Ah. I see, Darwin, the "Entertainer".
Posted on 11/20/2005 4:48:01 PM PST by PatrickHenry
On a December night in 1831, HMS Beagle, on a mission to chart the coast of South America, sailed from Plymouth, England, straight into the 21st century. Onboard was a 22-year-old amateur naturalist, Charles Darwin, the son of a prosperous country doctor, who was recruited for the voyage largely to provide company for the Beagle's aloof and moody captain, Robert FitzRoy.
For the next five years, the little ship — just 90 feet long and eight yards wide — sailed up and down Argentina, through the treacherous Strait of Magellan and into the Pacific, before returning home by way of Australia and Cape Town. Toward the end of the voyage, the Beagle spent five weeks at the remote archipelago of the Galapagos, home to giant tortoises, black lizards and a notable array of finches.
Here Darwin began to formulate some of the ideas about evolution that would appear, a quarter-century later, in "The Origin of Species," which from the day it was written to the present has been among the most influential books ever published.
Of the revolutionary thinkers who have done the most to shape the intellectual history of the past century, two — Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx — are in eclipse today, and one — Albert Einstein — has been accepted into the canon of modern thought, even if most people still don't understand what he was thinking. Darwin alone remains unassimilated, provocative, even threatening to some — like Pat Robertson, who recently warned the citizenry of Dover, Pa., that they risked divine wrath for siding with Darwin in a dispute over high-school biology textbooks (click here for related story). Could God still be mad after all this time?
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
In the day before TV, Radio, Newspapers, and access to more books than you can carry, the ability to entertain someone was very valuable.
For those "other things", they visted various islands.
The ‘spiritual father’ of the communist system, Marx was an avid adherent of Darwin. He combined his social and economic idea with evolutionary principles. Marx wrote that Darwin’s book ‘contains the basis in natural history for our views.’
Marx owed a major debt to Darwin for his central ideas. In Marx’s words: ‘Darwin’s book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural selection for the class struggle in history. … not only is it [Darwin’s book] a death blow … to “Teleology” in the natural sciences but their rational meaning is empirically explained’.
Marx first read Darwin’s Origin of Species only a year after its publication, and was so enthusiastic that he reread it two years later. He attended a series of lectures by Thomas Huxley on Darwin’s ideas, and spoke of ‘nothing else for months but Darwin and the enormous significance of his scientific discoveries’. According to a close associate, Marx was also ‘ … one of the first to grasp the significance of Darwin’s research. Even before 1859, the year of the publication of The Origin of the Species [sic]—and, by a remarkable coincidence, of Marx’s Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy—Marx realized Darwin’s epoch-making importance. For Darwin … was preparing a revolution similar to the one which Marx himself was working for … . Marx kept up with every new appearance and noted every step forward, especially in the fields of natural sciences … .’
I guess this means Marx wasn't all bad all of the time. and, of course, many, many people from various professions realized Darwin's epoch-making importance.
And your point is...?
Is your response to be interpreted as approving of communism? I don't think that is what you meant
This is doubtful, as Das Kapital makes no mention of either Darwin or his theory. Can you back up your claim? Or is this just something you pulled from a creationist pamphlet?
Is it your point that Evolutionary theory is a communist plot?
Ah. I see, Darwin, the "Entertainer".
Zirkle, C., Evolution, Marxian Biology, and the Social Scene, University of Philadelphia Press, Philadelphia, pp. 85-87, p. 86, 1959.
Colp, R., Jr., The contracts between Karl Marx and Charles Darwin, J. History of Ideas 35(2):329-338; p. 329, 1972.
Colp, Ref. 16, pp. 329-330.
Lessner, F., A workers reminiscences of Karl Marx; in: Reminscences of Marx and Engels, Foreign Languages Pub. House, Moscow, p. 106, 1968.
If you don't think so, why imply it?
No, whether the linkage is correct or not, the linkage is to "ruthless laissez faire capitalism", not to "good 'ol capitalism".
"Good 'ol capitalism" IS laissez faire, at least when done right. :)
The only credible source would be Das Kapital itself. It was Marx's only published work that came out after Darwin published his theory (he had published most of his communist garbage before anyone had heard of Darwin). As I said, it doesn't mention Darwin or his theory. You can cite all the creationist bozos in the universe, and it makes no difference. They're all worthless. Give me Marx himself on the subject, or drop the accusation.
The references cited below were not creationists, but marxists who knew Marx himself, people who corresponded with him, and wrote about him from first hand knowledge...not your supposed "creationist" bogeymen.
However, Das Kapital shows no sign of such influence. None at all. Doesn't even mention Darwin. And you've been unable to do anything to back up your claim except quote (perhaps accurately, perhaps not) some of Marx's commie buddies. Face it, you've been misled by your creationist sources.
No. Some control is necessary. Lest capitalists get physical payback for faulty products. Plus the word "ruthless" means something.
Google on Darwin and marxism There are 386,000 on that topic alone. And I am going to guess few are "creationist" boogeymen.
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.