Well, now that you posted the excerpt & link from Pannekoek, I had to go and read the whole article. (See what this agreement is making us do???)
Pannekoek summarizes at length the several evolution-based arguments that the capitalists used to defend capitalism against the feudalists who came before them as well as the socialists who supposedly were destined to replace them.
It's quite an interesting article, actually, written from the perspective of a Marxist. He makes some interesting points & critiques of both capitalist ("bourgeoisie") and communist ("proletariat") defenders & critics of Darwinism (as understood in the 1800's). But Pannekoek's Marxism causes his own understanding of evolution and its applicability to human society to be hopelessly muddled. IMO his article is a poignant example of the harm that belief in a bad ideology can do to an otherwise fine mind.
Consider this passage:
Darwinism served as a tool to the bourgeoisie in their struggle against the feudal class, against the nobility, clergy-rights and feudal lords. This was an entirely different struggle from the struggle now waged by the proletarians. The bourgeoisie was not an exploited class striving to abolish exploitation. Oh no. What the bourgeoisie wanted was to get rid of the old ruling powers standing in their way. The bourgeoisie themselves wanted to rule, basing their demands upon the fact that they were the most important class, the leaders of industry. What argument could the old class, the class that became nothing but useless parasites, bring forth against them? They leaned on tradition, on their ancient divine rights. These were their pillars. With the aid of religion the priests held the great mass in subjection and ready to oppose the demands of the bourgeoisie.
It was therefore for their own interests that the bourgeoisie were in duty bound to undermine the “divinity” right of rulers. Natural science became a weapon in the opposition to belief and tradition; science and the newly discovered natural laws were put forward; it was with these weapons that the bourgeoisie fought. If the new discoveries could prove that what the priests were teaching was false, the “divine” authority of these priests would crumble and the “divine rights” enjoyed by the feudal class would be destroyed. Of course the feudal class was not conquered by this only, as material power can only be overthrown by material power, but mental weapons become material tools. It is for this reason that the bourgeoisie relied so much upon material science.
Darwinism came at the desired time; Darwin’ s theory that man is the descendant of a lower animal destroyed the entire foundation of Christian dogma. It is for this reason that as soon as Darwinism made its appearance, the bourgeoisie grasped it with great zeal.
It's clear that to the communist Pannekoek, a scientific theory's real significance lies in its use as a polemical tool of one side or the other in a class struggle. It's a fundamentally cynical view of science. And under this cynical view, Pannekoek says that Darwinism supported capitalism.
And yet, later on for a brief moment Pannekoek acknowledges something we evo-Freepers were trying to explain to you back on that infamous now-pulled thread:
The false conclusions reached by Haeckel and Spencer on Socialism [that it undercuts the survival of the fittest] are no surprise. Darwinism and Marxism are two distinct theories, one of which applies to the animal world, while the other applies to society. They supplement each other in the sense that, according to the Darwinian theory of evolution, the animal world develops up to the stage of man, and from then on, that is, after the animal has risen to man, the Marxian theory of evolution applies. When however, one wishes to carry the theory of one domain into that of the other, where different laws are applicable he must draw wrong inferences.
Pannekoek, of course, being a Marxist, believes that Marxist theory explains the development of societies. We know this is just about as wrong as a theory could be. But nevertheless, in this paragraph & elsewhere he does recognize that biological evolution has no applicability to determining what's the best social order or moral system.
Finally, Pannekoek feebly tries to re-link Darwinism with Marxism with a prefunctory description of socialist utopia.
If only Pannekoek could have taken off his Marxist kaliedoscope glasses, he might have made some truly useful philosophical insights. Too bad.
The only way in which evolution & Marxism can be compared, is superficially: They both describe change over time. Evolution describes change in species, and Marxism claims to describe change in societies & economic systems. One could say exactly the same thing about pediatrics: The pediatric doctor understands how the human body grows over time & develops from an infant thru the toddler stage, thru the child, teenybopper, and adolescent stages, into a full-grown adult; in the same way the Marxist understands how societies grow from the feudal stage, thru the capitalist bourgeois stage, and finally to the "adult" socialist stage.
Or as Pannekoek would put it, "Pediatrics is a glorious corroboration and completion of the Marxian theory of social development." QED.
Karl Marx on Darwin:
"Darwin’s work is most important and suits my purpose in that it provides a basis in natural science for the historical class struggle. One does, of course, have to put up with the clumsy English style of argument. Despite all shortcomings, it is here that, for the first time, ‘teleology’ in natural science is not only dealt a mortal blow but its rational meaning is empirically explained."
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1861/letters/61_01_16.htm
The "teology" of which he speaks is religion. God.
So there you have it in a nutshell. Of course, we've been all around this before and you did not like the results. I'm perfect willing to go another more definitive round to show that Marxism embraces evolution for specific reasons, but the bigger question is, how do you feel about defending Marxism in order to "cleanse all spots" from your belief system? hmm?
Think about it.
Hey, forgive me, but I've been watching PH and PW!