How can you say that Hitler was more racist than those in his time when it was through pandering to racism that he came to power?
In addition, for your information, the excuse 'everybody does it' was completely discredited by the degenerate which at FR we call X42.
That both Darwin was racist and that racism is an integral part of his theory is shown quite well by the following:
In man the frontal bone consists of a single piece, but in the embryo, and in children, and in almost all the lower mammals, it consists of two pieces separated by a distinct suture. This suture occasionally persists more or less distinctly in man after maturity; and more frequently in ancient than in recent crania, especially, as Canestrini has observed, in those exhumed from the Drift, and belonging to the brachycephalic type. Here again he comes to the same conclusion as in the analogous case of the malar bones. In this, and other instances presently to be given, the cause of ancient races approaching the lower animals in certain characters more frequently than do the modern races, appears to be, that the latter stand at a somewhat greater distance in the long line of descent from their early semi-human progenitors.
Darwin, Descent of Man, Chapter 2.
How can you say that Hitler was more racist than those in his time when it was through pandering to racism that he came to power?
Because a) he came to power more on ultra-nationalism than on overt racism (that came later), b) pandering to the lowest common denominator doesn't mean the whole society is morally bankrupt, and c) despite a racist undercurrent in that society, Hitler led them to far greater heights of racism than had been the case prior to his inciting them up to his own rabid level.
I think we'll have to add this to the "Gore3k said *what*?!?" file...
Is it truly your contention that Hitler was no more racist than was average for the 1930's? *Really*? Please expand upon this topic, I'm sure we'll be fascinated to hear your, um, unique views on the topic of how Hitler wasn't atypically racist.
In addition, for your information, the excuse 'everybody does it' was completely discredited by the degenerate which at FR we call X42.
True, but since that's not the basis for his point, why are you "informing" us of this?
Hint: His point was not "everyone does it", his point is that contrary to the attempts of some posters (*cough*ALS*cough*) to paint Darwin as some sort of rabid racist and philosophical kin to Hitler, the fact remains that while Hitler was far more rabidly racist than his own already xenophobic culture, Darwin was much *less* racist than the merely chauvanistic culture he was raised in. For his day and culture, in fact, he was amazingly enlightened.
This is not an "everyone does it" point. On the contrary, his point is that Darwin was able to rise above what "everyone else" was doing.
That both Darwin was racist and that racism is an integral part of his theory is shown quite well by the following:
[In man the frontal bone consists of a single piece, but in the embryo, and in children, and in almost all the lower mammals, it consists of two pieces separated by a distinct suture. This suture occasionally persists more or less distinctly in man after maturity; and more frequently in ancient than in recent crania, especially, as Canestrini has observed, in those exhumed from the Drift, and belonging to the brachycephalic type. Here again he comes to the same conclusion as in the analogous case of the malar bones. In this, and other instances presently to be given, the cause of ancient races approaching the lower animals in certain characters more frequently than do the modern races, appears to be, that the latter stand at a somewhat greater distance in the long line of descent from their early semi-human progenitors. -- Darwin, Descent of Man, Chapter 2.]
If you think that's "racist", you're reading it wrong. And if that's the best example you can find, your case is apparently not very strong.
When Darwin refers to "ancient races" in this passage, it's not an implication about some races being more "primitive" than others -- he's talking about ancient fossils (i.e., prehistoric man), which were of course more primitive in structure than modern man.