Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Surprisingly, a magazine provides truths about the Darwinian eugenics movement

arroba Email

In this 2016 article, the authors tell it like it happened but then the information always falls into a black hole. This got fished out again recently, however:

The eugenicists’ arrogant certainty that, because they had inherited money and power, they were genetically superior to the rest of the human race, found in Charles Darwin’s theories an ideal pretext and a program: to take the survival of the fittest and make it happen faster, by stopping the “unfit” from breeding. The goal, in Margaret Sanger’s own words, was “More Children from the Fit, Fewer from the Unfit.” Instead of seeing the poor as victims of injustice or targets for Christian charity, the materialism these elitists took from Darwin assured them that the poor were themselves the problem — that they were inferior, deficient and dangerous down to the marrow of their bones.

The targets of this campaign in America were poor people, the unemployed, non-English-speaking immigrants, but most of all African-Americans. This vulnerable population, composed largely of ex-slaves and their children, was identified in the 1880s as a “threat” to the “racial health” and progress of the United States, by followers of Francis Galton — first cousin of Charles Darwin, heir to a slave-trading fortune, and inventor of the “science” of eugenics. These people had been exploited for centuries as free labor, denied education for fear of fomenting rebellion, and excluded from most of the economy. Now the eugenicists blamed the victims, black Americans, for their desperate social conditions, claiming that they were the natural result of blacks’ “defective germ plasm,”

Jason Jones & John Zmirak, “One of Margaret Sanger’s Pals Ran a Concentration Camp That Killed Black People” at The Stream (October 14, 2016)

Maafa 21: Black Genocide gets its odd title from the Swahili word for slavery, and it is this film’s contention that the eugenics movement in America began in the panic which white racists felt at the end of slavery over what should be done to solve what some called the “Negro problem.” It’s a long, harrowing film, which you should watch in small doses — treating it as a miniseries. And keep a box of Kleenex handy, because you will weep.

One thing we see less of today, though, is fatuous claims that Darwin was a “liberator” like Lincoln. Darwin Day and Evolution Weekend just avoid all this distressing stuff. Courtier media don’t force them to acknowledge and deal with it.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

>It is not the role of science to judge the morality of how discoveries are used, that is the role of society. German society was OK with Zyklon B and its uses. We were OK with the atom bomb being used to bring a swifter end to WWII in the Pacific. At this point, I'm not sure I want my society deciding what is moral. Not sure if I trust it that much. (And of course this brings us back to the whole moral relativism discussion, which we have had here ad nauseum....) EDTA
"It is sometimes said that science has nothing to do with morality. This is wrong. Science is the search for truth, the effort to understand the world; it involves the rejection of bias, of dogma, of revelation, but not the rejection of morality."- Linus Pauling
From the time we crawled out of the caves and started inventing and theorizing, our discoveries have been misused and abused. Chemistry research produced mustard gas and nerve gassed. Biological research produced weaponized disease. None of these abuses reflect on the “truthfulness of the discovery. It is not the role of science to judge the morality of how discoveries are used, that is the role of society. Ed George
The Darwinists will ignore this, just like everything else. BobRyan

Leave a Reply