Posted on 04/07/2005 11:12:08 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
In all our contemporary conflicts over the teaching of evolution in schools, there’s one question that nobody asks: To what does the embrace of Darwinism lead?
Historian Richard Weikart explores that topic in a book called From Darwinto Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany. Despite that provocative title, Weikart is no sensationalist. He’s not out to prove that Hitler and the Nazi party were directly inspired by Charles Darwin’s theories. But what Weikart does demonstrate, through exhaustive research, is that Darwin’s ideas about the origin of species helped create a culture that devalued human life. And in that culture, Nazism was able to thrive.
Darwin wasn’t the first person to claim that the strong and healthy have higher value than the weak and sick, or that some races are inferior to others. Those ideas, Weikart says, were around long before Darwin. What Darwin provided was a scientific foundation for these beliefs. Weikart writes, “Only in the late nineteenth and especially the early twentieth century did significant debate erupt over issues relating to the sanctity of human life. . . . It was no mere coincidence that these contentious issues emerged at the same time that Darwinism was gaining an influence. Darwinism played an important role in this debate, for it altered many people’s conceptions of the importance and value of human life, as well as the significance of death.” And it wasn’t just the sanctity of life that came under attack. Darwinism also strengthened what Weikart calls “scientific racism,” the theory that some races were less fully evolved than others.
Because of Darwin’s theories, leading scientists in the early part of the twentieth century felt emboldened to propose radical ideas about how the sick or members of other races should be treated. Even as we read them today, some of their statements still sound shocking in their willful ignorance. Several scientists, for example, compared the mentally ill to apes. Textbooks were written that allegedly demonstrated scientifically that Africans, Native Americans, and Australian aborigines were subhuman. The eugenics movement—advocated in Americaas well as Europe—was able to bring about the sterilization of thousands of supposedly “inferior” people.
In that environment, a young Adolf Hitler found fertile soil for his radical ideas for the “super race.” Weikart could not trace those ideas directly to Darwin, as we have little evidence of which authors Hitler read and admired. But in his days in Viennaand Munich, theories about racial inequality were everywhere. As Weikart says, “Eugenics and euthanasia . . . were embraced by a diverse crowd of secular social reformers,” and their ideas filled the popular press. The few authors we do know that Hitler admired were steeped in that culture.
Those ideas are still with us today. Look at what happened to Terri Schiavo a week ago. It’s a good time for us to remind people of the social consequences of Darwinism as Weikart so well documents. It’s bad enough to teach flawed theories in a classroom, but it gets downright dangerous when we let such theories lead us to a diminished view of human life and dignity.
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Oh, jeez, not this lie again...
Hitler was a Creationist, not a Darwinist. Deal with it.
Godwin's ping!
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
He seemed a bit more like a destructionist.
It logically follows if we're nothing more than evolved, and evolving, animals.
- Adolf Hitler, 1941.
Your the only one saying anything about Hitler being a Darwinist.
From the article: "He’s not out to prove that Hitler and the Nazi party were directly inspired by Charles Darwin’s theories. But what Weikart does demonstrate, through exhaustive research, is that Darwin’s ideas about the origin of species helped create a culture that devalued human life. And in that culture, Nazism was able to thrive."
Deal with that.
Judge the man by his actions, not his worthless confession. Hitler was a social Darwinist in the tradition of Herbert Spencer.
Mr. Silverback, please put me on your Breaking Point ping list. Thanks.
As if people had even the slightest problem devaluing one another and at times massacring one another for the entirety of recorded history throughout the world before Darwin.
LOL! Yeah, we believe you Adolf!
bump
Uh-oh, Darwin was Hitler. Sounds like something a liberal would say about a conservative when he couldn't come up with an argument.
Third purely creationist thread today. As with the others, I won't deploy the evolution ping list, which is reserved for science issues and political controversies. This thread is just for flame wars.
> Hitler was a social Darwinist
"Social Darwinism" is to "Darwinism" what "Peoples Republics" are to Republics. In other words: the name is taken, but not the message or the practice.
Please, please, don't insult my intelligence by pretending you read the article. If you had, you would have read this:
Historian Richard Weikart explores that topic in a book called From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany. Despite that provocative title, Weikart is no sensationalist. He’s not out to prove that Hitler and the Nazi party were directly inspired by Charles Darwin’s theories. But what Weikart does demonstrate, through exhaustive research, is that Darwin’s ideas about the origin of species helped create a culture that devalued human life. And in that culture, Nazism was able to thrive.
Weikart's premise is either valid or invalid whether Hitler was a Darwinist, a Creationist or a follower of the Giant Blue Space Cockroaches From Ganymede, because Weikart's premise is that Darwinism (and I'd add, "Higher" criticsm of the Bible) prepared fertile ground for the "science" of "racial hygiene."
Didn't Bill O'Reilley and Ted Kennedy say the same thing??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.