>>Kalamata post #366 cont. 4: "The term "struggle for existence" (which both Hitler and Darwin frequently used,) combined with the explosion of virulent racism after the release of Darwin's books, not to mention the arrival of eugenics in political life, could easily be considered all the seed a madman would need to plan an extermination."
>>Joey: "The Timeline of Anti-Semitism goes all the way back to Biblical times, long before Darwin or anyone else thought of evolution."
Actually, it goes back much further than that, or at least the prophecy does:
"But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee . . . And it shall come to pass, that as the Lord rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you; so the Lord will rejoice over you to destroy you, and to bring you to nought; and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it. And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone. And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the Lord shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind: And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life: In the morning thou shalt say, Would God it were even! and at even thou shalt say, Would God it were morning! for the fear of thine heart wherewith thou shalt fear, and for the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see. And the Lord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you." -- Deu 28:15, 63-68 KJV
That is exactly what happened when my ancestors rejected Christ.
**************
>>Joey: "It includes many massacres of Jews, some in Germany, including:"
Why the distraction, Joey? That is all well-documented history; but there were no Hitler's along the way.
Let's fast forward to the days after Darwin corrupted the moral narrative by convincing the naïve they were not created in the image of God, but in the image of an ape.
**************
>>Joey: "Treitschke also endorsed Social Darwinian theories of brutal competition among races. In an essay published in 1862, Treitschke praised the "pitiless racial struggle" of Germans against Lithuanians, Poles and Old Prussians; he claimed that "magic" emanated from "eastern German soil" which had been "fertilised" by "noble German blood". >>Joey: "But Darwin said nothing about "magic" in anybody's soil and von Treitschke did not invent anti-Semitism, he merely gave it yet another excuse."
Darwin gave it "legitimacy":
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." [Affinities and Genealogies, in Darwin, Charles, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." John Murray, 2nd Ed, 1888, Chap VI, p.156]
All the mad man had to do was convince himself that his race was civilized, and the other "race" (the Jews) was not. It is important to note that the early Nazi suppression of the Jews occurred at a time in history when eugenics was widespread and socially acceptable -- thanks to Hitler's cousin, Francis Galton, of which Darwin himself gave his stamp of approval (and so did Haeckel and Hitler.) We cannot ignore that doctrine, which I mentioned in an earlier post of un-natural selection from the pen of Charlie's cousin, Francis Galton, the father of eugenics:
***
"I conclude that each generation has enormous power over the natural gifts of those that follow, and maintain that it is a duty we owe to humanity to investigate the range of that power, and to exercise it in a way that, without being unwise towards ourselves, shall be most advantageous to future inhabitants of the earth." [Francis Galton, "Hereditary Genius: an inquiry into its laws and consequences." MacMillan & Co., 1869, Intro., p.2]
Darwin himself was caught up in the "euphoria" of un-natural selection, as expressed in this letter to Galton about Galton's book:
"I have only read about fifty pages of your book [1] (to the Judges), but I must exhale myself, else something will go wrong in my inside. I do not think I ever in all my life read anything more interesting and original. And how well and clearly you put every point! George, who has finished the book, and who expressed himself just in the same terms, tells me the earlier chapters are nothing in interest to the later ones! It will take me some time to get to these later chapters, as it is read aloud to me by my wife, who is also much interested. You have made a convert of an opponent in one sense for I have always maintained that, excepting fools, men did not differ much in intellect, only in zeal and hard work; and I still think [this] is an eminently important difference." [Letter to Francis Galton, Dec 23, 1870, in Darwin, Charles, "More Letters of Charles Darwin, a Record of His Works in a Series of Hitherto Unpublished Letters Vol II." John Murray, 1903, p.41]
Footnote 1. Hereditary Genius: an Inquiry into its Laws and Consequences, by Francis Galton, London, 1869. "The Judges of England between 1660 and 1865" is the heading of a section of this work (p. 55). See Descent of Man (1901), p. 41.
In the highlighted portion, Charlie was referring to Galton's notion that man's gifts were all hereditary, including his work ethic. This is Galton, again:
"the combination of high intellectual gifts, tact in dealing with men, power of expression in debate, and ability to endure exceedingly hard work, is hereditary." [Francis Galton, "Hereditary Genius: an inquiry into its laws and consequences." MacMillan & Co., 1869, p.110]
It is not difficult to see how, with only minor extrapolation of Darwinism and Galtonism, the Nazi's were able to take un-natural selection to another "level," breeding only the "fittest" of men to become members of a master race (Aryans, or course), and eliminating all but the slave nations they were to rule over. And don't forget the other 20th century butchers: Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot, who were also Darwinists.
***
The bottom line is, after Darwin's "legitimized" in the minds of mere men the notion that there was no higher power than themselves, the arrival of butchers like Hitler, Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot were, and are, inevitable.
**************
>>Joey: "1882: "First International Anti-Jewish Congress convenes at Dresden, Germany." In Dresden, a beautiful old city spared from Allied bombings until February 1945. 1909: "Salomon Reinach and Florence Simmonds refer to 'this new antisemitism, masquerading as patriotism, which was first propagated at Berlin by the court chaplain Stöcker, with the connivance of Bismarck.'[4] Similarly, Peter N. Stearns comments that 'the ideology behind the new anti-Semitism [in Germany] was more racist than religious.'[5]"
That is post-Darwin, Joey.
**************
>>Joey: "In 1909, while Hitler struggles to become a painter and learns political anti-Semitism in Vienna, Austria, in Germany antisemitism masquerades as patriotism, not Darwinism.
You keep referring back to Vienna, even though one of your own references points to post-World War I as the time Hitler's violent antisemitism emerged. I quote:
[Joey] "Historian Richard J. Evans states that "historians now generally agree that his notorious, murderous anti-Semitism emerged well after Germany's defeat [in World War I], as a product of the paranoid "stab-in-the-back" explanation for the catastrophe".[60]"
This is the full quote by Evans from a book review by him. The book review followed this quote:
"[H]istorians now generally agree that his notorious, murderous anti-Semitism emerged well after Germany's defeat, as a product of the paranoid "stab-in-the-back" explanation for the catastrophe. His first political activities for the army during the Revolution of 1918 even involved propagandizing in the ranks for the revolutionary government in Munich. It was only later, when he was sent to observe far-right political groups, that his political convictions became clear and firm. What effect service in the war had on his political views is shrouded in mystery." [Richard J. Evans, "Hitler's First War, by Thomas Weber - Review." The Globe and Mail, June 22, 2011]
**************
>>Joey: Point is: in none of the "Timeline of Anti-Semitism" items is Darwin or evolution even mentioned, much less cited as a source. Where we do see the term "Social Darwinism" it can hardly be considered an original source of anti-Semitism, merely another term for behavior which goes back thousands of years before Darwin."
You refuse to allow Hitler to grow up, Joey. Perhaps in later posts you will let him "escape" Vienna; but in the meantime I must tow the line. This passage refers to the Darwinian-inspired "moral" code of eugenics:
"I must stress, however, that even the most hardcore secularists often still retain religious influences (and Hitler was not as radically secular as most atheists or agnostics). Hitler still believed in some kind of God, and his thinking remained colored by religious elements, although in the end, earthly concerns dominated his political and racial ideology. This is especially true if we consider the moral philosophy of Nazism, which centered on promoting the biological welfare and advancement of the Nordic race and often conflicted with Christian ethics. Hitler's Darwinian-inspired moral code called for the eradication of the weak, sick, and those deemed inferior, rather than universal love." [Richard Weikart, "Hitler’s Religion: The Twisted Beliefs that Drove the Third Reich." Regnery History, 2016, Introduction]
This refers to the association of Hitler's pantheism with Darwinism:
"At first glance, it might seem that Hitler's pantheistic worship of nature is incidental, a bit of trivia that does little or nothing to help us understand the man and the atrocities that he committed. But to suppose this would be a mistake. Hitler's devotion to nature as a divine being had a grim corollary: the laws of nature became his infallible guide to morality. Whatever conformed to the laws of nature was morally good, and whatever contravened nature and its ways was evil. When Hitler explained how he hoped to harmonize human society with the scientific laws of nature, he emphasized principles derived from Darwinian theory, especially the racist forms of Darwinism prominent among Darwin's German disciples. These laws included human biological inequality (especially racial inequality), the human struggle for existence, and natural selection. In the Darwinian struggle for existence, multitudes perish, and only a few of the fittest individuals survive and reproduce. If this is nature's way, Hitler thought, then he should emulate nature by destroying those destined for death. Thus, in his twisted vision of religion, Hitler believed he was serving his God by annihilating the allegedly inferior humans and promoting the welfare and prolific reproduction of the supposedly superior Aryans." [Ibid.]
This refers to Hitler's admiration for Enlightenment thinkers:
"With his stress on will and instinct, Hitler did indeed have an irrationalist bent, and I explore this theme in greater depth elsewhere in this book. However, many of his comments in both public and private about the Enlightenment, religious toleration, and the science-religion nexus seem consistent with rationalism. On the few occasions that Hitler forthrightly discussed his attitude toward Enlightenment thinkers, he uniformly expressed appreciation and admiration for them. Kant, whose bust he wanted to place in his magnificent library in Linz, was one of the leading philosophers of the Enlightenment." [Ibid. Chapter 3]
"This was not the only time Hitler praised Enlightenment philosophers. During a monologue in October 1941, he lamented that current discussions about religion were in a miserable state compared to the writings of the French Enlightenment or to Frederick the Great's discussions with Voltaire. Nine months later, he told Bormann that of the books that Bormann had given him to look at, he was especially interested in Frederick the Great's books, Briefe über die Religion (Letters on Religion) and Theologische Streitschriften (Theological Polemics). Hitler commented that it would be valuable if all Germans, especially leaders and military officers, could read these works by Frederick, because then they would see that Hitler was not alone in his 'heretical thoughts.' Hitler obviously thought highly of Frederick, not only for his military exploits and tenacity but also for his Enlightened religious views. Hans Frank noticed this tendency, too, testifying that Hitler increasingly identified with Frederick the Great's Enlightened rationalism, which completely suppressed his childhood faith. The theologian Paul Hinlicky claims that Hitler's conception of God was shaped by Enlightenment thought, asserting, 'Hitler embraced the rationalist, watch-maker God typical of deistic (not 'theistic') thought whose stern and ruthless law he discovered anew in Darwinian natural selection. In this way, Hitler renounced the God identified by biblical narrative.'" [Ibid. Chapter 3]
More Enlightment "rationalism" mingled with Darwinism:
"Another way that Hitler paralleled Enlightenment rationalism was by stressing the variety of religions in the world. Hitler saw the presence of numerous religions in the world as a major hurdle to believing in any particular one. The basic idea was that since there were so many different religions, each claiming to be the sole and exclusive truth, most religions were necessarily wrong. Why, then, believe in one particular religion, just because by accident you happened to be raised in the society that embraced it? In a monologue in October 1941, Hitler expressed this point clearly. Where he got his statistics from is uncertain, but he claimed that there were 170 large religions in the world, so at least 169 must be wrong. The implication, however, was that all 170 were probably wrong. Then he claimed that no religion still being practiced was older than 2,500 years, while humans have existed for at least 300,000 years (having evolved from primates). This implied that religions were temporary phenomena of questionable validity. A few months later, he made similar remarks, claiming that human conceptions of Providence are constantly shifting. Only about 10 percent of people in the world believed in Catholicism, he claimed, and the rest of humanity had many different beliefs. This time, he gave the figure of 500,000 years for the existence of the human species, noting that Christianity only existed during an 'extremely short epoch of humanity.'" [Ibid.]
Struggle for Existence:
"Bur how should humans fight this struggle for existence? When applying Darwinian principles to human societies, Darwinists had to wrestle with the relative weight to give to competition between individuals within a society versus competition between different groups or societies. As we have seen earlier, many Darwinists-including Darwin himself-believed that group competition, such as war and racial antagonisms, played a crucial role in the development of human societies and even in the evolution of morality. Hitler aligned himself with this approach, believing that racial competition was the primary factor driving human evolution and history. Thus, in order to promote evolutionary progress, Hitler opted for a two-pronged strategy involving both artificial and natural selection: eugenics within German society to improve the health and vitality of the"Aryan race," and racial struggle and warfare toward those outside the German racial community. Hitler's eugenics and racial policies were linked as part of a larger program to preserve and improve the human species, since he considered the Germans the highest race, not only physically, but especially intellectually. Even more important for our purposes, Hitler believed that Germans were morally superior to all other races. Thus, eliminating other races and replacing them with Germans would bring moral improvement to the entire world. I" [Richard Weikart, "From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics and Racism in Germany." Palgrave Macmillan, 2004, p.212]
The Final Solution:
"Nevertheless the more intelligent members within the same community will succeed better in the long run than the inferior, and leave a more numerous progeny, and this is a form of natural selection. The more efficient causes of progress seem to consist of a good education during youth whilst the brain is impressible, and of a high standard of excellence, inculcated by the ablest and best men, embodied in the laws, customs and traditions of the nation, and enforced by public opinion." [Darwin, Charles, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." John Murray, 2nd Ed, 1888, Chap V, p.143]
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." [Affinities and Genealogies, in Darwin, Charles, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." John Murray, 2nd Ed, 1888, Chap VI, p.156]
Compare those two by Darwin with this one from Mein Kampf:
"The ultimate cause of such a decline [in culture] was their forgetting that all culture depends on men and not conversely; hence that to preserve a certain culture the man who creates it must be preserved. This preservation is bound up with the rigid law of necessity and the right to victory of the best and stronger in this world. Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live." [Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf: Manheim Translation." Houghton Mifflin Company, 1999, p.289]
Charlie Darwin's doctrine was evil, Joey; and Hitler embraced it, via one avenue or another.
Mr. Kalamata