Darwinism and Racism


The Societal Consequences of Darwinism
The consequences of accepting Darwinian theory have been profound. Enormous moral and social damage has been wrought in classrooms and to society. The theory that led Darwin to discard the Bible and reject the existence of God has had a profound effect on millions of other people.

It is no coincidence that Karl Marx, the father of communism, out of gratitude to Darwin, sent him Das Kapital, his principal book on communism. "Although developed in the crude English fashion," Marx wrote to his communist colleague Friedrich Engels, "this [Darwin's Origin of Species] is the book which in the field of natural history, provides the basis for our views." To another he wrote that Darwin's work "suits my purpose in that it provides a basis in natural science for the historical class struggle" (Janet Browne, Charles Darwin: The Power of Place, 2002, p. 188).

This evolutionary backing eventually helped establish the philosophical framework for the twin scourges of communism and atheism in Russia, China, Eastern Europe, Cambodia, North Korea and many other nations.

"Genocide, of course," writes Phillip Johnson, "is merely a shocking name for the process of natural selection by which one gene pool replaces another. Darwin himself explained this in The Descent of Man, when he had to deal with the absence of 'missing links' between ape and human. Such gaps were to be expected, he wrote, in view of the extinctions that necessarily accompany evolution.

"He coolly predicted that evolution would make the gaps wider in the future, because the most civilized (that is, European) humans would soon exterminate the rest of the human species and go on from there to kill off our nearest kin in the ape world. Modern Darwinists do not call attention to such passages, which make vivid how easily the picture of amoral nature inherent in evolutionary naturalism can be converted into a plan of action" (Reason in the Balance, 1995, p. 144).

Later Adolf Hitler indeed applied the Darwinian concept of the "survival of the fittest" to the human race. During World War II the Nazis forcibly sterilized more than 2 million people and began systematically exterminating people whom Hitler considered to be inferior. The Nazis justified their atrocities by rationalizing that they were doing mankind a service with "genetic cleansing" to improve the races.

As long as evolution—with its implications of amorality and the survival-of-the-fittest mentality among "superior" and "inferior" races —is accepted and believed, genocide, as sporadic ethnic cleansings in various parts of the globe show, will have a scientific justification, even though most believers in Darwinian theory would object to this conclusion.

The Bible foretells that, before Jesus Christ's return, a worldwide commercial system will include the trading of "bodies and souls of men" (Revelation 18:9-13). Could this really happen? One only has to remember the Nazi holocaust. Hundreds of thousands were pressed into slave labor. Those too weak, ill, young or old to work faced a merciless death.

Remember, such events happened barely a generation ago in what were considered to be the most advanced and enlightened nations. It could happen again, especially in a world in which so many have adopted a belief in moral relativism and a survival-of-the-fittest outlook.



 


Max naona umeamua kuua kabisaaaa. Exhibit hiyo ni tosha msee.

 


Darwinism wicked theorem.
 


Dis bwaay was wicked.

 


Charles Darwin said, kill dem pickney before dem grow. Dis guy was a wicked bwaay.

 
The Theory of evolution is a scientific statement on the observation of natural phenomena. As such, it is open to both negative and positive criticism. However, its survival and continue legitimacy as a theory is evidence to its strong "logical consistency". This should be viewed by all progressive and free-thinking beings as a triumph to human intellect.

Now the misuse (and sometimes misinterpretation) of the theory of Evolution, is a whole different issue. It is true that the use of a scientific theory by human can be highly subjective…and that I think is where you see a problem. I feel you, mwanangu.

But hey, I have a big problem with god (God) too; The cause of so many death and destruction – from Palestine, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan/Armenia, Northern Irland, Nigeria, Chechnya, Kashmir, to Pakistan, and beyond…
 


Where is the connection between the Islamic death and God? Go and ask Allah, why is he killing dem.
 
MaxShimba said:

Where is the connection between the Islamic death and God? Go and ask Allah, why is he killing dem.
Click to expand...


Jamaa anaonyesha kuwa yeye si atheist bali ni Muislam wa kawaida. Ndio maana amekimbia. Angali India kuna nini? Islamacist kazi yao ni moja tu, kulipuwa watu.
 

Scientists have almost universally concluded that the human races are largely equal in regard to innate intelligence and most other traits. In spite of the wide social disparities between the races in the West, no more than approximately one standard deviation difference in mean intelligence exists between the whites and blacks. This fact is contrary to a basic requirement of naturalistic evolution: in order for selection to take place, differences must exist between individual organisms for selection to select from. For selection to work; something first must cause races to develop, a process which in Darwinian terms is called speciation. As evolution progresses, the contrast between groups must become greater, producing development of new definable divisions. The lack of major differences between races, especially in intelligence, the factor most crucial for the major contrast between Homo sapiens and "lower" forms of life, creates a major difficulty for current evolution theory. In addition, misuse of the theory of evolution was an important factor in the extreme forms of racism, especially that against blacks and Jews, that flourished at the turn of the century and for many years beyond.


 

. . Darwinism led to racism and anti-semitism and was used to show that only "superior" nationalities and races were fit to survive. Thus, among the English-speaking peoples were to be found the champions of the "white man's burden" an imperial mission carried out by Anglo-Saxons. ... Similarly, the Russians preached the doctrine of pan-Slavism and the Germans that of pan-Germanism.' 63



 


The five races were then ranked from inferior to superior as follows:

'There are the Ethiopian or Negro type, originating in Africa; the Malay or brown race, from the islands of the Pacific; the American Indian; the Mongolian or yellow race, including the natives of China, Japan and the Eskimos; and finally, the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America.' 70

The textbook states that the 'highest' race is the Caucasians, who are specifically 'higher' developed in terms of 'instincts, social customs, and . . . [physical] structure.' 71 This book, widely adopted by American public high schools for over 30 years, was the text John Scopes used when he was a substitute biology teacher and was later convicted of violating the Butler Act, the law against teaching evolution in public schools. Also, typical of the views of the educated at this time is an article in the Encyclopedia Britannica which, under the heading 'Negro', stated:

'By the nearly unanimous consent of anthropologists this type occupies ... the lowest position in the evolutionary scale . . . the cranial sutures . . . close much earlier in the Negro than in other races. To this premature ossification of the skull, preventing all further development of the brain, many pathologists have attributed the inherent mental inferiority of the blacks, an inferiority which is even more marked than their physical differences . . . the development of the Negro and White proceeds on different lines . . . in the former the growth of the brain is . . . arrested by the premature closing of the cranial sutures ... The mental [differences] are at least as marked as the physical differences . . . No full blooded Negro has ever been distinguished as a man of science, a poet, or an artist . . .' 72


 

'Biologists find it hard to admit that. . . present living beings differ at all from those of the past . . . But facts are facts; no new broad organizational plan has appeared for several hundred million years, and for an equally long time numerous species, animal as well as plant, have ceased evolving. We have said that evolution in the present is difficult, if not extremely difficult, to observe. Some biologists maintain that they can not only observe it but also describe it in action; the facts that they describe, however, either have nothing to do with evolution or are insignificant. At best, present evolutionary phenomena are simply slight changes of genotypes within populations, or substitutions of an allele by a new one.' 130



 

Thanks for taking the time to make a constructive argument, regardless of whether it is for or against.

It is always difficult for most people to focus on this subject without getting too emotional and subjective. Wengine mmetumia post yangu kuwasema muislamu. Hamkuona nimeandika "god is causing destruction in Northern Island, Armenia, Palestine, Nigeria...". For your information hizo nchi zinawakristo na wayahudi pia. Msiwaseme vibaya ndugu zenu waislamu wakati wakristo pia hufanya mauwaji. Did you check the news on what happen in Nigeria last week????🙁 Jamani kuweni waangalifu na hizo imani zenu...it is dangerous and barberic. Mtajimaliza...

I don’t believe in god - actually I don't believe a "personal god" exist or is a necessary priori. But at the same time, I do sympathize with those who are unable to make this intellectual leap... Death is pretty scary and for many, god offers a way out of their conundrum....
 

This is usually pointed out to us by Christians, whose predecessors got away with wholesale tortuous murder for over a millennium. What was that saying about the beam in one's own eye?

Meanwhile, although Communism teaches the nonexistence of God, that does not mean that Communism is not theistic in some of its practices and in some of its ways of thought. Communism, as practiced in China and the U.S.S.R. during these times, was very fundamentalistic in its approach to Communism as well as to atheism, and it is this fundamentalistic thinking which prompts irrational behavior. Communism taught that it had an exclusive on the truth and that all others, all non-Communists, were in error. At the same time, Communism squashed any dissenting points of view. This is a traditionally theistic way of thinking, if you ask me, acting as if loyal to a higher absolute, as if charged with the burden of protecting the reputation of that higher absolute. Communism failed to rid itself of the vestigial modes of thought resulting from hundreds of years of Christian and Islamic domination.

Also, Communism was very big on teaching slave mentality, an attitude that is usually associated with theistic systems -- not with atheistic thinking. Gora makes a very impressive case that Communism -- or any form of slave mentality, for that matter -- is rightly called a form of theism.
 
SCHMIDT said:

Max naona umeamua kuua kabisaaaa. Exhibit hiyo ni tosha msee.
Click to expand...

Hahahaaaa kwa wewe nikusema tu kwamba ASHABIKIAYE MJINGA NA YEYE NI MJINGA PIA.

Unashabikia copy cat za mwenzio ambaye ameposti kilichoandikwa na wenzie bila kukifanyia tathmini.

Nitakuja baadae na wewe ili unielezee ufasaha aya zilizoandikwa kwenye kitabu chenu wameziweka kwa ajili gani kuhusu ubaguzi, Nataka usiondoke uje unijibu ngoja kwanza ni deal na jamaa yako.

Naona naongea na watoto wa chekechea, yaani hata kitabu unachokiamini hukisomi?
 

Oh Dear copycat.

Was it their atheism that prompted them to kill? If you can make the case that it was their atheism and their atheism alone that made them kill (if you can eliminate all other possible influences), then I will grant that atheists are responsible for propagating a murderous doctrine and are thus responsible for murder. If you cannot make a direct connection between atheism and the murderous tendencies of the Communists, then I insist that you retract this statement that you made, associating the philosophy of atheism with these murders.

Meanwhile, during the Inquisitions, it was the Christian doctrines more than any other factors that inspired the torture of millions of feeble, harmless women charged with witchcraft. They were put to death in obedience to God's commandment to Moses in Exodus xxii. 18 (immediately following the "Ten Commandments"): "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." They were burned in direct and literal obedience to Christ's statement in John xv. 6: "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." The reason these women were burnt slowly was so that they would have more time to repent (though this would be impossible, since most of them had their tongues torn out before they were burned, and if repentance involves action, how could they repent when bound to a pole with layer after layer of skin burning off of their quivering flesh, and if repentance is a matter of heart, who could switch loyalty toward something or someone who would burn you alive? this just could not be done!). Not to be outdone, Islam inspired the wholesale slaughter of anyone who refused to honor the god and prophet of Islam. All these murders were inspired directly by theism, which demands loyalty and obedience to a Jealous God.

I challenge you to find an example of where the atheism itself is as directly responsible for murderous acts on the part of a society as the various religions have been. True, atheist have committed atrocities, just as Christians and Muslims and Hindus have done. Can these atrocities, though, be directly explained by the person's atheism as clearly as the atrocities that many religious people have committed can be directly explained by that person's absolute belief in an absolute dogma? Again, if you can make a solid case that atheism itself has influenced atrocity as directly as Christianity or Islam has influenced atrocity, I will gladly accept responsibility for propagating murderous doctrines. If you cannot, you owe the atheists who visit this thread and support their believe an apology with your implication.
 
MaxShimba said:

Where is the connection between the Islamic death and God? Go and ask Allah, why is he killing dem.
Click to expand...

How does this apply to the Inquisitions which were the official policy of Roman Catholicism for centuries? How does this apply to the fact that all the original Protestant leaders (save two) endorsed the same barbarous practices against Catholics and Jews? We are talking, here, about the leadership calling the shots and the "flocks" going along with the calls.
 
Darwin said:
...[/U]
Click to expand...

Mwanangu usinitie moto hapatakalika hapa...

I take the position that atheists/Naturalist/Brights need to speak out forcefully, against the dogmatic behavior of blind faith/god-in-the-sky worshippers. I am always amazed by their assumptions that “god” is the de facto. As if they where born knowing he existed. Also, the notion that scientific-thinking/pragmatism and religious belief/angel-worshiping could coexist is bulls…t. Look what is happening in that big nation, where religious stupidity has infiltrating the government to the point where they want to consider creationism on equal par with the evolution theory. They roadblocking stem cell research. Yet, when they get sick, they go to the hospital, and not to church or mosque?
 


Very poor thinking and reasoning.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…