p. 349. Return to text.
- King, J., The Biology of Race, University of California Press, 2nd ed., Berkeley, CA, p. 156, 1981. Return to text.
- Fest, J.C., The Face of the Third Reich, Pantheon, NY, pp. 99–100, 1970. Return to text.
- Mosse, G.L., Nazi Culture; Intellectual, Cultural, and Social Life in the Third Reich, Schocken Books, New York, p. 57, 1981. Return to text.
- Mosse, Ref. 41, p. 58. Return to text.
- Paliakov, Ref. 37, p. 282. Return to text.
- Wertham, F., A Sign for Cain, The Macmillan Co., New York, 1966. Return to text.
- Davies, J.D., Phrenology: Fad and Science, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1955. Return to text.
- Stanton, W., The Leopard’s Spots; Scientific Attitudes Towards Race in America, 1815–1859, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1960.Return to text.
- Weindling, P., Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism 1870–1945, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1989. Return to text.
- Schleunes, Ref. 29, p. 31. Return to text.
- Clark, Ref. 12, pp. 115–116. Return to text.
- Rich, N., Hitler’s War Aim, Norton, New York, 1973. Return to text.
- Wiggam, A. E., The New Dialogue of Science, Garden Publishing Co., Garden City, NY, p. 102, 1922. Return to text.
- Haeckel, Ref. 2, p. 170. Return to text.
- Haeckel, Ref. 4, p. 116. Return to text.
- Posner, G.L. and Ware, J., Mengele, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1986. Return to text.
- Phillips, K., Post-Conservative America: People, Politics, and Ideology in a Time of Crisis, Random House, New York, p. 164, 1981. Return to text.
- Hitler, A., Ref. 32, p. 117. Return to text.
- Milner, R., The Encyclopedia of Evolution, Facts on File, New York, p. 206, 1990. Return to text.
- Keith, Ref. 14, p. 72. Return to text.
- Stein, Ref. 10, p. 54. Return to text.
- Mosse, Ref. 41, p. 244. Return to text.
- Humber, P., The Ascent of Racism, Impact, February, p. 2, 1987. Return to text.
- Hawtin, G., The Living Creature; The Origin of the Negro, Geo. R. Hawtin, Battleford, Sask. 1980. Return to text.
- Magne, C.L., The Negro and the World Crisis, New Christian Crusade Church, Holywood, CA, 1972. Return to text.
- Mueller-Hill, B., Murderous Science: Elimination by Scientific Selection of Jews, Gypsies, and others, Germany 1933–1945, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 23, 1988. Return to text.
- Gray, P., Cursed by Eugenics, Time, January 11, pp. 84–85, 1999. Return to text.
- Jones, E.M. (ed.), Darwin and the Vampire: Evolution’s contribution to the Holocaust, Culture Wars 17:11, 1998. Return to text.
- Fest, Ref. 40, p. 99. Return to text.
- Haas, P.J., Nineteenth century science and the formation of Nazi policy, Journal of Theology, 1995. Return to text.
- Hoess, R., Commandment of Auschwitz, World Publishing Company, Cleveland, IL, p. 110, 1960. Return to text.
- Nordenskiöld, E., The History of Biology, Tudor Publishing Company, New York, p. 522, 1935. Return to text.
- Stein, Ref. 10, p. 50. Return to text.
- Hull, D., Uncle Sam Wants You; a review of the book Mystery of Mysteries: Is Evolution a Social Construction? by Michael Ruse. Science284:1131–1132, 1999. Return to text.
- Rowan, W., ‘Charles Darwin’, in Architects of Modern Thought, Canadian Broadcasting Corp., Toronto, p. 12, 1955. Return to text.
- Rowan, Ref. 73, p. 13. Return to text.
- Youngson, R., Scientific Blunders; A Brief History of How Wrong Scientists Can Sometimes Be, Carroll and Graf Pub., New York, 1998. Return to text.