The Evolution of Genocide

Catholic Education Center ^ | 2000 | The Evolution of Genocide

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

This article doesn't get into Kallmann's American Society of Human Genetics and its members, which is another sordid dimension of eugenics history in America.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Ping just to let you know your whole educational system is run by Nazis, eugenists, and socialist psychos.

[samtheman]

I do want to read this entire article later, when I have the time.

I’ve only just glanced over it briefly and much of the material I’m already somewhat familiar with, enough to point out that there is a difference between the Theory of Evolution and the Theory of Marxism with regard to how they are used by totalitarians.

Totalitarians have been attracted to both theories, it is true. And in their hands, both theories have been “applied” in a way that resulted in much evil and many murders.

But still, there is a fundamental difference that’s worth keeping in mind. Marxism is totally and solely a political/economic theory that must be applied to human society in order to test it. It only makes sense in terms of how it works in human society. It has failed that test miserably in hundreds of cases and is currently responsible for over one hundred million deaths. Those deaths are directly attributable to the very idea of Marxism/Leninism.

The Theory of Evolution, however, as much as it is liked by some totalitarians, is not a theory of how society should be run. Not at all. It is a theory that explains the evidence in the rocks and in our cells and in our DNA. It is a very successful theory at explaining those things and the main body of science in regard to that theory has advanced without an eye towards any “social applications”.

Those who “apply” the Theory of Evolution to human society are not biologists, are not Darwins and Mendels. They are Marxists (Hitler was also a Marxist, of sorts, though he eschewed the word), who found it convenient to drag the Theory of Evolution into their repetoire of “explanations” for reasons for killing people.

Marxism is an evil theory designed to build the greatest structure of evil in the history of the world. (It failed. Islam has it beat.)

Evolution is a scientific theory that is grabbed by the scruff of the neck and yanked into the torture chambers built by Marxists and forced to perform “dirty work” in those chambers, work that amounts to, really, nothing more than providing pseudo-scientific cover for the work of torturers and has nothing to do with the science itself.

Anyway, I do intent to go back and read the whole piece, but this is my initial reaction so far.

[samtheman]

Oh, one more thing.

The Theory of Evolution lives or dies by how well it explains what we find in the rocks and in our DNA. The success of the theory itself is not touched by those who mistakenly try to “apply” it to human society. And in its own terms (explaining rocks and DNA) it is probably the most successful theory in the history of science.

The Theory of Marxism, on the other hand, can only prove successful by creating a successful human society based on its precepts. It has never created such a society, not once. It is an abysmal failure everywhere it is tried and it’s current body-count is in the hundred-million range.

So on the one hand, you have history’s most successful Scientific theory and history’s most unsuccessful political theory. Of course the Marxist politico’s are going to try to wrap their naked failures in some semblance of evolutionary argument. But it’s only a semblance. It’s only a pseudo-scientific charade. Read Stephen J. Gould, one of the great writers on evolution, to see how unscientific the Marxist “applications” of evolution truly are.

[BlackElk]

ndt: You can see from the article upon which this thread is predicated why people who really believe in God and people who well know that they are not soulless chimpanzees will NEVER accept your idea of "accepted standards."

Everyone else: ping your friends (and your favorite enemies) to the text of the underlying article. For all the things that matter, carry on.

[lentulusgracchus]

Has it been that long already?! Seems like yesterday the fundamentalists and inerrantists were taking on the Darwinists in Kansas. But it's interesting to see the Catholic ethicists weighing in on the same side as the fundies, basically on the basis of who and what the fundies' opponents were.

The authoress's comments about what the journalist said to her about "reading the report" (translation: you people who disagree with us are all so reprehensibly ignorant....), contrasted with the newspaper's decided lack of interest in what she had to say when she had read the basic documents (and a good deal more!) and had her stuff all put together for an intelligent reply, speaks eloquently to the feigned objectivity of "media" people.

[syriacus]

In fact, the [Scopes] trial commemorated the legality of teaching the biological inferiority of certain races and classes of people. [34] The textbook on trial in that famous case, Hunter's A Civic Biology, [35] espoused white supremacy and the "science" of eugenics, thus bolstering through education the sterilization campaigns going on at that time by the "scientific" communities in the United States.

Whoa!

[Wilhelm Tell]

On its negative side it becomes racial preventative medicine; on its positive side, racial hope . . .

Those words really struck me. The Nazi regime can be seen as just a more extreme (I almost wrote "pure") example of the same mentality that dominated much of the "civilized" world. The horrors of Naziism did not cause people to abandon these discredited ideas. Instead they have learned to be more subtle and patient.

[maryz]

Self-ping for later reading.

[nkycincinnatikid]

bump to read on the beach

[AmericaUnited]

And in its own terms (explaining rocks and DNA) it is probably the most successful theory in the history of science.

Oh please! I would not call a theory that has had to modified again and again and again, because it was wrong, "the most successful theory in the history of science.".

Just like it depended on JUNK-DNA being true and now we know that there is no such thing. BZZZT! Try again.

[rickdylan]

It is time to demand that evolutionists stop promoting a eugenics mindset. It is time to dismantle the population control system, first by ending federal funding, and then by redefining charity in terms of concrete items like food, clothing and shelter for purposes of charitable tax status, not to include birth control, abortion or other tools of eugenicists.

Granted evolution is garbage science and most abortions should not happen, but the consequences of not having birth control are obvious enough in places like Gaza and Kosovo.

[syriacus]

Thanks for posting this. I’ve printed up the article.

[samtheman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA

[ndt]

"ndt: You can see from the article upon which this thread is predicated why people who really believe in God and people who well know that they are not soulless chimpanzees will NEVER accept your idea of "accepted standards."

Looks like a standard attempt to smear through lies and distortion to me. Feel free to tell me how Hitler was an "evilutionist" and then I can post quotes he made praising Christianity, then you can tell me how it's a lie and he was a pagan and hated Christians then I can show you how nearly every single one of those anti-Christian quotes came from the same guy who only met him once then we can really start pluming the depths of internet folk history.

But I would really rather not. It makes me feel dirty.

The fact is Hitler distorted both religion and science for his own pourpose. That is what psychopaths do.

[ndt]

"Just like it depended on JUNK-DNA being true"

No it didn't. The very definition of Junk DNA assumes that some of it might do something.

Junk DNA is "a section of DNA for which there is no known use"

You are making edits which do not exist and turing it into "a section of DNA for which there is no known use"

[ndt]

Allow me to edit.

- a section of DNA for which there is no known use

should read

- a section of DNA for which there is no known function

My typo, not sciences

[BlackElk]

As one who promotes the idjit myth of Darwin that humans other than you are "descended from" apes or whatever, you ARE dirty already.

Planned Barrenhood foundress Margaret Sanger sent one Lothrop Stoddard, Ph. D., to Germany in the 1930s to be Planned Barrenhood's "official observer" at the Nazi eugenics courts and to report back breathlessly on what a spiffy job Herr Hitler was doing in cleaning up the gene pool by slaughtering Jewish people and others regarded by Hitler and the Nazis as "inferiors." Eugenics is an attempted exercise in applied evolution. It does not work either. More of Stoddard's racist mythology can be found in his WW I era tome: The Rising Tide of Color in which he advocated eliminating everyone but Nordics and a few servants.

Sanger also cited test results of US military tests of Eastern European Jews not fluent in English to "scientifically prove" Jews to be "intellectually inferior." I disagree with her a priori methodology. Do you?

If you think that Hitler was (when governing the Third Reich) a Christian and not a pagan in love with Norse mythologies, then that is on a par with your curious notions and Darwin's regarding the allegedly godless origin of man. If you don't like Kathleen O'Keefe's thesis or those of others cited in the main article, then , by all means take up your objections with her and/or them.

Your observation as to Hitler's distortions of science and religion seems just as applicable to Darwin and his cult.

Darwin is dead---God.

[csense]

Thanks for the ping Ethan. I’ll read it when I have the time...