Posted on 05/27/2009 8:24:54 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Darwinism and the Nazi race Holocaust
by Jerry Bergman
Leading Nazis, and early 1900 influential German biologists, revealed in their writings that Darwin’s theory and publications had a major influence upon Nazi race policies. Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. In the formulation of their racial policies, Hitler’s government relied heavily upon Darwinism, especially the elaborations by Spencer and Haeckel. As a result, a central policy of Hitler’s administration was the development and implementation of policies designed to protect the ‘superior race’. This required at the very least preventing the ‘inferior races’ from mixing with those judged superior, in order to reduce contamination of the latter’s gene pool. The ‘superior race’ belief was based on the theory of group inequality within each species, a major presumption and requirement of Darwin’s original ‘survival of the fittest’ theory. This philosophy culminated in the ‘final solution’, the extermination of approximately six million Jews and four million other people who belonged to what German scientists judged as ‘inferior races’...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Ping!
One day people will come to understand the need for nature to take its course. Darwin’s theories should give pause to the fact that “nature will always find a way”. For thousands of years it did not need scientific intervention for things to have come about the way they did.
This article shows such backward, twisted, extremism that is of the lowest sort. To try to exterminate other humans to bring about what nature would bring about naturally is just sick!
Good article and dead accurate. The world has suffered enough from evoloserism; it’s clearly time to get rid of it.
If you argue against Darwinism/evolution, you're arguing against fact. I'm a Christian, and I see clearly that Darwin was exactly right. His theories have been confirmed a thousand ways to Sunday, and it's just sad to see that we are still denying them. Do we want to deny the existence of atoms, too?
Hitler misused everything. Just because survival of the fittest is an undeniable fact doesn't mean that it's a normative statement (that we should practice it).
The only thing Darwin knew about economics was that he was living off of his parents wealth.
Debate all you like, but Hitler’s motivations have absolutely no bearing on the Theory of Evolution’s adherence to evidence.
My point was the author incorrectly attributed this phrase to Darwin.
You may think that you are a Christian, but your post is that of a true dreamer.
Gould admitted hundreds of times that the evidence was in opposition to the premises of evolution; do you think that you know more about it than he did?
Adgerence to evidence? What a laugh!
> If you argue against Darwinism/evolution, you're arguing against fact. I'm a Christian, and I see clearly that Darwin was exactly right. His theories have been confirmed a thousand ways to Sunday, and it's just sad to see that we are still denying them. Do we want to deny the existence of atoms, too?
> Hitler misused everything. Just because survival of the fittest is an undeniable fact doesn't mean that it's a normative statement (that we should practice it).
Sorry for the plagiarism: I couldn't resist. Couldn't have said it better myself, so I chose instead to say what you said again: it bears repeating and putting in bold. Well said!
In some of undergraduate college history classes a number of years back, the question of ‘survival of the fittest’ Darwinism was frequently discussed in relations to Nazism and the Holocaust.
Kind of ironic, almost deja vu’ like, to see an article on this. That being said, Darwinism, as a philosophy and ‘science’, was still 1) a major influence mechanism and 2) dominated thinking during that time.
Interesting.
You obviously missed my point. Adherence or nonadherence, Hitler’s motivations have no effect on the evidence.
> You may think that you are a Christian, but your post is that of a true dreamer.
He says he’s a Christian, who are you to say otherwise?
I’m a Christian, and I happen to agree with what “electron volt” wrote.
“Gould admitted hundreds of times that the evidence was in opposition to the premises of evolution;”
I’d love to hear a source for this claim.
Careful, next thing you know that small facist group will start calling you a liberal,
> Careful, next thing you know that small facist group will start calling you a liberal,
LOL! Being called a “liberal” is the grown-up FRee Republic equivalent of being called a “poo-face” or a “meany” when you’re a kid. It smarts a little the first time but loses its sting when the adults are around.
Google ‘nazi anthropologist’ as a lead in to get more information on this topic.
Oc course by the standards of the evolutionists, these guys were highly credentialed and degreed scientists, so we should take every word they made as gospel.
There are some good links under that search string! I will be sure to post some of them in the future :o)
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.