On the part of the Second Reich in German Southwest Africa: Apparently, it was considered too awful for a general audience So John G. West, the producer, has edited it, in the hope of keeping it up:
Here’s the less awful version:
He also writes,
In my experience, scientists tend to blame racism on everyone else — politicians, preachers, the unwashed masses, pop culture. They don’t want to acknowledge the scientific community’s own culpability in spreading racist ideas.
But in our current cultural moment, it may finally be time to tell the story of Darwinian racism. I’ve removed some (but not all) of the disturbing imagery from the original film, and I’ve made it shorter. I hope it now passes YouTube’s censorship and more people will be able to see it for the first time.John G. West, “African Genocide: The Horror of Scientific Racism” at Evolution News and Science Today
Indeed. Even basic questions like, “If Darwinism is true, why is inequality wrong?” could never even be discussed. And there was always some foolishness going down about how Darwin opposed slavery, as if that was the point.
It would be best to have a reasonable discussion before Darwin is booted from Westminster Abbey by Cancel Culture’s mob, who feel that they themselves are living well above history in the Year Zero.
9 Replies to “YouTube places restriction on vid on scientific racism”
Of course they censored it
You’re showing the Darkside of the very authority that the left uses to support their claims
Such as lovely studies stating that COVID-19 was not spread by protests
Which is a fundamental lie but that’s what they pushed
Excellent video clip.
Darwin sure got one side of the equation right – the more powerful and more intelligent do ultimately take over those less fortunate. This is game theory. Whether the less fortunate are of the same or of a different race is not the primary concern.
Now we just need someone to figure out the other part of the same equation – why do we also have empathy and how is it supposed to play into the eternal human struggle for power and domination.
If there is no free will, as Darwinists claim, then things like genocide have no real meaning. If one group kills off another, they are simply doing what has been predetermined and cannot be condemned. Condemnation of any kind requires the belief that free will was involved in the actions and choices were made that are not predetermined. There can be no morality, spiritual or social, since making a moral distinction of any kind requires free will.
Here’s a nice example of official eugenics, not in the usual places or contexts:
You mean YouTube is not really dedicated to eradicating all racism? 😉 😉 😉
The trouble is, the very structure of the Darwinian story of the human race makes racism easy to contemplate. Consider two stories – irrespective of whether either is true:
1. Humans evolved from lesser animals. In the Darwinian story, someone must be the subhuman; otherwise, there is no beginning to human history.
2. Humans were specially created in the form of one single couple, conventionally called Adam and Eve, who are the ancestors of all living humans. Of course, one can still be a racist but one can’t derive it directly from the origins story. There has to be a “Yes, but later… ”
There are, doubtless, other stories out there with differing implications. But a discussion of this problem would be helpful.
News, re: #1,
Margaret Sanger took it to that point.
She intentionally targeted blacks to “abort” their babies.
She goes on and it’s sickening… she was evil and spawned the death of millions babies all over the world.
Sanger’s Racism against African Americans exposed
So sad . . . monstrous!
It would seem like we’re experiencing a more modern, quieter form of eugenics today: