Replies

Though not much in vogue currently, the fascistic systems of Hitler, Mussolini, and others almost conquered the world a generation ago. There are even now neo-Nazi movements which bear watching, as well as various dictatorships of similar character around the world; not to mention the “new left” student movement which strangely resembles the early days of Nazism.

In any case, all such ideologies, built up as they are on the concepts of racism and statist totalitarian aggression and control, are direct products of the Darwinian doctrines of struggle for existence and survival of the fittest. Friedrich Nietzsche, the philosophical father of these systems, was an ardent evolutionist, as were his spiritual children, Hitler and Mussolini.

From the ‘preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life’ (i.e., Darwin’s subtitle to Origin of Species), it was a short step to the preservation of favoured individuals, classes or nations—and from their preservation to their glorification. Social Darwinism has often been understood in this sense: as a philosophy, exalting competition, power and violence over convention, ethics and religion. Thus it has become a portmanteau of nationalism, imperialism, militarism, and dictatorship, of the cults of the hero, the superman, and the master race .recent expressions of this philosophy, such as (Hitler’s) Mein Kampf are, unhappily, too familiar to require exposition here. And it is by an obvious process of analogy and deduction that they are said to derive from Darwinism. Nietzsche predicted that this would be the consequence if the Darwinian theory gained general acceptance.

Fascism is generally held to be a right-wing movement and Communism a left-wing. Both, however, are the variants of the same species, evolutionistic, totalitarian collectivism. In any case, it is clear that the basic rationale of Communism, just as that of Fascism, is the dogma of materialistic evolution.

In an age of social Darwinism, the combination of the ideas of struggle, of historical evolution, and of progress proved irresistible. The Marxists became merely a sect in the larger church . In urging these lessons, Marx and Engels set the pattern of all subsequent Marxist polemics by using what may be called the evolutionist’s double standard: when you do it, it’s wrong, because you are the past; when we do it, it’s right, for we are the future. The mood—borrowed from science—is that of a mighty ruthlessness. History like nature, is tough.

It is well known that not only the early Communists, such as Marx and Engels, were atheistic evolutionists but also that all the leaders of Communism since have been the same. Though they have fluctuated between Darwinian and Lamarckian biology in their application of evolutionary mechanisms to communist theory, they have never varied in their commitment to evolution itself.

Though not mu [snip] tment to evolution itself.

Horsefeathers. This is evolution.

Fossil: Sts 5

Site: Sterkfontein Cave, South Africa (1)

Discovered By: R. Broom & J. Robinson 1947 (1)

Estimated Age of Fossil: 2.5 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, floral & faunal data (1, 4)

Species Name: Australopithecus africanus (1, 2)

Gender: Male (based on CAT scan of wisdom teeth roots) (1, 30) Female (original interpretation) (4)

Cranial Capacity: 485 cc (2, 4)

Information: No tools found in same layer (4)

Interpretation: Erect posture (based on forward facing foramen magnum) (8)

Nickname: Mrs. Ples (1)

See original source for notes:
http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=24

they have fluctuated between Darwinian and Lamarckian biology

The latter being "Intelligent Design", of course.

Perhaps you could support your claims with evidence rather than merely offering rhetoric.

And Henry Morris himself was a racist poopy head, with his belief that "the children of Ham" were natarul servants.

" In any case, all such ideologies, built up as they are on the concepts of racism and statist totalitarian aggression and control, are direct products of the Darwinian doctrines of struggle for existence and survival of the fittest."

Nonsense.

"Friedrich Nietzsche, the philosophical father of these systems, was an ardent evolutionist,..."

He was rather ambivalent toward evolution, and certainly did not like natural selection.

"as were his spiritual children, Hitler and Mussolini."

Hitler never mentioned Darwin but did quite often speak of the Aryan race as being the perfect creation of God. He thought species were fixed.

" From the ‘preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life’ (i.e., Darwin’s subtitle to Origin of Species), it was a short step to the preservation of favoured individuals, classes or nations—and from their preservation to their glorification."

The *races* had absolutely nothing to do with human races. They were biological sub-species/varieties. Darwin didn't even discuss human evolution in the Origin.

...In any case, all such ideologies, built up as they are on the concepts of racism and statist totalitarian aggression and control, are direct products of the Darwinian doctrines of struggle for existence and survival of the fittest...

Islamfascists too?

all such ideologies, built up as they are on the concepts of racism and statist totalitarian aggression and control, are direct products of the Darwinian doctrines of struggle for existence and survival of the fittest

Hitler never cited evolution as a reason for the fascist state, or in reciting the flaws of liberalism and the liberal state. Never. And the fact of the matter is that Hitler seldom mentioned evolution in connection with Nazi race theory or antisemitism, nor did other important Nazi race theorists such as Alfred Rosenberg.

When Hitler and other Nazis did cite evolution it was usually (and in superficial and facile fashion) in connection with militarism, and justifying the desirability of strife and struggle. And this was not a Nazi innovation. German leaders and generals made the same connection before and during WWI.