Darwinism

The Fitter Race: Yes, It Is Possible to Say Something New About the Nazis . . .

Spread the love

As long as it’s NOT about their love for evolution. It is common to hear that the Nazis utterly lacked morality. Of course, that satisfies deep anger. But is it true? University of California professor Richard Weikart’s recent book, Hitler’s Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), offers an illuminating answer: No.

Hitler’s Ethic (a companion to his From Darwin to Hitler, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004) demonstrates that the Nazis indeed had an ethic. It flowed directly and painstakingly from evolutionary theory, as understood in Germany at the time.

I wish I had said this stuff. Come to think of it, I at least reported it here. Subscribe to Salvo, one of the few pubs worth reading these days, if you are not a gorilla somewhere.

6 Replies to “The Fitter Race: Yes, It Is Possible to Say Something New About the Nazis . . .

  1. 1
    Robert Byers says:

    come up before.
    I , YEC, agree and insist that evolutionary ideas and so rejection of previous ideas set a upper middle c;ass etc and establishment on presumptions of differences in genetic etc qualities of mankind.
    Evolution wasn’t the teacher of conclusions but a teacher of foundations from whence bigger ideas could find root. Including opposing ideas finding resistance.
    Yet nazism was simply identity exaltation within and without national boundaries of certain peoples.
    Whether Germans, Italians etc etc it mattered not.
    Without evolution there would of been no difference in motivations of the NAZI’s but perhaps a less or none acceptance of Nazi preaching to the general public.

  2. 2
    rockyr says:

    Denyse, a good comment in the Salvo. There is indeed a deep confusion and resentment by the Darwinists when it is pointed out that evolution and Darwinism was an integral part of all the evil regimes of the last century, whether Nazis or communists or they allies. This is clear to anybody who has actually tried to read or understand what any of these evil dictators and mass murderers wrote and believed. Another common thread is their atheism. In Hitler’s case it is more confusing because the atheists start pointing out all the perverted quasi-Christian nonsense or semi-sense Hitler used to propagate and popularize his ideas, but it is undeniable that at the core of his beliefs, and despite his quasi-Buddhist New Age mysticism, he was a hard-core Darwnist, the product of Nietzche’s and Heackel’s generation of German scientists and philosophers so admired by British Darwinists, be it Darwin’s bulldog T. H. Huxley, or his buddy John Tyndall, or the rest of the original British bunch that popularized Haeckel in Britain. Darwin’s ideas were hijacked by these characters, and it seems to me Darwin realized this sad fact towards the end of his life.

    Anyway, even form the strictly historical point of view, it is clear that all these evil dictators were staunch Darwinists. An interesting interview with Pat Buchanan, which summarizes his view of the history of the last 200 years or so can be viewed here. (Interview itself is 60 min.) Buchanan clearly pointed out that all these evil characters responsible for the deaths on millions were Darwinists. Buchanan correctly used the words “Darwinists” and “Barbarians” to describe these monsters, and mentioned he would like to write a book specifically dealing with this topic. I hope Buchanan writes it soon to help clarify all this confusion.

    http://video.google.com/videop.....058157682#

    P.S.

    About your Salvo comment with respect to Turks and Turkey – I hope you are kidding, or deflecting the argument. As any decent dictionary will explain, there is a very specific and significant meaning of the word, that goes to the root of the problem, even in the historical sense of the struggle between Christianity and the Turks. The Ottoman Empire was ruled by Turks, and it was not so much Islam as religion that both the Western and Eastern Christianity resented, but the fact that the Islam was hijacked and represented by the barbaric Turks, in the sense or “a cruel, rigorous, or tyrannical man; any one behaving as a barbarian or savage; one who treats his wife hardly; a bad-tempered or unmanageable man.” And it was not so much a (Bavarian) German, but rather a Prussian, who exhibited similar “qualities”, leading to the natural alliance between the “Germans” and the Turks in the WWI & WWII.

  3. 3
    O'Leary says:

    Rockyr, if I said anything contrary to Turks or Turkey, I must have been unintentionally misrepresenting my own views.

    By Turks I mean people whose passports say they are from Turkey.

    That’s all. It is all I would ever say in any case.

    My passport says I am from Canada.

    Born, raised citizen.

    Would anyone like to try contesting that? Yeah, good luck.

  4. 4
    bornagain77 says:

    Here is a trailer for a new documentary coming out this summer with Richard Weikart in it:

    What Hath Darwin Wrought?
    http://www.whathathdarwinwrought.com/

    The film also features David Berlinski, and John West
    http://www.whathathdarwinwrought.com/experts.php

  5. 5
    bornagain77 says:

    DI has a article up giving a little detail behind the documentary:

    The Dark Side of Darwinism
    http://www.discovery.org/a/14921

  6. 6
    bornagain77 says:

    O’Leary, I think you might like this:

    Is Psychology Adding Scientific Knowledge?
    http://www.creationsafaris.com.....#20100708a

Leave a Reply