Posted on 08/18/2014 9:30:18 AM PDT by Heartlander
This month marks the hundredth anniversary of the start of the First World War. Between 1914 and 1918, the conflict took 16 million lives in brutal combat yet its causes remain strangely cloudy to most of us. One historian titled his recent book about the origins of the war The Sleepwalkers, as if nations and leaders stumbled into the global catastrophe almost by accident, unmotivated by any particular philosophy or ideology.
World War II is very different: Everyone understands what that was about, how starkly different worldviews, fueling hatred and greed for domination, tore Europe apart. In articulating a twisted vision of racial struggle, Hitler's Nazis could not be faulted for a lack of candor.
Now a new documentary film from Discovery Institute reveals the previously neglected ideological and scientific roots of the war that set the stage for the coming of Nazi Germany. The Biology of the Second Reich: Social Darwinism and the Origins of World War I debuts online today.
In just 14 minutes, viewers are introduced to the powerful currents of Darwinian racial theory that helped to drive German intellectual and military leaders in the years leading up to 1914.
Written and directed by Center for Science & Culture associate director John West, the video features the work of California State University historian Richard Weikart, author of the book From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany (Palgrave Macmillan). Dr. Weikart's previous scholarship has revealed the role of evolutionary speculation that underlay Nazi racial theory.
Far less familiar, to the public and even to some historians, is the role that what was then mainstream biology played in driving Germany to war. Some of that country's leading figures regarded a war of annihilation as a necessary step in assuring the survival and thriving of the fittest race: their own.
The film acknowledges that the causes of the war were complex, and it doesn't claim that Darwinian biology was the only influence at work. It does show that Darwinism had an important impact in motivating German militarism.
Prominent American biologist Vernon Kellogg recounted his own disturbing conversations before the war with members of the German military elite. Previously a pacifist, Kellogg after learning what the world was up against, became a strong and influential advocate for countering the German threat.
The film amply documents the thinking of German scientists and politicians. It also recalls the genocide (1904-1907) perpetrated by Germany in its African colony, now Namibia, against the Herero people -- a dress rehearsal for the Holocaust. Here too, Darwinian racial considerations were prominent.
As Dr. Weikart points out, Charles Darwin was a Social Darwinist, but of course had he to lived to see these events, he would have been horrified by the unintended consequences of his ideas.
Not that there weren't hints even in his own lifetime. As early as 1870, German zoologist Gustav Jaeger observed that "the war of annihilation... is a natural law, without which the organic world... could not continue to exist at all." Darwin was aware of the irony that his theory and its amplifications in The Descent of Man were more eagerly embraced in Germany than in his own native country.
The Biology of the Second Reich uncovers a fascinating, neglected, and highly relevant story from the past -- not so very long ago, in fact. The film reminds us of the consequences that science, including "consensus" science, can have on culture, playing out in the theater of history, in war and peace, life and death. Watch it now.
Ping
Very fascinating. As a lover of history, I have often wondered what persuaded a country as great as Germany to launch WWI/WWII.
Indeed, Germany’s rich heritage of scientific and production genius throughout the 1800’s would naturally lead a nation to notions of superiority. Even in today’s post WWII world, Germany stands as a powerhouse in comparison to neighboring European nations.
My personal belief is that it is only through the honest application of Christianity, which teaches that the best of human existence is expressions of love and tolerance.
There are those who will disagree with me stating the obvious dichotomy that many wars were justified through Christianity; however, I maintain that these justifications were a contortion of Christianity rather than an expression of it.
From what I recall,The European leaders at the time all thought that the War was going to be over in weeks .But since all of the royalty at the time was related their ego’s got a bit ahead of them and there was no willingness to end the war.
After the Germans sank the Lusitania.That was it.It was a fight to the finish.
“Not that there weren’t hints even in his own lifetime. As early as 1870, German zoologist Gustav Jaeger observed that “the war of annihilation... is a natural law, without which the organic world... could not continue to exist at all.” “
Well, that explains why ALL those who are out to destroy Israel are annihilated upon the return of the Messiah, thus fulfilling the prophecy of “Peace On Earth, Good Will To Men” at His birth.
The only thing that saved Great Britain was the fact that theirs was a constitutional monarchy.
Thanks!
There was ALL KINDS of willingness to end the war. It's just that all sides intended that end to be a victory for their side. Which obviously couldn't be true for everybody.
I thought Swine flue ended the fighting due to attrition?
Yes. I had been taught it was a bewildering patchwork of secret defense treaties—obviously not intended to serve as deterrents—that resulted in the continental conflagration. If know, these same alliances might have kept the peace indefinitely.
puppypusher: "...European leaders at the time all thought that the War was going to be over in weeks "
Old Teufel Hunden: "they were a great and powerful nation.
However, they were also a new nation that wanted to expand and enlarge their empire.
Unfortunately they came late to the Empire building game and the other great powers were not looking to give up any of their posessions..."
Oratam: "it was a bewildering patchwork of secret defense treaties..."
The first point to remember is that throughout all of human history, empires were self-justifying -- a fact you can easily see by asking, "what 'moral justification' did the Romans have for invading, occupying & controlling Britain in 43 AD?
What 'moral justification' did Napoleon have for invading Russia in 1812?"
The answers are: they needed no "justifications" since victory was justification enough, their empires were essentially amoral.
Thus, the idea that the German Empire of 1914 might need some moral justification for starting a major war is relatively new -- indeed, it puts our own perspective back into the minds of past rulers, inappropriately.
Of course German rulers well understood that they did not want the entire world allied against them, and that required major deceptions -- events must be made to look as if they happened "on their own" without German control.
So, they pushed Austria to invade and finish-off little Serbia quickly, while the Kaiser & most of Europe were on vacation.
Unfortunately, Austrians had timetables (and vacations) of their own, and thus Serbia remained un-invaded and un-"finished off" until vacations were over, but now Russia got involved, to the point of calling a partial mobilization, strictly they said, to warn Austria against invading little Serbia.
German leadership decided to use Russia's partial mobilization against Austria as Germany's excuse to declare war on Russia, then immediately began executing its "Schlieffen Plan" to invade... France!
So why did they do it?
The answer is, in their own minds they needed no "justification", but they did have reasons, and first and foremost, they believed that time was running out for Austrian & German Empires -- if they did not act against Serbia & Russia in 1914, Russia would soon be too powerful for them to defeat, so now was the time.
They weren't particularly concerned about France -- after all, Germany dealt handily with the French in 1870, and would surely do so again -- but France had to be defeated before turning on Russia.
And, they did not expect Britain's great naval power to have much effect on land, in France.
And so their "Schlieffen plan" was put in motion, and the rest, as they say, is history.
they believed that time was running out for Austrian & German Empires -- if they did not act against Serbia & Russia in 1914, Russia would soon be too powerful for them to defeat, so now was the time.
From a cold and completely rational way, it makes complete sense.
To carry their expectations a little farther forward, they expected the war to be over before Britain would be able to build enough of an army to have any effect on the Continent.
I think you're just a little harder on Germany than justified. They felt as if they were surrounded. And they were! Admittedly, largely as a result of Kaiser Bill's blundering over the previous 20 years or so.
They believed they had a limited window of opportunity to launch what we would today call a pre-emptive strike. IOW, to some extent they acted out of desperation, not lust for power, as Japan did in 1941. They believed, accurately or not, they had no choice.
Or, perhaps a little more accurately, they recognized they had alternatives, but the consequences of those alternatives were unacceptable.
Nice that the author totally ignores the real events that led to the start of WWI .....
The film acknowledges that the causes of the war were complex, and it doesn't claim that Darwinian biology was the only influence at work.
“From the article:
The film acknowledges that the causes of the war were complex, and it doesn’t claim that Darwinian biology was the only influence at work.”
But does it even mention the events that led to the start of WWI? It wasn’t that complex.
“From the article:
The film acknowledges that the causes of the war were complex, and it doesn’t claim that Darwinian biology was the only influence at work.”
But does it even mention the events that led to the start of WWI? It wasn’t that complex.
A chief staff officer under Moltke Jr., and later "Schlieffen Plan" executor was a young Great General Staff major named Eric Ludendorf.
During the war Ludendorf rose to the highest levels of command, second only to Hindenburg.
By October 1918 he saw no path to victory, and recommended the Kaiser accept Wilson's "14 points" of peace.
Soon realizing that was a mistake, he withdrew the recommendation, but was sacked himself instead.
After the war Ludendorf was an early promoter of the "stab in the back" legend, marched with a young Adolf Hitler in the 1923 Munich Beer Hall Putsch, ran against Hindenburg for President of Germany in 1925, and in 1935 published his thoughts on Total War in a book by that name.
So Ludendorf is the imperial link which connects Alfred von Schlieffen to Adolf Hitler.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.