Hitler was a creationist who believed in fixed kinds.
“This urge for the maintenance of the unmixed breed, which is a phenomenon that prevails throughout the whole of the natural world, results not only in the sharply defined outward distinction between one species and another but also in the internal similarity of characteristic qualities which are peculiar to each breed or species. The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger. The only difference that can exist within the species must be in the various degrees of structural strength and active power, in the intelligence, efficiency, endurance, etc., with which the individual specimens are endowed”
Once more, the question of creation vs. evolution has NEVER been at the core of Darwinism.
Hitler and Nazism epitomized eugenics which IS at the core of Darwinism.
It is ironic to find that Creationists are roundly excoriated for out-of-context quote-mining of "Darwinists" to try to show that evolution is either not believed by evolutionists, or is self-contradictory; but in defending evolution, one is allowed to do not only quote-mining, but a type of controlled burn against Godwin's Law.
Try reading the quote in context, mmmkay?
Here's your paragraph:
This urge for the maintenance of the unmixed breed, which is a phenomenon that prevails throughout the whole of the natural world, results not only in the sharply defined outward distinction between one species and another but also in the internal similarity of characteristic qualities which are peculiar to each breed or species. The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger. The only difference that can exist within the species must be in the various degrees of structural strength and active power, in the intelligence, efficiency, endurance, etc., with which the individual specimens are endowed
And here is the last sentence of the paragraph you quoted, which inexplicably got left out from your citation:
It would be impossible to find a fox which has a kindly and protective disposition towards geese, just as no cat exists which has a friendly disposition towards mice.
Hmmm, beginning to sound like "Master Race" yet? Keep reading.
This is the next paragraph:
That is why the struggle between the various species does not arise from a feeling of mutual antipathy but rather from hunger and love. In both cases Nature looks on calmly and is even pleased with what happens. The struggle for the daily livelihood leaves behind in the ruck everything that is weak or diseased or wavering; while the fight of the male to possess the female gives to the strongest the right, or at least, the possibility to propagate its kind. And this struggle is a means of furthering the health and powers of resistance in the species. Thus it is one of the causes underlying the process of development towards a higher quality of being.
Sounds like "survival of the fittest" to a T.
And the next couple paragraphs provide the segue to The Master RaceTM (BARF ALERT):
If the case were different the progressive process would cease, and even retrogression might set in. Since the inferior always outnumber the superior, the former would always increase more rapidly if they possessed the same capacities for survival and for the procreation of their kind; and the final consequence would be that the best in quality would be forced to recede into the background. Therefore a corrective measure in favour of the better quality must intervene. Nature supplies this by establishing rigorous conditions of life to which the weaker will have to submit and will thereby be numerically restricted; but even that portion which survives cannot indiscriminately multiply, for here a new and rigorous selection takes place, according to strength and health.
If Nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such a case all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile.
History furnishes us with innumerable instances that prove this law. It shows, with a startling clarity, that whenever Aryans have mingled their blood with that of an inferior race the result has been the downfall of the people who were the standard-bearers of a higher culture. In North America, where the population is prevalently Teutonic, and where those elements intermingled with the inferior race only to a very small degree, we have a quality of mankind and a civilization which are different from those of Central and South America. In these latter countries the immigrants – who mainly belonged to the Latin races – mated with the aborigines, sometimes to a very large extent indeed. In this case we have a clear and decisive example of the effect produced by the mixture of races. But in North America the Teutonic element, which has kept its racial stock pure and did not mix it with any other racial stock, has come to dominate the American Continent and will remain master of it as long as that element does not fall a victim to the habit of adulterating its blood.
BTW, what does it say that you have to quote Mein Kampf to falsely attack creationists, while utterly misrepresenting the true Darwinist "struggle for survival" memes in it, within a couple of paragraphs of your quote?
So would you rather plead guilty to being a Nazi (YOU quoted Mein Kampf to make your case!); or simply to intellectual dishonesty (I've seen the same arguments posted by Darwin Central members here on FR, btw, but in fairness to you, I don't know where you got the quote from); or to mind-numbing carelessness in your eagerness to score cheap points (you could have Googled the quote and verified the context even as I just did, trivially)?
NO cheers, unfortunately.