Does Darwinism lead to bigotry?

[Dr. Chuckles]

The creationist claims "Hitler was a committed student of Darwin's evolution" without providing any support for such a claim, although he does 'provide' a few words from Mein Kampf about "lower human types" but then fails to show that Hitler even mentioned Darwin in the tome. Some of those named in Mein Kampf as influences on Hitler's thinking include, Martin Luther, Frederick the Great, Bismarck, Henry Ford, Lenin, Karl Marx, Napoleon, and Richard Wagner but never Charles Darwin.

Wasn't Wagner one of the figure heads for late 18th century racial anti-semitism that gained ground as the "thinking man's" bigotry during the enlightenment? From my understanding, most of that stuff was heavily inspired by new theories on genetics and evolution, misapplied, as they were

 

[Somerville]

Wasn't Wagner one of the figure heads for late 18th century racial anti-semitism that gained ground as the "thinking man's" bigotry during the enlightenment? From my understanding, most of that stuff was heavily inspired by new theories on genetics and evolution, misapplied, as they were

Nope, the new Theory of Evolution didn't inspire the racism and anti-Semitism of western Europe, rather it was used as a supposed rationale for irrational but deeply held beliefs that had been part of the culture since the days following the fall of Rome.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Nope, the new Theory of Evolution didn't inspire the racism and anti-Semitism of western Europe, rather it was used as a supposed rationale for irrational but deeply held beliefs that had been part of the culture since the days following the fall of Rome.

Yes, I understand that anti-semitism was present prior to the enlightenment (I never claimed anything to the contrary). But your remark concerned the fact that Charles Darwin wasn't named in Mein Kampf and so didn't have an influence over Hitler's thinking, even if it was misapplied. But again, from my understanding, such theories formed the backbone, correct or not, for the theories promoted by people like Richard Wagner. Who, as you point out, was named an influence in Mein Kampf.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Yes, I understand that anti-semitism was present prior to the enlightenment (I never claimed anything to the contrary). But your remark concerned the fact that Charles Darwin wasn't named in Mein Kampf and so didn't have an influence over Hitler's thinking, even if it was misapplied. But again, from my understanding, such theories formed the backbone, correct or not, for the theories promoted by people like Richard Wagner. Who, as you point out, was named an influence in Mein Kampf.

Wagner was a composer and a nationalist. He was older when Hitler was 12 (?). You're making it sound like Wagner was Huxley and there were direct causal roots from Darwin.

 

[Wayno]

Yes, I understand that anti-semitism was present prior to the enlightenment (I never claimed anything to the contrary). But your remark concerned the fact that Charles Darwin wasn't named in Mein Kampf and so didn't have an influence over Hitler's thinking, even if it was misapplied. But again, from my understanding, such theories formed the backbone, correct or not, for the theories promoted by people like Richard Wagner. Who, as you point out, was named an influence in Mein Kampf.

Hitler got his ideas from American Progressives....

Eugenics and the Nazis -- the California connection - SFGate

 

[Wayno]

Nope, the new Theory of Evolution didn't inspire the racism and anti-Semitism of western Europe, rather it was used as a supposed rationale for irrational but deeply held beliefs that had been part of the culture since the days following the fall of Rome.

Hitler got his ideas from American Progressives.

Eugenics and the Nazis -- the California connection - SFGate

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Wagner was a composer and a nationalist. He was older when Hitler was 12 (?). You're making it sound like Wagner was Huxley and there were direct causal roots from Darwin.

lol. No, I am pointing out, that from my understanding,the racial anti-semitism of the enlightenment was heavily influenced by the emerging science of genetics and evolution (which Wagner was a huge proponent of).


Am I wrong, or are people really taking offence to someone highlighting a mere fact that does nothing to speak to the validity of evolution or the work of Darwin?

 

[zgoldsmith23]

lol. No, I am pointing out, that from my understanding,the racial anti-semitism of the enlightenment was heavily influenced by the emerging science of genetics and evolution (which Wagner was a huge proponent of).


Am I wrong, or are people really taking offence to someone highlighting a mere fact that does nothing to speak to the validity of evolution or the work of Darwin?

Clarify that last sentence, please.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Clarify that last sentence, please.

Well, no one seems to be disputing the fact that Wagner was heavily influenced by the scientific innovations I mentioned above, but only taking offense to someone highlighting that relationship. Which is silly, because someone misapplying a scientific theory doesn't speak to it's actual merits.

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Well, no one seems to be disputing the fact that Wagner was heavily influenced by the scientific innovations I mentioned above, but only taking offense to someone highlighting that relationship. Which is silly, because someone misapplying a scientific theory doesn't speak to it's actual merits.

Do you have a link to Wagner connecting his anti-semitism by the Theory of Evolution? And yes, it does get old as then you get people that think it's true and try to use this as a counter-argument (such as the OP).

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Do you have a link to Wagner connecting his anti-semitism by the Theory of Evolution?

I looked briefly online and didn't see anything that was easily accessible or that seemed like what I would consider a legitimate source.

and try to use this as a counter-argument (such as the OP).

Again, the Op's argument would be stupid regardless of what Wagner based his arguments on. Because Wagner would be misapplying the actual science. It's like critiquing Quantum mechanics because the shucksters on the secret used it

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

During the 1870s, the new political antisemitism was compounded with
"racial" antisemitism. Based on the new ideas on evolution, posited by the
English naturalist Charles Darwin—who himself never meant them to leave
the realm of science—Jew haters began declaring that Jews were an inferior
"race" on the evolutionary scale. Since their problem was physical or genetic,
it could never be changed, despite assimilation. Included in this new form of
antisemitism, was the idea that Jews were responsible for the world's troubles
because of their race and genetic composition.

http://www.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft Word - 5742.pdf

here's one reference. I'm not too familiar with the material, being that I am only aware of it from studying the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict

 

[gungadin]

Is it possible to admire someone who was so blatantly racist and evil?

That's a leading question.

Charles Darwin was racist, yes. That doesn't make him evil, it simply makes him a man of his time. Many people of that era were racist, including Abraham Lincoln. Is it still possible to admire them? I do. Not for their views on race, but for their other contributions.

Pam

 

[Somerville]

Hitler got his ideas from American Progressives.

Eugenics and the Nazis -- the California connection - SFGate

Didn't read the article - did ya?

 

[Somerville]

Wasn't Wagner one of the figure heads for late 18th century racial anti-semitism that gained ground as the "thinking man's" bigotry during the enlightenment? From my understanding, most of that stuff was heavily inspired by new theories on genetics and evolution, misapplied, as they were

Wagner's anti-Semitism couldn't have been inspired by the ToE as many of his most hateful statements were made before Darwin's seminal work, On the Origin of Species was published in 1859

A fairly balanced article on the question of Wagner from a Jewish source is The Controversy Over Richard Wagner. It is a discussion of Israel's ban on Wagnerian music and how music lovers attitudes have changed over the past 75 years in Israel, with more focus on the quality of the music and less on the composer.

Some of Wagner's not so nice words about the Jewish people

"You ask me about the Judenthum [Judaism in Music]. You must know the article is by me. Why do you ask?...I felt a long-repressed hatred for this Jewry, and this hatred is as necessary to my nature as gall is to blood. An opportunity arose when their damnable scribbling annoyed me most, and so I broke forth at last. It seems to have made a tremendous impression, and that pleases me, for I really wanted only to frighten them in this manner; that they will remain our masters is as certain as that not our princes, but the bankers and Philistines, are nowadays our masters..."
Correspondence of Wagner and Liszt Vol. I p145 (18/4/1851)

In an article published in 1849 in The Wibelungen there is the following statement:

"....we still avenge Christ on the Jews of today..."

This probably refers to anti-Jewish riots that took place around Easter of 1848, during a politically tense period in Germany that aggravated tradtional anti-Jewish sentiments associated with the crucifixion of Christ. Vengeance upon the Jews for killing Jesus was the most popular excuse for such riots that often occurred around Easter, not only in Germany but in most of Europe. When he wrote the word "we", Wagner appeared to align himself with this sort of physical violence against Jews. As far as known archives show, this is Wagner's first published anti-Semitic statement.

Wagner's most famous statement of his racial prejudice is Das Judenthum in der Musik, which appeared in 1850 but received most of its fame following a re-publishing in 1869.

 

[Cyrylek]

We know that Charles Darwin was a racist, that fact is undeniable.

Darwin's doctrine of evolution depicts the "gorilla" and the "negro" occupying evolutionary positions between the "baboon" and the "civilized (Caucasian) races of man.

According to Harvard University's Stephen Jay Gould, "Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, (that is, before Darwin) but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory."

Point in case: Hitler was a committed student of Darwin's evolution. In his book Mein Kampf, Hitler spoke of "lower human types." He accused the Jews of bringing "Negroes into the Rhineland" with the purpose of "ruining the white race by the necessarily resulting bastardization."

Is it possible to admire someone who was so blatantly racist and evil?

First, it is not necessary to admire someone to admire his work.

Second, Charles Darwin was a very strange "racist" - starting from his famous quarrel with FitzRoy, the captain of Beagle.(Darwin argued that slavery is evil and ought to abolished) and ending with his analysis of behavior of black slaves in Brazil (conclusion: they are as smart as any of "Roman generals")

Now, Darwin certainly subscribed to the notion of cultural superiority of his own group - practically everyone did back then, but when he wrote about "civilized races" wiping out "savages", it does not contain approval: he just saw it coming, and shared the observation.

At the same time, he wrote, of course, that superiority or inferitority of species or races is relative, a Tasmanian aborigine being actually superior to an Englishman, in terms of adaptation to his environment (and biologically speaking, that's these are the only terms that matter).

He never had suggested that human beings have value only on the biological level.

As for the vulgar interpretations in media and by politicians - well, they've got it exactly wrong: Actual "social Darwinism" would lead to tolerance and mutual appreciation, not genocides. Adaptation is relative, future environments are unpredictible. The more diversity and cross-breeding we have in our species, the better. You never know what genes will be "superior".

Hitler, a leader of an anti-clerical party, made appeals to distorted Darwinism. Porgoms in Russia were led by people appealing to distorted Christianity. For the dead Jews, it hardly mattered if they have died for being a "vile race" or "the traitors of Christ".

 

[Wayno]

Didn't read the article - did ya?

Actually, I did...

I found especially interesting the American Progressive's funding of Dr.'s like Megele, and his experiments on humans.

 

[Wayno]

Francis Galton, an early proponent of eugenics, was Darwin’s cousin and Ernst Haeckel, a German biologist who championed evolution and maintained a long correspondence with the English naturalist, was a primary source for Nazi eugenic policies.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Wagner's anti-Semitism couldn't have been inspired by the ToE as many of his most hateful statements were made before Darwin's seminal work, On the Origin of Species was published in 1859

A fairly balanced article on the question of Wagner from a Jewish source is The Controversy Over Richard Wagner. It is a discussion of Israel's ban on Wagnerian music and how music lovers attitudes have changed over the past 75 years in Israel, with more focus on the quality of the music and less on the composer.

Some of Wagner's not so nice words about the Jewish people



In an article published in 1849 in The Wibelungen there is the following statement:

"....we still avenge Christ on the Jews of today..."

This probably refers to anti-Jewish riots that took place around Easter of 1848, during a politically tense period in Germany that aggravated tradtional anti-Jewish sentiments associated with the crucifixion of Christ. Vengeance upon the Jews for killing Jesus was the most popular excuse for such riots that often occurred around Easter, not only in Germany but in most of Europe. When he wrote the word "we", Wagner appeared to align himself with this sort of physical violence against Jews. As far as known archives show, this is Wagner's first published anti-Semitic statement.

Wagner's most famous statement of his racial prejudice is Das Judenthum in der Musik, which appeared in 1850 but received most of its fame following a re-publishing in 1869.

How does it follow that Wagner couldn't base a brand of anti semitism on evolutionary theory because he made antisemitic statement prior to 1854 and made others that could be interpreted as religious?

These are not mutually exclusive things.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Wagner's anti-Semitism couldn't have been inspired by the ToE as many of his most hateful statements were made before Darwin's seminal work, On the Origin of Species was published in 1859

actually, after doing a bit of research, it seems he did most of his publishing after the reprint of "inder Musik" (atleast according to wikipedia)

"However the fuss about the reprint was little more than a storm in a teacup. Far more important, in terms of publicising Wagner's anti-Jewish feelings, was his stream of essays and newspaper articles over the following years, up to and including that of his death in 1883, which directly or indirectly criticised Jewish individuals or the Jews as a whole. These coincided with the growth of antisemitism—in the sense of a movement to withdraw the civic rights extended to Jews during the 19th century, and particularly on the unification of Germany in 1870—as a significant force in German and Austrian politics.[17] Antisemitic leaders indeed made approaches to Wagner requesting his support; although he never offered such support officially, neither did he dissociate himself from their policies"

being a wikipedia entry, I don't have much real faith in it, but it highlights that you're making rather questionable assertions about material you seem unfamiliar with

 

[Somerville]

actually, after doing a bit of research, it seems he did most of his publishing after the reprint of "inder Musik" (atleast according to wikipedia)

"However the fuss about the reprint was little more than a storm in a teacup. Far more important, in terms of publicising Wagner's anti-Jewish feelings, was his stream of essays and newspaper articles over the following years, up to and including that of his death in 1883, which directly or indirectly criticised Jewish individuals or the Jews as a whole. These coincided with the growth of antisemitism—in the sense of a movement to withdraw the civic rights extended to Jews during the 19th century, and particularly on the unification of Germany in 1870—as a significant force in German and Austrian politics.[17] Antisemitic leaders indeed made approaches to Wagner requesting his support; although he never offered such support officially, neither did he dissociate himself from their policies"

being a wikipedia entry, I don't have much real faith in it, but it highlights that you're making rather questionable assertions about material you seem unfamiliar with

I truly do not understand what you are trying to say about my posts. shall I simplify for you.

Wagner wrote of his anti-Semitic feelings BEFORE Darwin published on the subject of evolution.

The fact that he continued to write and have published similar screeds after 1859, does not negate the fact that he first stated his beliefs BEFORE Darwin published.

"being a wikipedia entry" one should look at some of the references provided, that's what the numbers in the brackets are indicating.

 

[Somerville]

Actually, I did...

I found especially interesting the American Progressive's funding of Dr.'s like Megele, and his experiments on humans.

and just which "American Progressives" would those be? - in your estimation only - because you've already revealed your near total ignorance of the subject.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

The fact that he continued to write and have published similar screeds after 1859, does not negate the fact that he first stated his beliefs BEFORE Darwin published.

Again, this isn't mutually exclusive to Wagner adopting and promoting racial anti-semitism later in life, and I never asserted he was only anti-semitic due to the ideas of Darwin ...

"being a wikipedia entry" one should look at some of the references provided, that's what the numbers in the brackets are indicating.

Yes, I am more than aware of this. But the sourced material is a printed book, so it's rather hard to validate

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Here is one of Wagner's later writings for a reference to his views on the "scientific" theories of race

Quite apart from such an explanation, one of the cleverest men of our day has also proved this fall to have been caused by a corruption of blood, though, leaving that change of diet wholly out of sight, he has derived it solely from the crossing of races, whereby the noblest lost more than the less noble of them gained. The uncommonly circumstantial picture of this process supplied us by Count Gobineau in his "Essai sur l'inégalité des races humaines" (2) appeals to us with most terrible force of conviction. We cannot withhold our acknowledgment that the human family consists of irremediably disparate races, (3) whereof the noblest well might rule the more ignoble, yet never raise them to their level by commixture, but simply sink [276] to theirs. Indeed this one relation might suffice to explain our fall; even its cheerlessness should not blind us to it: if it is reasonable to assume that the dissolution of our earthly globe is purely a question of time, we probably shall have to accustom ourselves to the idea of the human species dying out. On the other hand there is such a matter as life beyond all time and space, and the question whether the world has a moral meaning we here will try to answer by asking ourselves if we mean to go to ground as beasts or gods.

The first point will be, to examine the special attributes of those noblest races, through whose enfeeblement they lost themselves among ignoble races. The more definitely has recent science inclined us to accept the natural descent of man's lower races from the animal species most resembling them, the harder is it to assent to a derivation of the so-called white race from those black and yellow: as to the explanation of the white tint itself our physiologists are still at variance. Whilst yellow races have viewed themselves as sprung from monkeys, the white traced back their origin to gods, and deemed themselves marked out for rulership. It has been made quite clear that we should have no History of Man at all, had there been no movements, creations and achievements of the white men; and we may fitly take world-history as the consequence of these white men mixing with the black and yellow, and bringing them in so far into history as that mixture altered them and made them less unlike the white. Incomparably fewer in individual numbers than the lower races, the ruin of the white races may be referred to their having been obliged to mix with them; whereby, as remarked already, they suffered more from the loss of their purity than the others could gain by the ennobling of their blood.

Hero-dom and Christendom


PS In case you are unaware, Gobineau is the man credited with establishing the theory on the Aryan master race

 

[Wayno]

and just which "American Progressives" would those be? - in your estimation only - because you've already revealed your near total ignorance of the subject.

LOL.......

If you don't know what the eugenics movement is, and the fact that it was AMERICAN PROGRESSIVES that were the motivating force behind it, the ignorant one would be you.....

Try and keep up.

You might begin by using the link I provided.

You can educate yourself beyond that on your own.