Posted on 07/09/2003 12:08:32 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
And I think you're a schizophrenic witch.
Really, I do.
Including yourself
Memory doesn't serve so well, could you please provide a link
If? If?
I proved (in #2686, addressed to you) that Darwin was passionately opposed to slavery, so much so that, in a letter to the American botanist Asa Gray in the early months of The Civil War (still before 1st Bull Run) he "wish[ed] to God, though at the loss of millions of lives, that the North would proclaim a crusade against Slavery." And continued:
In the long run, a million horrid deaths would be amply repaid in the cause of humanity. What wonderful times we live in. Massachusetts seems to show noble enthusiasm. Great God how I should like to see the greatest curse on Earth Slavery abolished.
There is much more evidence that could be adduced of Darwin's opposition to slavery, for it was a strong and life-long passion on his part; but in this message I'm going to stick to evidence already posted within this thread, in order to more starkly demonstrate to the lurkers your execrable obstinancy, deep dishonesty and extreme bigotry.
I should also add that similar evidence has been put before you many times in the past. There is no historical basis -- not a single shred -- for any doubt whatsoever about Darwin's views on slavery. Yet you continue lie about them.
he never said so in his public writings which is what matters.
False, and also previously so demonstrated in this very thread. In #830 (addressed to goodseedhomeschool) I quoted from one of Darwin's public writings, The Voyage of the Beagle. After recounting some of the horrors of slavery, the section I excerpted concludes:
It is often attempted to palliate slavery by comparing the state of slaves with our poorer countrymen: if the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin; but how this bears on slavery, I cannot see; as well might the use of the thumb-screw be defended in one land, by showing that men in another land suffered from some dreadful disease. Those who look tenderly at the slave owner, and with a cold heart at the slave, never seem to put themselves into the position of the latter;—what a cheerless prospect, with not even a hope of change! picture to yourself the chance, ever hanging over you, of your wife and your little children—those objects which nature urges even the slave to call his own—being torn from you and sold like beasts to the first bidder!And these deeds are done and palliated by men who profess to love their neighbours as themselves, who believe in God, and pray that His Will be done on earth! It makes one's blood boil, yet heart tremble, to think that we Englishmen and our American descendants, with their boastful cry of liberty, have been and are so guilty; but it is a consolation to reflect, that we at least have made a greater sacrifice than ever made by any nation, to expiate our sin.
BTW, not only was Darwin more than willing to express his views on slavery publicly, he was also willing to oppose even his close friend and mentor. Although he did not name him, the passage above was angrily added by Darwin to a 1845 edition of Voyage in response to Charles Lyell's just published Travels In North America, which Darwin felt was soft on slavery. (Adrian Desmond & James Moore, Darwin, pp 328-29.) It was his own friend that he excoriated among those who "palliated" the evils of slavery.
In those [Darwin's public writings] he spread racial hatred.
False.
Yes, as I have previously conceeded, Darwin held some views that are racist by today's standards; but he never, by any standard, devolved to racialist "hatred". I defy you to supply even one example.
Well, actually, that's not quite true, I must admit on further consideration. But, most interestingly, the only examples I know of in Darwin were racial comments take on a bilious tone were in connection with his hatred of slavery, and were directed against European slaveholders. E.g. his comment about Portuguese slaveholders in Brazil, which I quoted in #2715. Note here that, while there are indeed stereotypes about negroes, Darwin's attitude toward them is positive and affectionate:
"I have watched how steadily the general feeling, as shown at elections, has been rising against Slavery. What a proud thing for England, if she is the first European nation which utterly abolish is it. I was told before leaving England, that after living in slave countries: all my options would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the Negros character. It is impossible to see a negro & not feel kindly toward him; such cheerful, open honest expressions & such fine muscular bodies; I never saw any of the diminutive Portuguese with their murderous countenances, without almost wishing for Brazil to follow the example of Haiti [where the slaves successfully revolted and gained their freedom]; & considering the enormous healthy looking black population, it will be wonderful if at some future day it does not take place." -- Charles Darwin to Catherine Darwin (May 22 - July 14 1833) The Correspondence of Charles Darwin Vol. 1 1821-1836 (1985), pp. 312-313
In addition he also, in his private correspondence to others went so far as advocating the extermination of inferior races.
No, he did not.
Darwin sailed around the world on The Beagle from 1831 to 1836. He actually witnessed native peoples being slaughtered. For instance the Tasmanians had been almost literally wiped out to the last man, and woman (under a Governor who was an outspoken Christian, btw) only a few years before Darwin visited Australia. Ditto with indians in South America, except that Darwin actually saw some of the genocidal wars in progress there.
It is hardly surprising that Darwin would have concluded, from what he saw, that native populations were likely to be doomed in their encounter with Europeans; but communicating observations and extrapolating from them is not the same as approving of the process observed. You have provided no evidence at all that Darwin approved of this process, but only quotes where he describes the unfortunate fate of native populations and predicts more of the same.
Again I have already given evidence in this thread, in #2715, that Darwin did NOT approve. Here he discussing the slaughter of indians in South America. (I quote Darwin's description of the attrocities at greater length in the original message.) Note that there is no question here that Darwin is horrified and disapproves, and note this is from his "public writings":
This is a dark picture; but how much more shocking is the unquestionable fact, that all the women who appear above twenty years old are massacred in cold blood! When I exclaimed that this appeared rather inhuman. he answered, "Why, what can be done? they breed so!"Every one here is fully convinced that this is the most just war, because it is against barbarians. Who would believe in this age that such atrocities could be committed in a Christian civilized country?" -- Charles Darwin, Voyage of the Beagle (1839), Chapter V
If I wasn't confining myself to material already posted in the thread, I would quote from the strong, passionate and public defense that Darwin made of the Missionary Movement subsequent to The Beagle voyage, specifically citing the facts that missionaries both protected native people, and mitigated or opposed the violence toward them practiced by some of the colonials.
The man was a lying hypocrite
Pot, kettle, black!
I saw it. Thanks for taking the time to document the lies, distortions, and phony scholarship; depressing and pathetic as it is to witness such from fellow freepers.
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.