For the record, Chiang went on to reject revolutionary evolutionism and fought the commies with every fiber in his bing.
Ping!
“All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an era when development, evolution, is a scientific word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.”
- Woodrow Wilson
What a bunch of garbage.
If anything communism was partly a reaction against the Darwinism of Capitalism.
But more than than that, communism tried to morally justify theft. That was it’s real attraction. Pent-up envy and hostility towards those better off was let loose.
Mao was clearly caught up in the Chinese Way. For well over a thousand years, all Chinese, including the Emperors, were taught that Emperors come in a cycle of four different kinds, associated with the four elements. And each Emperor was raised to behave according to his role in the cycle.
The first in the cycle was the “builder” Emperor, who would create China anew, from scratch. His successor would be the “maintainer” Emperor, who would get the rebuilt China functioning smoothly.
Then his successor would be the “degenerate” Emperor, who would pull the government into the Forbidden City, and let everything go to heck. His only real job was to keep anybody else from improving things. The “Last Emperor” of China was a degenerate Emperor.
When Mao took over, he all sorts of ambitious plans, but as far as China was concerned, he was the final Emperor of the cycle, the “water” Emperor, aka, the “Destroyer” Emperor. His job was to tear down China so that it could be rebuilt by his successor.
In Chinese history, when a water Emperor happened, LOTS of Chinese died. Usually in very brutal ways. So this is what everyone expected of Mao as well.
So Mao was caught in a predicament. When he issued an order that a water Emperor would issue, it was carried out instantly, and in as bloody as manner as possible. When he issued an order that a water Emperor would *not* issue, it would hit a solid wall of bureaucracy and go nowhere. Literally *nobody* would carry it out properly.
Eventually even Mao figured out that he was an Emperor, whether he wanted to be one or not. He even took to standing on a particular stone in the Imperial Palace that only the Emperor was permitted to stand on, as it was theoretically the center of the universe.
And since his time, the Chinese General Party Secretaries have once again conformed to the popular expectation of what they are supposed to do, were they Emperors.
Oh good grief you have just sounded new depths in stupidity. Do you really believe that Darwin left England, took up residence in China and became a new kind of Zen master, teaching his students "the way of of the murdering nihilist evolutionist, creating a cult following where he executed those who deviated from The Word of our Sublime Master."
Man are you ridiculous.
I thought I had seen it all from you but like I said in another thread it is impossible to underestimate you. Now you are blaming Mao on Darwin? That is stooping low even for you. We get it, you have a problem with Darwin, not evolution. If you have a problem with evolution you need to take it with the author of evolution, God.
Beautiful.
This is just a natural progression that starts with the idea that we are just descendants of pond scum, no better than a snail darter, man is JUST an animal anyway.
IF we are JUST and animal anyway, that paves the way for any number of de-humanizing philosophies and actions.
Survival of fittest - let the old die, they are just a burden anyway, useless eaters; kill the unborn, they are not wanted anyway, an inconvenience, a ‘punishment’, they are just a tumor, a mass of tissue.
No individualism - you are part of a ‘hive, no personal property, it ‘belongs’ to everyone, your children b’belong’ to the village, you Must think as we do to have proper diversity.
You have no Value beyond what you can give to society. When that ability is gone, you are worthless, disposable.
Mao, Lenin, Marx, Obama, Chavez all make use of this idea in their quest for power and control.
The truth of God is reflected all over in creation. The probably of even a single enzyme, much less a single cell, arriving by chance and natural process is so incredibly low even given the largest amounts of time and space suggested so far that it is irrational faith.
When ones presuppositions, the logical conclusions of those presuppositions conflict with the world in which they live and their conscience (laws of God written on their hearts Rom 2:15), there is tension, then they build walls of protection to shield themselves from the tension. As the fairly tale of evolution is exposed, the truth of God's creation will shine on hard hearts.
Thanks for posting.
In any case, despite diligent searching, I'm finding ABSOLUTELY NOTHING substantively connecting Darwin and Mao. If, as the Creation Evolution Headlines author writes, "Darwin was Mao’s ideological mentor," then surely Mao would have said or written something about Darwin or Darwinism.
I've looked at several online archives Mao's works. The most complete I've found is at marxists.org. Here is the google search on that archive for "Darwin." Out of God knows how many thousands upon thousands of pages from speeches, books (including of course all of the "Little Red Book"), articles, poetry, etc, there are ONLY FIVE references to Darwin. All of them are passing references. None of them are substantive.
All of these five Darwin references by Mao make the same trivial point -- new ideas that may later turn out to be worthwhile are often initially rejected, especially by elites and the older generation. In all cases Darwin is only one of several examples cited, and in no case is he even the primary focus. It wouldn't take you much time to look at all five examples, but here's one for the non-clickers:
Ever since ancient times the people who founded new schools of thought were all young people without too much learning. They had the ability to recognize new things at a glance and, having grasped them, they opened fire on the old fogeys. The old fogeys with learning always opposed them. When Martin Luther founded the Reformation, and Darwin’s theories appeared, many people opposed them. The inventor of sleeping-pills was not even a doctor, let alone a famous doctor; he was only a pharmacist. At first the Germans did not take him seriously, but the French welcomed him. That was how sleeping-pills started. I am told that penicillin was invented by a man who worked as a laundryman in a dyers and cleaners. Franklin of America, who discovered electricity, began as a newspaper boy. Later he became biographer, politician and scientist. Gorky only had two years of elementary schooling. Of course some things can be learnt at school; I don’t propose to close all the schools. What I mean is that it is not absolutely necessary to attend school. The main thing is whether your direction is correct or not and whether you come to grips with your studies. Learning has to be grasped. As soon as they had grasped the truth the young founders of new schools embarked on discoveries, scorning the old fogeys. Then those with learning oppressed them. Isn’t that what history is like? When we started to make revolution, we were mere twenty-year-old boys, while the rulers of that time, like Yüan Shih-k’ai and Tuan Ch’i-jui were old and experienced. They had more learning, but we had more truth.
Notice who Darwin is immediately paired with in that quotation. So, by the weak standards of this creationist author, I suppose we can also assert that, "Martin Luther was Mao’s ideological mentor."
BTW, in this essay Mao describes Jesus (along with Confucius, The Buddha and Mohammed) as "among the greatest thinkers." More than he ever said for Darwin.