Does Darwinism Promote Racism?

That was an interesting article...well-said.

I just wish more people would try to understand that point.

If you read about the Dutch in the 1600's during the time their culture was heavily influenced by the Reformation (Christianity), they treated the Austronesian people in their colonial possession in Taiwan as equal Dutch citizens and even encouraged single Dutch men to intermarry with the Austronesian Christian women so to better learn their languages and cultures. You can see Taiwanese from a certain region in west Taiwan that obviously have Dutch ancestry.

But post-Darwin in the late 1800's, the English and remaining Dutch instituted Apartheid in South Africa.

Connection?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my TimesDaily Forum Friends,

Is Darwinism directly related to racism? Does Darwinism support eugenics and euthanasia?

Bill, why would you judge any scientist or religion by a misguided disciple? Surely you see the flaw in this argument. I could spend the rest of my life trotting out case after case of the perverted actions performed in a god's name, the christian god if you like, and many with his blessing or at his command. Say the word and I can fill volumes.

Shall we go there?

Racism was around long before Darwin's grandparents were even born.

Sorry Bill, but that's a really dumb post.

Racialism and other forms of discrimination have been defended by every form of "scholar" and apologist under the sun, from mystical nationalism of the Nazis to the eugenics movement's advocates (supposed "progressives" as well as Nazis). "Social Darwinism" is well alive in many right wing circles.

Perhaps reading George M. Frederickson's seminal and rather exhaustive study of racism, The Black Image in the White Mind is the best treatment of such varied techniques of suborning prejudice.

The equation of social Darwinism to overt racism is rather like equating Herder's nationalism to racism and the Nazizeit. That is to say, the German mystical nationalists used Herder's work to justify the "natural superiority" of a mythic "Aryan Race." Similiarly, people misread Darwin and thwart its basic premise to the same ends: namely their own perverted ones.

Black Image is one of the most important works in the intellectual historiography canon, up there with The Virgin and the Dynamo however, people only are introduced to it in graduate school, to their misfortune.

Any science or religion may be perverted to prove a cause or belief. In the New World, Spanish religious figures defined the Indians as homunculi -- a being that appears human, but is not, to justify slavery and worse. The mark of Cain was justified to subject blacks as inferior to others. Both beliefs justified in the name of religion.

Madame Blavotsky, founder of Theosophy, predicted the coming of a superior aryan race that led to the NSDAP and the horrors that unleashed upon the world. Incidentally, Helen Keller became a believer in Theosophy and Lenin used some of its tenets in his brand of Marxism.

The communist used Darwin to support the rise of the new soviet man. But, only ended up producing many more of the old Russians drunks.

The Catholic church for all it dogma is quite at home with Darwin and his theory. With the new mapping of the human genome, we know there is only about 0.1 percent difference in the difference races DNA. Rather humbling to all those goose steppers and the shaven head bunch or the black muslims or the Hindutva for that matter.

*shakes head in disbelief at Bill*


DF

Why does it offend so many when an error is found in scientific theory. Scientists are after all just men. ALL men make errors. Darwin made lots.

quote:

Originally posted by DeepFat:
*shakes head in disbelief at Bill* DF

Hi Deep,

You, the great evangelist from the church of atheism -- have nothing to say? While I disagree with several of the others; at least they had something to add.

Yet, all you have is another atheistic "cutesy.'

Oh, well, water finds it level -- even muddied water.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by miamizsun:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my TimesDaily Forum Friends,

Is Darwinism directly related to racism? Does Darwinism support eugenics and euthanasia?

Bill, why would you judge any scientist or religion by a misguided disciple? Surely you see the flaw in this argument. I could spend the rest of my life trotting out case after case of the perverted actions performed in a god's name, the christian god if you like, and many with his blessing or at his command. Say the word and I can fill volumes.

Shall we go there?

Hi Miami,

While I am happy that you see Darwin as perverted; we are not judging science by him. We are judging evolution by him -- and his very well known racists teachings and by his very well known racists friends -- specifically Margaret Sanger.

Keep in mind that Darwin is Evolution. And I do not deny that many who claimed to be Christian have done evil -- but no one Christian defines Christianity. Jesus is Christianity just as Darwin is Evolution. Jesus is not racists; never defines one by the color of his skin nor where he lives. The same cannot be said of Darwin and Sanger.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Yes to some degree it does promote religious racism.

quote:

Originally posted by Rolltideroll02:
Yes to some degree it does promote religious racism.

I know what racism is.

What is "religious racism"?

e

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
We are judging evolution by him -- and his very well know racists teachings and by his very well known racists friends -- specifically Margaret Sanger.

Keep in mind that Darwin is Evolution. And I do not deny that many who claimed to be Christian have done evil -- but no one Christian defines Christianity. Jesus is Christianity just as Darwin is Evolution. Jesus is not racists; never defines one by the color of his skin nor where he lives. The same cannot be said of Darwin and Sanger.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill,

A few points:

1.) The adjective you're looking for is "racist." "Racists" is the plural form of a noun.

2.) Darwin is not evolution. Put in another form, Darwin does not equal evolution.

3.) You suggest Christianity is not racist. But is it sexist? Sexism subjugates and thus negatively affects more than half of the population.

e

Jesus is not racists; never defines one by the color of his skin nor where he lives.

Really Bill

Matthew 15

26But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.

Humans and chimps share about 98.7 percent (originally thought to be 98.9 percent) of DNA. The miracle is that we are not hairy and swing from trees, not that chimps can't build cathedrals.

Darwin was an man who postulated a theory of evolution of all things, including man. He was also a deacon of his church. As science progressed problems with some of his ideas were found in error, but not his basic premises. New discoveries back up the idea of a progression of the species and extinction. Jefferson didn't believe in the theory of extinction, that God wouldn't allow it. He was wrong -- no mammoths in the US.

Evolution is a tool that God uses to allow free will in His universe. Nothing I write will change what either evolutionists or creationists believe. Have at it brethren! I'm letting the bears fight this one out. I'll settle for a rug.

Bill's initial post exemplifies what is called "selective" sourcing." Using the proper sequence of sources, carefully selected, one can "prove" that A=Ω. Did and do some racialists and ultranationalists misuse Herder, Darwin, and even the Bible? Yes.

Using Bill's "logic," I could produce an essay on how the Grimm Brothers led directly to the Anschluss and invasion of Poland, and then to the Manhattan Project and from thence to nuclear profliferation and from there status quo sine bellum with China which leads to the rise of WalMart.

So, Germanic linguistics leads to cheap Chinese trinkets in US stores. Mystery solved!

I have an old conference paper that I presented in 2002 in which I treat the 6 discrete modes of rearing slave children. In it, I avoid addressing the psychological ramifications of childhood slavery, as that has been treated to death, especially by Wilma King, however, I do insist that the white masters seeing white and black/bond children develop side by side with the average rate of development exactly the same in every area from walking to talking forced the "inferior racially" theory of white domination to be false before their eyes, hence they fell back on the legalistic, cultural, historical and religious apologies.

Biologically speaking, there is no such thing as "race," as a separation of species. The differences between what we term "races" is so superficial that they would not be worth mentioning were it not so obvious that it is a mere mechanism for differentiation. It is odd that we speak of the "markers" of race as beign skin color, when in reality, it is a combo of hair texture and color, skin color, eye folds or lack thereof, and "scissor shaped incisors".

There are Hopi and Navajo and other First Nations who it is hard to tell if they are Japanese or Siberian or what. We have no idea what "race" the ancient Egyptians were before Grecian and Roman contact and then Arab. Some Ethopians are extremely "caucasoid," and look very "Arab," while others are clearly from Central or Western African rootstock.

Oddly enough, the word "race" comes from the French version of the Latin "radix" which means "root." The is the same root in "race," "radical" when referring to exponents, and the roots of a plant.

What is race? It is concentrated genetics in open view in biology. In sociology and politics, it is much, much more.

What is my "race?" Family ancestry says mostly Celtic, as evidenced by my names, but my blood type is B- which is exceedingly rare except in the Mediterranean Coast in both Africa and Eurasia, yet family lore insists that my ancestors came from Cornwall, Wales, and SE England and Scotland. My hair looks like a mass of bird's nest gone awry until I hack it off in disgust. I tan like a Puerto Rican in one week of decent sun. Yet, I am White. The census and the school records and society say that I am.

Well, we call my dog Mother Maybelle a "rat terrier" for lack of a better term, loves to chase small game, but no wiry coat, shiny and longish like a spaniel, but black and white like a Jack Russell. I don't care what you call her, just call her "Good Girl" and give her a piece of pizza.

quote:

Evolution is a tool that God uses to allow free will in His universe. Nothing I write will change what either evolutionists or creationists believe. Have at it brethren! I'm letting the bears fight this one out. I'll settle for a rug.

I never thought of it like that. Good post, Howard.

quote:

Originally posted by Neal Hughes:
Bill's initial post exemplifies what is called "selective" sourcing." Using the proper sequence of sources, carefully selected, one can "prove" that A=Ω. Did and do some racialists and ultranationalists misuse Herder, Darwin, and even the Bible? Yes.

Very well said.

The original post made me think of this photo. I don't believe for a second that all Christians agree with this fellow, while he did back his arguments with biblical quotes and profess his faith in Jesus. At the same time, I don't think Bill actually believes that those who see value in Darwin's work are all racists.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my TimesDaily Forum Friends,

Is Darwinism directly related to racism? Does Darwinism support eugenics and euthanasia?

Yes, it was once believed by many that the theory of evolution supported a superior race of humans. Subsequent test confirmed those primitive people's worst nightmare: That there is no discernible difference between races from an evolutionary standpoint.

"Scientists" once believed the earth was flat and the earth was the center of the solar system.

Scientific discovery also confirmed that we all are related to a single person that lived 60 to 80 thousand years ago. Wrap your head around that, Bill.

Edit: My point being that evolutionary science has proved rather conclusively that we are all brother's and sisters. Thanks be to Darwin.