Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Darwin and Killing

A internet sensation is a young woman of African descent who goes off in a class teaching Darwinism.  Although in her anger she makes no clear case, it is no secret that Darwinism is raw racism.  There are many versions of Darwinism, but later in his career,  Darwin emphasized

This is often explained away as being misunderstood, or boys will be boys, or Darwin being a creature of his times.

Charles Darwin (1871) The Descent of Man, 1st edition, pages 168 -169:

The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, from general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks often occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies—between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridae between the elephant, and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and all other mammals. But these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

Here is how the wikipedia entry tries to explain it away...

According to, this is a common creationist quote mine.  

Noncreationists find this passage racist too, but do you notice the slight of hand: the wikipedia essayist argues in essence “ignorant people find this passage objectionable.  If you do, you join the ignorant.”

When Darwin referred to "race" he meant "varieties," not human races.(For example, in Chapter 1 of On the Origin of Species, Darwin writes "the several races, for instance, of the cabbage".) In the passage "there is nothing in Darwin's words to support (and much in his life to contradict) any claim that Darwin wanted the "lower" or "savage races" to be exterminated. He was merely noting what appeared to him to be factual, based in no small part on the evidence of a European binge of imperialism and colonial conquest during his lifetime."

Wow.  In the quote of Darwin above, he is speaking of savage races, not savage cabbages.  he does mention in his list to make his case lmurs, but moved up the food chain in this quote to specifically mention man.  There is no way to argue out of the position Darwin takes above: The civilized will extermintate the savags, and the savages are blacks.

Few people acrually read Darwin, but apparently this young woman did.  She no longer cared for an education, if it is designed to inculcate that people of her race are to be exterminated.

No comments:

Post a Comment