Religions > Atheism > Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david ford" |
| Date: |
25 Oct 2005 11:03:14 AM |
| Object: |
Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
Mark Isaak wrote:
[total snip]
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA006_1.html
Claim CA006.1:
Adolf Hitler exploited the racist ideas of Darwinism to
justify genocide.
Source:
Weston-Broome, Sharon. 2001. Louisiana House
Concurrent Resolution no. 74: CIVIL RIGHTS:
Provides relative to racism and education about
racism. HLS 01-2652 ORIGINAL.
Response:
1. Hitler based his ideas not on Darwinism but on
a "divine right" philosophy:
Thus, it [the folkish philosophy] by no means
believes in an equality of races, but along with their
difference it recognizes their higher or lesser value
and feels itself obligated, through this knowledge,
to promote the victory of the better and stronger,
and demand the subordination of the inferior and
weaker in accordance with the eternal will that
dominates this universe. (Hitler 1943, 383)
When Hitler speaks of [Hitler]"God" or [Hitler]"Providence," he's
speaking of:
1) himself, or
2) the German volk/ folk/ people, or
3) the State/ government, or
4) [Hitler]"Nature"/ the world of "Nature"/ the 'natural' world/ the
universe, often referred to in _Mein Kampf_ as a 'she,' or
5) the Judeo-Christian God, which is phony talk, because Hitler
rejects the existence of the Judeo-Christian God and rejects all He
stands for.
Hitler was an adherent of atheism.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
The first edition of Mein Kampf suggests that Hitler
may once have believed in a young earth: "this
planet will, as it did thousands of years ago, move
through the ether devoid of men" (p. 65; the second
edition substitutes "millions" for "thousands," and
chapter 11 refers to "hundreds of thousands of
years" of life in another context.) Other passages
further support his creationist leanings:
Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118403178.860854.170600%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Stalin encounters the T0E in seminary: A Victory for Atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118511187.489582.241590%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
The undermining of the existence of human culture
by the destruction of its bearer seems in the eyes of
a folkish philosophy the most execrable crime.
Anyone who dares to lay hands on the highest
image of the Lord commits sacrilege against the
benevolent Creator of this miracle and contributes
to the expulsion from paradise. (Hitler 1943, 383)
and
What we must fight for is to safeguard the
existence and reproduction of our race and our
people, . . . so that our people may mature for the
fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of
the universe. (Hitler 1943, 214)
Quotes from Hitler invoking Christianity as a basis
for his actions could be multiplied ad nauseam.
2001 Abraham Foxman: Hitler was a big liar
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1128010617.235272.105530%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
For
example:
Hence today I believe that I am acting in
accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by
defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for
the work of the Lord (Hitler 1943, 65).
"[T]he task of preserving and advancing the highest
humanity, given to this earth by the benevolence of
the Almighty, seems a truly high mission (Hitler
1943, 398).
A campaign against the "godless movement" and
an appeal for Catholic support were launched
Wednesday by Chancellor Adolf Hitler's forces
(Associated Press 1933).
Of course, this does not mean that Hitler's ideas
were based on creationism any more than they
were based on evolution. Hitler's ideas were a
perversion of both religion and biology.
"Hitler's ideas were a perversion of... biology." How so?
Hitler's human breeding plan using selection + mutations
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124684179.251743.95950%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124731489.829229.220700%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
2004 Kater
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1126752603.953619.262940%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Himmler, a former chicken farmer..., was ruled by very
strong beliefs regarding the application of breeding
theories to humans-- by way of positive selection for the
"Aryans" and negative selection for their natural enemies,
the Slavs, Gypsies, and Jews.
2. Genocide and racism existed long before
Darwin. Obviously, they did not need any
contribution from Darwinism.
1859 Darwin vs. the Judeo-Christian conception of the unity of man
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120016676.023811.113660%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
In many instances,
such as the Crusades and the Spanish conquest of
Central America, religion was explicitly invoked to
justify them.
3. Evolution does not promote social Darwinism or
racism or eugenics.
Meaning of "evolution"?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-386md9F5lsv5cU1%40individual.net
Hitler's debt to American eugenicists
http://www.waragainsttheweak.com/offSiteArchive/HitlerDebtToAmerica.html
the American eugenics movement, H.G. Wells
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128523609.669113.175570%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Sanger: segregate the anti-social and feebleminded
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128629229.811428.173830%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
1933 H.J. Muller: "Hitler is said to have studied the Baur Fischer
Lenz
book [_Human Heredity_] very seriously, and to have been won over to
it"
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1127262825.691025.245670%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
2004 Richard Weikart: "physicians... were committed to a racist
eugenics ideology that the Nazis favored"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407120310.7d3f3929%40posting.google.com
References:
1. Hitler, A. 1943. Mein Kampf. Transl. R.
Manheim. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
http://www.stormfront.org/books/mein_kampf/ or
http://www.crusader.net/texts/mk/
2. Associated Press. 1933. Hitler aims blow at
'Godless' move, Lansing State Journal (Michigan),
Feb. 23, 1933. Reprinted at http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/unknown/hitler.html
Further Reading:
Toland, John. 1976. Adolf Hitler. Garden City, NY:
Doubleday.
http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/evc/argresp/hitler.faq and
http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/evc/argresp/hitler.add
Hitler embraced Darwinian natural selection
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin Hitler parallel
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128959733.118706.179680%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Haeckel re: Jesus; Fest on "Social Darwinism in Hitler's thought"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1125598958.059080.62950%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1868 Haeckel and 1941 Hitler parallel
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118920740.543349.176440%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
1868 Haeckel, 2003 Dawkins, 1997 George Williams, 1995 Dennett:
Darwinist atheists/ materialists downgrading the value of human life
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-399aluF5uql89U1%40individual.net
1871 Darwin: [CD]"the civilised races of man"-- e.g. [CD]"the
Caucasian"-- [CD]"will almost certainly exterminate and replace
throughout the world the savage races"-- e.g. [CD]"the negro or
Australian," as in Australian aborigine-- with the end result being
[CD]"man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407060404.711490be%40posting.google.com
Draft 2 of a chronology of Darwinian thought and the march to the Final
Solution
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1122434358.640904.162640%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
.
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
29 Oct 2005 09:53:11 AM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
Mike Lepore wrote:
"James"
[to David Ford]
Attempting to equate the Holocaust with evolution was
silly the first time you did it, silly this time, and it will
continue to be silly in the future.
There is just this trivial connection -- if a nut dictator has
policies to encourage blondes to have lots of babies, while
masacring the brunettes, then, sure enough, it's a biological fact
that such a process could truly increase the proportion of blondes
in the population.
That'd be survival of the blondest.
I guess this is the supposed connection between
evolution and the Holocaust, but it's a pretty damn weak point
for anyone to keep harping on, as though there were something
deeply profound there.
Oddly enough, Hitler was not very "Nordic". Except for blue
eyes, Hitler was not exactly the model of exemplarary Aryan
features. Arthur Gobineau was a dark haired man with a notably
swarthy skin.
Nor were brunettes ever destroyed for having brown hair,
though many Poles were killed for being Poles.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
02 Nov 2005 11:01:57 AM |
|
|
wbarwell wrote:
david ford wrote:
Mike Lepore wrote:
"James"
[to David Ford]
Attempting to equate the Holocaust with evolution was
silly the first time you did it, silly this time, and it will
continue to be silly in the future.
There is just this trivial connection -- if a nut dictator has
policies to encourage blondes to have lots of babies, while
masacring the brunettes, then, sure enough, it's a biological fact
that such a process could truly increase the proportion of blondes
in the population.
That'd be survival of the blondest.
I guess this is the supposed connection between
evolution and the Holocaust, but it's a pretty damn weak point
for anyone to keep harping on, as though there were something
deeply profound there.
Oddly enough, Hitler was not very "Nordic". Except for blue
eyes, Hitler was not exactly the model of exemplarary Aryan
features.
"Except for blue eyes, Hitler"
Hitler's eyes' color varied.
"Hitler was not exactly the model of exemplarary Aryan features."
Karl Marx was an antisemitic atheism-adherent who had Jewish
ancestors.
Hitler was an antisemitic atheism-adherent who thought he
had Jewish ancestors.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128621261.103530.184110%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Marx; 1800s and 1900s secular leftist individuals having Jewish
ancestors
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=1129867015.194883.157910%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
some atheism adherents' development and use of brutal terror tactics
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128703737.434501.234400%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Arthur Gobineau was a dark haired man with a notably
swarthy skin.
Nor were brunettes ever destroyed for having brown hair,
though many Poles were killed for being Poles.
2004 Kater
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1126752603.953619.262940%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Himmler, a former chicken farmer..., was ruled by very
strong beliefs regarding the application of breeding
theories to humans-- by way of positive selection for the
"Aryans" and negative selection for their natural enemies,
the Slavs, Gypsies, and Jews.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
02 Nov 2005 03:31:39 PM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
Himmler, a former chicken farmer..., was ruled by very
strong beliefs regarding the application of breeding
theories to humans-- by way of positive selection for the
"Aryans" and negative selection for their natural enemies,
the Slavs, Gypsies, and Jews.
You don't need Darwin to be a chicken farmer.
In fact, Darwin kept up a lively correspondence
with many pidgeon breeders and breeders of horse
and other animals. Animal breeders long before
Darwin knew, you kept good sports for breeding,
destroyed undesirable animals to keep them from
breeding.
Killing Jews and Gypsies and Poles in chicken farmer
style ethnic cleansing such as a chicken farme would
use in a barnyard on chickens. Its in no way Darwinian.
After all, according to Hitler, the Jews were too
smart and too successful.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: nanotools in biology |
27 Oct 2005 08:17:58 AM |
|
|
James wrote in "Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify
genocide":
david ford wrote:
James wrote:
david ford wrote:
biology exhibits the appearance of having been the product of mind/
intelligence
<snip>
Fascinating, really.
Do you grant that biology exhibits the appearance of having been the
product of mind/ intelligence?
I have seen absolutely no reason to think so.
Do you think that the nanotools Davies mentions below exhibit the
(false) appearance of having been the product of mind/ intelligence?
Do you think that the nanotools' being [Davies]"integrated in a highly
organized way" [Davies]"to form a smoothly functioning whole, like an
elaborate factory production line" exhibits the (false) appearance of
having been the product of mind/ intelligence?
Davies, Paul. 1999. _The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin
and Meaning of Life_ (New York: Simon & Schuster), 304pp. On 97-98,
two paragraphs:
These [just-described human] achievements of
microengineering are breathtaking in their implications,
but we should not lose sight of the fact that nature got
there first. The world is already full of nanomachines:
they are called living cells. Each cell is packed with
tiny structures that might have come straight from an
engineer's manual. Minuscule tweezers, scissors,
pumps, motors, levers, valves, pipes, chains, and even
vehicles abound. But of course the cell is more than just
a bag of gadgets. The various components fit together
to form a smoothly functioning whole, like an elaborate
factory production line. The miracle of life is not that it
is made of nanotools, but that these tiny diverse parts are
integrated in a highly organized way.
What is the secret of this astonishing organization?
How can stupid atoms do it? Individually, atoms can
only jostle their neighbors and bond to them if the
circumstances are right. Yet, collectively, they
accomplish ingenious marvels of construction and
control, with a fine-tuning and complexity as yet
unmatched by any human engineering. Somehow nature
discovered, on its own, how to do this. It found out how
to build the intricate machine we call the living cell,
using only the raw materials to hand, all jumbled up. It
repeats this feat every day in our own bodies, every time
a new cell is made. That is already a fantastic
accomplishment. Even more remarkable is that nature
built the first cell from scratch. How was it done?
Do you know how totally-blind-at-every-level processes could have
[Davies]"built the first cell from scratch"?
On the Origin of Life
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-39oh33F63riraU1%40individual.net
All that you've posted is
an argument from incredulity. Regardless, this is not what we were
discussing: create another thread if you must debate this.
If 'yes,' do you think that that appearance is a false/ deceptive
appearance?
But what does that have to do with what we're
actually discussing?
Nothing. It has to do with a past request of yours that I post some
certain material without merely giving URLs.
The only thing I asked is for you stop posting the same erroneous links
ad naueseum. Attempting to equate the Holocaust with evolution was
silly the first time you did it, silly this time, and it will continue
to be silly in the future.
"Attempting to equate the Holocaust with evolution"
Meaning of "evolution"?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-386md9F5lsv5cU1%40individual.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
25 Oct 2005 03:29:40 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:40:18 -0500,
James <spamblock@com.com> wrote:
This guy has posted these exact same links a dozen times over. Other
users have picked them clean and shown them to be utter garbage. Why
David insists on reposting claims so furiously absurd is completely
beyond me.
David Ford is a major advocate of the Big Lie. If you repeat the same
nonsense and garbled notions frequently enough, then at some point it will
be taken for true. It's my opinion that David doesn't himself actually
believe any of this, but rather he's trying to hone his immoral propoganda
for use elsewhere.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
25 Oct 2005 05:04:14 PM |
|
|
AC wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:40:18 -0500,
James <spamblock@com.com> wrote:
This guy has posted these exact same links a dozen times over. Other
users have picked them clean and shown them to be utter garbage. Why
David insists on reposting claims so furiously absurd is completely
beyond me.
David Ford is a major advocate of the Big Lie. If you repeat the same
nonsense and garbled notions frequently enough, then at some point it will
be taken for true. It's my opinion that David doesn't himself actually
believe any of this, but rather he's trying to hone his immoral propoganda
for use elsewhere.
Aaron, do you agree with any of the Goebbels below?
12 May 1943 Goebbels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120260213.363834.164990%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
The Fuehrer spoke very derogatorily about the arrogance
of the higher and lower clergy. The insanity of the
Christian doctrine of redemption really doesn't fit at all
into our time. Nevertheless there are learned, educated
men, occupying high positions in public life, who cling to it
with the faith of a child. It is simply incomprehensible
how anybody can consider the Christian doctrine of
redemption as a guide for the difficult life of today. The
Fuehrer cited a number of exceptionally drastic and in
part even grotesque examples. The opinionated "sky pilots"
[clergy members -df] of course know exactly how the world is
constituted. Whereas the most learned and wisest
scientists struggle for a whole lifetime to study but one of
the mysterious laws of nature, a little country priest from
Bavaria is in a position to decide this matter on the basis
of his religious knowledge. One can regard such a
disgusting performance only with disdain. A church that
does not keep step with modern scientific knowledge is
doomed. It may take quite a while, but it is bound finally
to happen. Anybody who is firmly rooted in daily life, and
who can only faintly imagine the mystic secrets of nature,
will naturally be extremely modest about the universe.
The clerics, however, who have not caught a breath of
such modesty, evidence a sovereign opinionated attitude
toward questions of the universe....
1924 or 1925 Hitler: "today these sky-pilots [i.e. members of
the clergy]... force their drivel on the world."
Hitler, Adolf. _Mein Kampf_ at
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch11.html
Only after the enslavement of subjected races did the
same fate strike beasts, and not the other way around, as
some people would like to think. For first the conquered
warrior drew the plow-and only after him the horse. Only
pacifistic fools can regard this as a sign of human
depravity, failing to realize that this development had to
take place in order to reach the point where today these
sky-pilots [i.e. members of the clergy, judging by the
Goebbels diaries' use of the phrase] could force their
drivel on the world.
The progress of humanity is like climbing an endless
ladder....
Hitler was an adherent of atheism.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
26 Oct 2005 12:24:21 PM |
|
|
Aaron, are you still reading this thread?
(I've seen only one-- just one-- post of yours in this thread.)
If so, do you consider John Wilkins a [AC]"coward" for refusing to
converse with me?
John's erroneous beliefs can't hide.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1127704575.828237.280060%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Don't make me laugh.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1127877013.477499.48130%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
August 2005 John Wilkins:
[Snip David's self-referential links and other crap.
I know arguing with this guy is like attacking a
stone with wet tissue paper, but There Are Lurkers]
Ref:
1990 Lynn Margulis
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1125116281.603256.38930%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
david ford wrote:
AC wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:40:18 -0500,
James <spamblock@com.com> wrote:
This guy has posted these exact same links a dozen times over. Other
users have picked them clean and shown them to be utter garbage. Why
David insists on reposting claims so furiously absurd is completely
beyond me.
David Ford is a major advocate of the Big Lie. If you repeat the same
nonsense and garbled notions frequently enough, then at some point it will
be taken for true. It's my opinion that David doesn't himself actually
believe any of this, but rather he's trying to hone his immoral propoganda
for use elsewhere.
Aaron, do you agree with any of the Goebbels below?
Well, do you?
12 May 1943 Goebbels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120260213.363834.164990%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
The Fuehrer spoke very derogatorily about the arrogance
of the higher and lower clergy. The insanity of the
Christian doctrine of redemption really doesn't fit at all
into our time. Nevertheless there are learned, educated
men, occupying high positions in public life, who cling to it
with the faith of a child. It is simply incomprehensible
how anybody can consider the Christian doctrine of
redemption as a guide for the difficult life of today. The
Fuehrer cited a number of exceptionally drastic and in
part even grotesque examples. The opinionated "sky pilots"
[clergy members -df] of course know exactly how the world is
constituted. Whereas the most learned and wisest
scientists struggle for a whole lifetime to study but one of
the mysterious laws of nature, a little country priest from
Bavaria is in a position to decide this matter on the basis
of his religious knowledge. One can regard such a
disgusting performance only with disdain. A church that
does not keep step with modern scientific knowledge is
doomed. It may take quite a while, but it is bound finally
to happen. Anybody who is firmly rooted in daily life, and
who can only faintly imagine the mystic secrets of nature,
will naturally be extremely modest about the universe.
The clerics, however, who have not caught a breath of
such modesty, evidence a sovereign opinionated attitude
toward questions of the universe....
1924 or 1925 Hitler: "today these sky-pilots [i.e. members of
the clergy]... force their drivel on the world."
Hitler, Adolf. _Mein Kampf_ at
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch11.html
Only after the enslavement of subjected races did the
same fate strike beasts, and not the other way around, as
some people would like to think. For first the conquered
warrior drew the plow-and only after him the horse. Only
pacifistic fools can regard this as a sign of human
depravity, failing to realize that this development had to
take place in order to reach the point where today these
sky-pilots [i.e. members of the clergy, judging by the
Goebbels diaries' use of the phrase] could force their
drivel on the world.
The progress of humanity is like climbing an endless
ladder....
Hitler was an adherent of atheism.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
From: AC <mightymartia...@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.atheism,sci.skeptic,talk.atheism
Subject: Re: Darlington on "violent discontinuity" in origin of
meiosis, sex
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 06:02:52 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <slrnc6q140.1p4.mightymartianca@alder.alberni.net>
in
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/9e34c4adb397e889?dmode=source
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 05:47:31 +0000 (UTC),
david ford <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
I like the history of science, and will not [L]"stop digging up
old, moldy references" anytime soon.
You like the history of science because you have a pathetic desire to
prop
up your world view, and because you know damn well the huge majority of
scientists in the last several decades have no argument with
evolutionary
theory, your only choice is to dig at texts so moronically out of date
that
only someone fundementally delusional or dishonest would cite them in
anything but a purely historical context.
It also explains why you are a coward who runs away from threads like a
frightened child.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartia...@hotmail.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
27 Oct 2005 03:18:15 AM |
|
|
On 2005-10-25 15:04:14 -0700, "david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> said:
Aaron, do you agree with any of the Goebbels below?
12 May 1943 Goebbels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120260213.363834.164990%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
The Fuehrer spoke
I can agree with that. Hitler did speak.
Guess that makes me an atheist Nazi.
--
GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825 --
"Genocide is used sparingly by God in only extreme circumstances." -Jim Spaza
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 12:32:55 PM |
|
|
On 25 Oct 2005 15:04:14 -0700,
david ford <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
AC wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:40:18 -0500,
James <spamblock@com.com> wrote:
This guy has posted these exact same links a dozen times over. Other
users have picked them clean and shown them to be utter garbage. Why
David insists on reposting claims so furiously absurd is completely
beyond me.
David Ford is a major advocate of the Big Lie. If you repeat the same
nonsense and garbled notions frequently enough, then at some point it will
be taken for true. It's my opinion that David doesn't himself actually
believe any of this, but rather he's trying to hone his immoral propoganda
for use elsewhere.
Aaron, do you agree with any of the Goebbels below?
12 May 1943 Goebbels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120260213.363834.164990%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
The Fuehrer spoke very derogatorily about the arrogance
of the higher and lower clergy. The insanity of the
Christian doctrine of redemption really doesn't fit at all
into our time. Nevertheless there are learned, educated
men, occupying high positions in public life, who cling to it
with the faith of a child. It is simply incomprehensible
how anybody can consider the Christian doctrine of
redemption as a guide for the difficult life of today. The
Fuehrer cited a number of exceptionally drastic and in
part even grotesque examples. The opinionated "sky pilots"
[clergy members -df] of course know exactly how the world is
constituted. Whereas the most learned and wisest
scientists struggle for a whole lifetime to study but one of
the mysterious laws of nature, a little country priest from
Bavaria is in a position to decide this matter on the basis
of his religious knowledge. One can regard such a
disgusting performance only with disdain. A church that
does not keep step with modern scientific knowledge is
doomed. It may take quite a while, but it is bound finally
to happen. Anybody who is firmly rooted in daily life, and
who can only faintly imagine the mystic secrets of nature,
will naturally be extremely modest about the universe.
The clerics, however, who have not caught a breath of
such modesty, evidence a sovereign opinionated attitude
toward questions of the universe....
1924 or 1925 Hitler: "today these sky-pilots [i.e. members of
the clergy]... force their drivel on the world."
Hitler, Adolf. _Mein Kampf_ at
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch11.html
Only after the enslavement of subjected races did the
same fate strike beasts, and not the other way around, as
some people would like to think. For first the conquered
warrior drew the plow-and only after him the horse. Only
pacifistic fools can regard this as a sign of human
depravity, failing to realize that this development had to
take place in order to reach the point where today these
sky-pilots [i.e. members of the clergy, judging by the
Goebbels diaries' use of the phrase] could force their
drivel on the world.
The progress of humanity is like climbing an endless
ladder....
Hitler was an adherent of atheism.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler wasn't an atheist, David, any more than he was a homosexual.
I tell you what, David. When you have the guts to answer my question, then
we'll talk about Hitler and Darwin:
Were there any Christians building and maintaining the gas chambers and
ovens where millions of Jews were murdered? Were there any Christians
working on the railways that transported Jews to their doom in Nazi-occupied
Europe? Were there any Christians seizing Jewish property when the Jews
were dispossed and herded into concentration camps? Were there any
Christians in the bureaucracy of the Holocaust.
Now, for all of those out there, David won't answer this question. David
will try to answer with "what's a Christian" or something else. He's too
afraid to answer the question, because he either has to invoke a fallacious
No True Scotsman Argument or admit that Christianity did not lead to the
moral action of deposing the Nazis and saving six million Jews.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 08:15:49 PM |
|
|
AC wrote:
On 25 Oct 2005 15:04:14 -0700,
david ford <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
AC wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:40:18 -0500,
James <spamblock@com.com> wrote:
This guy has posted these exact same links a dozen times over. Other
users have picked them clean and shown them to be utter garbage. Why
David insists on reposting claims so furiously absurd is completely
beyond me.
David Ford is a major advocate of the Big Lie. If you repeat the same
nonsense and garbled notions frequently enough, then at some point it will
be taken for true. It's my opinion that David doesn't himself actually
believe any of this, but rather he's trying to hone his immoral propoganda
for use elsewhere.
Aaron, do you agree with any of the Goebbels below?
12 May 1943 Goebbels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120260213.363834.164990%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
The Fuehrer spoke very derogatorily about the arrogance
of the higher and lower clergy. The insanity of the
Christian doctrine of redemption really doesn't fit at all
into our time. Nevertheless there are learned, educated
men, occupying high positions in public life, who cling to it
with the faith of a child. It is simply incomprehensible
how anybody can consider the Christian doctrine of
redemption as a guide for the difficult life of today. The
Fuehrer cited a number of exceptionally drastic and in
part even grotesque examples. The opinionated "sky pilots"
[clergy members -df] of course know exactly how the world is
constituted. Whereas the most learned and wisest
scientists struggle for a whole lifetime to study but one of
the mysterious laws of nature, a little country priest from
Bavaria is in a position to decide this matter on the basis
of his religious knowledge. One can regard such a
disgusting performance only with disdain. A church that
does not keep step with modern scientific knowledge is
doomed. It may take quite a while, but it is bound finally
to happen. Anybody who is firmly rooted in daily life, and
who can only faintly imagine the mystic secrets of nature,
will naturally be extremely modest about the universe.
The clerics, however, who have not caught a breath of
such modesty, evidence a sovereign opinionated attitude
toward questions of the universe....
1924 or 1925 Hitler: "today these sky-pilots [i.e. members of
the clergy]... force their drivel on the world."
Hitler, Adolf. _Mein Kampf_ at
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch11.html
Only after the enslavement of subjected races did the
same fate strike beasts, and not the other way around, as
some people would like to think. For first the conquered
warrior drew the plow-and only after him the horse. Only
pacifistic fools can regard this as a sign of human
depravity, failing to realize that this development had to
take place in order to reach the point where today these
sky-pilots [i.e. members of the clergy, judging by the
Goebbels diaries' use of the phrase] could force their
drivel on the world.
The progress of humanity is like climbing an endless
ladder....
Hitler was an adherent of atheism.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler wasn't an atheist, David, any more than he was a homosexual.
"Hitler wasn't an atheist"
Upon what basis/ grounds do you believe that?
I have only just begun making my case that Hitler
a) was an atheism-adherent, and
b) engaged in homosexual activity.
Lurkers may wish to review:
2002 Allen Barra review on salon.com of Machtan's _The Hidden Hitler_
http://www.salon.com/books/review/2002/01/14/machtan/
Hitler was an adherent of atheism and engaged in homosexual activity
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
I tell you what, David. When you have the guts to answer my question, then
we'll talk about Hitler and Darwin:
Were there any Christians building and maintaining the gas chambers and
ovens where millions of Jews were murdered? Were there any Christians
working on the railways that transported Jews to their doom in Nazi-occupied
Europe? Were there any Christians seizing Jewish property when the Jews
were dispossed and herded into concentration camps? Were there any
Christians in the bureaucracy of the Holocaust.
I've done very little investigation of the beliefs of German
individuals. Well, I have learned that Hitler was an adherent of
atheism.
What's the definition of [AC]"Christians"?
Do you consider members of "The German Christians' Faith Movement" to
be [AC]"Christians"?
Do you consider Krause a [AC]"Christia[n]"?
I suspect that the 3,000 German pastors faction that was pro-Hitler--
the 'German Christians' group-- had moved very, _very_ far from
orthodox Protestant Christianity-- so much so that they ought not be
regarded as 'Christians.' To illustrate, the Berlin district leader of
"The German Christians' Faith Movement," Reinhardt Krause, proposed at
a 13 November 1933 rally that the Old Testament be abandoned, and
advocated that Jesus' New Testament teachings be revised along lines
[Krause]"corresponding entirely with the demands of National
Socialism."[Shirer, 326, 328]
National Socialism was a Judeo-Christian-God-less secular religion.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
theological disputes among German Protestants
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129228612.176548.107730%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Hitler's secular religion
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120837574.592972.268980%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler opposed Christianity
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1117657689.616680.167840%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Now, for all of those out there, David won't answer this question. David
will try to answer with "what's a Christian" or something else. He's too
afraid to answer the question, because he either has to invoke a fallacious
No True Scotsman Argument or admit that Christianity did not lead to the
moral action of deposing the Nazis and saving six million Jews.
Now, for all of those out there, Aaron won't explain what the
definition of [AC]"Christians" is.
He leaves a key word in his question undefined, despite numerous
requests for the definition.
"Christianity did not lead to the moral action of deposing the Nazis
and saving six million Jews."
This statement is accurate:
'_fill in the blank with anything_ did not lead to the deposing of the
Nazis and saving six million Jews.'
Churches resisted Hitler
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128561942.412167.145530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Also in the political resistance movement did the representatives of
the Catholic Church play an important role. Here the pater of the
Jesuites Delp ought to be mentioned before all others; he
participated
in the conspiracy that led to the 20th July [1944 attempt to
assassinate Hitler -df]. Later on Delp was executed by the Gestapo.
....
By this Bonhoffer became an important figure in the preparations for
the Coup d'Etat of 20 July 1944. He was later executed. Dr. George
Bell, Bishop of Chichester, possesses information on all the details
of
their work. 1st Lt. Steltzer worked in the same direction. He held
contact with the Norwegian bishop Berggrave, who can certify as to
the
correctness of this statement.
Speaking of [AC]"saving six million Jews," President FDR, a
typically-revered Democrat President lest we forget, did essentially
_nothing_ AFAICT to allow Jews fleeing Nazi Germany find safe harbor on
American soil.
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 08:32:54 PM |
|
|
I have only just begun making my case that Hitler
a) was an atheism-adherent,
Mark Bilbo:
You might like some of these
pictures by the way:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
Thanks. I especially liked the pics captioned "Hitler leaving Church"
and "Hitler praying." It's amazing how gullible some people can be.
Especially when those gullible people _know_ they're dealing with a
politician!
2001 Abraham Foxman: Hitler was a big liar
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1128010617.235272.105530%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
The webpage stated that "the Deutsche Christen (DC) became the voice of
Nazi ideology within the Evangelical Church."
theological disputes among German Protestants; Nazi concentration camps
for Catholics and Protestants
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129228612.176548.107730%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 11:13:45 PM |
|
|
On 28 Oct 2005 18:15:49 -0700,
david ford <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
AC wrote:
On 25 Oct 2005 15:04:14 -0700,
david ford <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
AC wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:40:18 -0500,
James <spamblock@com.com> wrote:
This guy has posted these exact same links a dozen times over. Other
users have picked them clean and shown them to be utter garbage. Why
David insists on reposting claims so furiously absurd is completely
beyond me.
David Ford is a major advocate of the Big Lie. If you repeat the same
nonsense and garbled notions frequently enough, then at some point it will
be taken for true. It's my opinion that David doesn't himself actually
believe any of this, but rather he's trying to hone his immoral propoganda
for use elsewhere.
Aaron, do you agree with any of the Goebbels below?
12 May 1943 Goebbels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120260213.363834.164990%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
The Fuehrer spoke very derogatorily about the arrogance
of the higher and lower clergy. The insanity of the
Christian doctrine of redemption really doesn't fit at all
into our time. Nevertheless there are learned, educated
men, occupying high positions in public life, who cling to it
with the faith of a child. It is simply incomprehensible
how anybody can consider the Christian doctrine of
redemption as a guide for the difficult life of today. The
Fuehrer cited a number of exceptionally drastic and in
part even grotesque examples. The opinionated "sky pilots"
[clergy members -df] of course know exactly how the world is
constituted. Whereas the most learned and wisest
scientists struggle for a whole lifetime to study but one of
the mysterious laws of nature, a little country priest from
Bavaria is in a position to decide this matter on the basis
of his religious knowledge. One can regard such a
disgusting performance only with disdain. A church that
does not keep step with modern scientific knowledge is
doomed. It may take quite a while, but it is bound finally
to happen. Anybody who is firmly rooted in daily life, and
who can only faintly imagine the mystic secrets of nature,
will naturally be extremely modest about the universe.
The clerics, however, who have not caught a breath of
such modesty, evidence a sovereign opinionated attitude
toward questions of the universe....
1924 or 1925 Hitler: "today these sky-pilots [i.e. members of
the clergy]... force their drivel on the world."
Hitler, Adolf. _Mein Kampf_ at
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch11.html
Only after the enslavement of subjected races did the
same fate strike beasts, and not the other way around, as
some people would like to think. For first the conquered
warrior drew the plow-and only after him the horse. Only
pacifistic fools can regard this as a sign of human
depravity, failing to realize that this development had to
take place in order to reach the point where today these
sky-pilots [i.e. members of the clergy, judging by the
Goebbels diaries' use of the phrase] could force their
drivel on the world.
The progress of humanity is like climbing an endless
ladder....
Hitler was an adherent of atheism.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler wasn't an atheist, David, any more than he was a homosexual.
"Hitler wasn't an atheist"
Upon what basis/ grounds do you believe that?
I have only just begun making my case that Hitler
a) was an atheism-adherent, and
b) engaged in homosexual activity.
Lurkers may wish to review:
2002 Allen Barra review on salon.com of Machtan's _The Hidden Hitler_
http://www.salon.com/books/review/2002/01/14/machtan/
Hitler was an adherent of atheism and engaged in homosexual activity
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129143372.689763.127020%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128308336.450775.177530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Anybody can find something that agrees with their preconceptions David. The
question we all have to ask is why no mainstream historian thinks Hitler was
gay or an atheist.
I tell you what, David. When you have the guts to answer my question, then
we'll talk about Hitler and Darwin:
Were there any Christians building and maintaining the gas chambers and
ovens where millions of Jews were murdered? Were there any Christians
working on the railways that transported Jews to their doom in Nazi-occupied
Europe? Were there any Christians seizing Jewish property when the Jews
were dispossed and herded into concentration camps? Were there any
Christians in the bureaucracy of the Holocaust.
I've done very little investigation of the beliefs of German
individuals. Well, I have learned that Hitler was an adherent of
atheism.
What's the definition of [AC]"Christians"?
Do you consider members of "The German Christians' Faith Movement" to
be [AC]"Christians"?
Do you consider Krause a [AC]"Christia[n]"?
Weaseling out again David. Why don't you tell me what you're definition of
a Christian is David.
I suspect that the 3,000 German pastors faction that was pro-Hitler--
the 'German Christians' group-- had moved very, _very_ far from
orthodox Protestant Christianity-- so much so that they ought not be
regarded as 'Christians.' To illustrate, the Berlin district leader of
"The German Christians' Faith Movement," Reinhardt Krause, proposed at
a 13 November 1933 rally that the Old Testament be abandoned, and
advocated that Jesus' New Testament teachings be revised along lines
[Krause]"corresponding entirely with the demands of National
Socialism."[Shirer, 326, 328]
Ah yes, let us distance nasty Christians from nice mainstream Christians of
today.
National Socialism was a Judeo-Christian-God-less secular religion.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
theological disputes among German Protestants
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129228612.176548.107730%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Hitler's secular religion
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120837574.592972.268980%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler opposed Christianity
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1117657689.616680.167840%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Now, for all of those out there, David won't answer this question. David
will try to answer with "what's a Christian" or something else. He's too
afraid to answer the question, because he either has to invoke a fallacious
No True Scotsman Argument or admit that Christianity did not lead to the
moral action of deposing the Nazis and saving six million Jews.
Now, for all of those out there, Aaron won't explain what the
definition of [AC]"Christians" is.
He leaves a key word in his question undefined, despite numerous
requests for the definition.
"Christianity did not lead to the moral action of deposing the Nazis
and saving six million Jews."
This statement is accurate:
'_fill in the blank with anything_ did not lead to the deposing of the
Nazis and saving six million Jews.'
Christianity had been murdering Jews for centuries. Even the great founding
Protestant Martin Luther was a vicious anti-Semite.
Churches resisted Hitler
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128561942.412167.145530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Also in the political resistance movement did the representatives of
the Catholic Church play an important role. Here the pater of the
Jesuites Delp ought to be mentioned before all others; he
participated
in the conspiracy that led to the 20th July [1944 attempt to
assassinate Hitler -df]. Later on Delp was executed by the Gestapo.
....
By this Bonhoffer became an important figure in the preparations for
the Coup d'Etat of 20 July 1944. He was later executed. Dr. George
Bell, Bishop of Chichester, possesses information on all the details
of
their work. 1st Lt. Steltzer worked in the same direction. He held
contact with the Norwegian bishop Berggrave, who can certify as to
the
correctness of this statement.
Speaking of [AC]"saving six million Jews," President FDR, a
typically-revered Democrat President lest we forget, did essentially
_nothing_ AFAICT to allow Jews fleeing Nazi Germany find safe harbor on
American soil.
And so what? I'm not defending FDR's actions eithe.r
My question is clear and yet you still run away from it.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 08:35:35 PM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
[...]
Are you going to blow your brains out in an underground bunker,
Christian fascist degenerate, David Ford?
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/1550ac41adac823d
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Forrest" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 12:46:33 PM |
|
|
AC wrote:<snipped>
I tell you what, David. When you have the guts to answer my question, then
we'll talk about Hitler and Darwin:
Were there any Christians building and maintaining the gas chambers and
ovens where millions of Jews were murdered? Were there any Christians
working on the railways that transported Jews to their doom in Nazi-occupied
Europe? Were there any Christians seizing Jewish property when the Jews
were dispossed and herded into concentration camps? Were there any
Christians in the bureaucracy of the Holocaust.
Now, for all of those out there, David won't answer this question. David
will try to answer with "what's a Christian" or something else. He's too
afraid to answer the question, because he either has to invoke a fallacious
No True Scotsman Argument or admit that Christianity did not lead to the
moral action of deposing the Nazis and saving six million Jews.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
There was an interesting titbit from an orbituary of Simon Wiesenthal
which I read recently. At one time he was rounded up with a group of
other Jews in a town in Poland. An SS officer made them kneel, and went
down the line, shooting them in the head one by one. Then the bells of
a local church rang, and the office and his troop went off to pray.
Wiesenthal used the opportuntity to escape.
I guess that SS officer thought that he was a Christian.
RF
.
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 01:33:56 PM |
|
|
On 28 Oct 2005 10:46:33 -0700,
Richard Forrest <richard@plesiosaur.com> wrote:
AC wrote:<snipped>
I tell you what, David. When you have the guts to answer my question, then
we'll talk about Hitler and Darwin:
Were there any Christians building and maintaining the gas chambers and
ovens where millions of Jews were murdered? Were there any Christians
working on the railways that transported Jews to their doom in Nazi-occupied
Europe? Were there any Christians seizing Jewish property when the Jews
were dispossed and herded into concentration camps? Were there any
Christians in the bureaucracy of the Holocaust.
Now, for all of those out there, David won't answer this question. David
will try to answer with "what's a Christian" or something else. He's too
afraid to answer the question, because he either has to invoke a fallacious
No True Scotsman Argument or admit that Christianity did not lead to the
moral action of deposing the Nazis and saving six million Jews.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
There was an interesting titbit from an orbituary of Simon Wiesenthal
which I read recently. At one time he was rounded up with a group of
other Jews in a town in Poland. An SS officer made them kneel, and went
down the line, shooting them in the head one by one. Then the bells of
a local church rang, and the office and his troop went off to pray.
Wiesenthal used the opportuntity to escape.
I guess that SS officer thought that he was a Christian.
I already conceded to David for the purposes of my question the idea that
Hitler wasn't a Christian. In fact, I'm willing to let him get away with
the idea that maybe none of those high-ranking or infamous Nazis we all know
about were Christians. I'm not interested so much in the architects of the
Holocaust than in the foot soldiers of the Holocaust, and even in those who
benefited from it (those that got Jewish property).
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
28 Oct 2005 01:06:57 PM |
|
|
On 28 Oct 2005 10:46:33 -0700, "Richard Forrest"
<richard@plesiosaur.com> wrote:
AC wrote:<snipped>
I tell you what, David. When you have the guts to answer my question, then
we'll talk about Hitler and Darwin:
Were there any Christians building and maintaining the gas chambers and
ovens where millions of Jews were murdered? Were there any Christians
working on the railways that transported Jews to their doom in Nazi-occupied
Europe? Were there any Christians seizing Jewish property when the Jews
were dispossed and herded into concentration camps? Were there any
Christians in the bureaucracy of the Holocaust.
Now, for all of those out there, David won't answer this question. David
will try to answer with "what's a Christian" or something else. He's too
afraid to answer the question, because he either has to invoke a fallacious
No True Scotsman Argument or admit that Christianity did not lead to the
moral action of deposing the Nazis and saving six million Jews.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
There was an interesting titbit from an orbituary of Simon Wiesenthal
which I read recently. At one time he was rounded up with a group of
other Jews in a town in Poland. An SS officer made them kneel, and went
down the line, shooting them in the head one by one. Then the bells of
a local church rang, and the office and his troop went off to pray.
Wiesenthal used the opportuntity to escape.
I guess that SS officer thought that he was a Christian.
They're just as bigoted but don't go as far. Because they're members
of a Borg-like collective, Christian group-think takes over: because
they don't go this far anybody who does can't be a Christian.
In reality they're all individuals with their own threshold of how far
they'd go. But they all do things which by their own criteria make
themselves "not real Christians".
Including using the "not real Christians" dishonesty.
RF
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
25 Oct 2005 01:39:24 PM |
|
|
Evidence to back up the claim: zero. Par for the course for Ford.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Lepore" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
26 Oct 2005 01:20:21 AM |
|
|
"John Baker" wrote:
Evidence to back up the claim: zero. Par for the course for Ford.
True, but it's also important to realize that, even if he were right in his
claim that Hitler did his deeds in the name of Darwin, it would still be
no reflection whatsoever on Darwin. Whatever later people do supposedly
"in the name of" someone of an earlier generation has no relevance
in evaluating the thinker of the earlier generation. Ironically, Christians
should
be among the first to realize this, since they know intimately of the
Inquisiiton
and the witch hunts that were conducted in the name of Jesus. I'm a
socialist who realizes this principle well, since the vast evil done by
the murderous Stalin and Mao and some others is no reflection at all on
the compassionate humanism of Marx and Engels. To understand things
clearly, we must disregard what may be called, and contrast what they
are said to be with what they genuinely are.
A prairie dog is not a kind of dog. Bluegreen algae is not a type of algae.
Electromotive force is not a force.
.... and tyrants and despots, and their ideologies, almost never correspond
to their self-descriptions.
Mike Lepore email lepore delete the 5 at bestweb dot net
http://www.deleonism.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
26 Oct 2005 03:42:13 AM |
|
|
Mike Lepore wrote:
"John Baker" wrote:
Evidence to back up the claim: zero. Par for the course for Ford.
True, but it's also important to realize that, even if he were right
in his claim that Hitler did his deeds in the name of Darwin, it
would still be no reflection whatsoever on Darwin. Whatever later
people do supposedly "in the name of" someone of an earlier
generation has no relevance
in evaluating the thinker of the earlier generation. Ironically,
Christians should
be among the first to realize this, since they know intimately of
the Inquisiiton
and the witch hunts that were conducted in the name of Jesus. I'm a
socialist who realizes this principle well, since the vast evil done
by the murderous Stalin and Mao and some others is no reflection at
all on the compassionate humanism of Marx and Engels. To understand
things clearly, we must disregard what may be called, and contrast
what they are said to be with what they genuinely are.
A prairie dog is not a kind of dog. Bluegreen algae is not a type of
algae. Electromotive force is not a force.
... and tyrants and despots, and their ideologies, almost never
correspond to their self-descriptions.
Mike Lepore email lepore delete the 5 at bestweb dot net
http://www.deleonism.org/
Basically Ford is a smear artist.
The ethnic cleansing of Hitler was based on racism
of people like Gobineau. Later German racists
took that further and decided if Aryan Germans were
a superior race, then it was logical to remove inferior
races.
All of Hitler's racist ideas were written down 40 - 30 years
before Mein Kampf. Lagarde, Wollman, and other racist
popularizers. They wrote books, many of which Hitler owned,
and published journals and magazines. Hitler cribbed his rhetoric
from these racists, his polemics.
He did not invent it. He exploited it, others sowed Germany,
he just reaped the crop.
It had nothing to do with Darwin, and everything to do
with this deep and hateful stream of racial theories of German
Aryan superiorty, pure blood, and lebenstraum.
Nothing Hitler wrote, said or did was not laid out 30 years before
Mein Kampf, and it most certainly did not come from Darwin.
When Hitler planned his attack on Russia, Poland, the Ukraine,
he was only implementing plans 30 years old, the claim Slavs
were inferior races infesting land superior Aryans deserved.
Ford plays on the general lack of knowledge of such thing, the real
source of German racism and the holocaust.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
26 Oct 2005 10:07:44 AM |
|
|
wbarwell wrote:
Basically Ford is a smear artist.
Oooh, an "artist."
The ethnic cleansing of Hitler was based on racism
of people like Gobineau.
Count Gobineau wrote the 1854 _Essay on the Inequality of Races_ which
you erroneously claimed [w]"filled Germam heads with dreams of Aryan
racial superiority." Barzun notes that the book [Barzun on 104]"sought
to explain the decline of civilizations and denied the possibility of
turning back the current of history by breeding a few blonds." Also,
Gobineau [Barzun]"thought Germany non-Aryan."
You have written, [w]"The real racism of teh Nazis came from the racist
writings of people like Count Gobineau, who wrote a decade before
Darwin and filled Germam heads with dreams of Aryan racial
superiority."
Darwin wasn't nearly as original a 'thinker' as he would like you to
believe he was.
Barzun, Jacques. 1941. _Darwin, Marx, Wagner: Critique of a Heritage_
(Boston: Little, Brown and Company), 420pp., 47, 49, 51, 59, 61, 70,
87-92.
1987 Hsu
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3a18k3F66sgjpU1%40individual.net
Van Valen denies that Darwin espoused social
Darwinism. I disagree, but I shall not quibble over
the issue. The fact remains that Darwinism has a
social origin. As a recent student of Darwinism has
pointed out, "the extrapolation from Darwinism to
either humanity or society are not separable from
Darwin's own views, nor are they chronologically
subsequent. They are integral" (Young, 1985).
Darwin did not fool all of his contemporaries. I cite
Frederick Engels in my Reply to Schoch's Comment
(above) that the whole Darwinist teaching of the
struggle for existence is but a "conjurer's trick."
Arguments on the basis of the social philosophy of
his time were the basis for Darwin's interpretation of
the history of life, and his theory was then
transferred back to provide the scientific basis in
support of social Darwinism as the eternal law of
human society. "The puerility of this procedure is so
obvious," Engels wrote in 1875, "that not a word
need be said about it."
I wish Engels had dwelt more on the "puerility of this
procedure," so as to show the true color of "the
argument of noise and sneers with which
(Darwinists) tried to put down... everyone... who did
not subscribe to the infallibility of the God Darwin
and his prophet Huxley," as Tristram said in 1860.
Darwin has made mistakes, and his mistakes have
brought misery to humanity. Facing the bias and
obstinacy of Darwinists, I feel almost tempted to join
my colleague, Paul Feyerabend (1975, p. 7), who
proposed to lead "three cheers to the
fundamentalists in California who succeeded in
having a dogmatic formulation of the theory of
evolution removed from the textbooks and an
account of Genesis included."
Later German racists
took that further and decided if Aryan Germans were
a superior race, then it was logical to remove inferior
races.
All of Hitler's racist ideas were written down 40 - 30 years
before Mein Kampf. Lagarde, Wollman, and other racist
popularizers.
Do you include Haeckel among these "racist popularizers"?
Haeckel re: Jesus; Fest on "Social Darwinism in Hitler's thought"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1125598958.059080.62950%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Haeckel and Buchner and a Darwinian a-moral climate
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118315214.069039.280490%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
They wrote books, many of which Hitler owned,
and published journals and magazines. Hitler cribbed his rhetoric
from these racists, his polemics.
He did not invent it. He exploited it, others sowed Germany,
he just reaped the crop.
It had nothing to do with Darwin, and everything to do
with this deep and hateful stream of racial theories of German
Aryan superiorty, pure blood, and lebenstraum.
Do you think there is a [Darwin]"Preservation of Favoured Races in the
Struggle for Life"?
Nothing Hitler wrote, said or did was not laid out 30 years before
Mein Kampf, and it most certainly did not come from Darwin.
Do you agree with this Proctor?:
Proctor, Robert N. 1988. _Racial Hygiene: Medicine under the Nazis_
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), 414pp. On 13-14, material
opening the section "From Social Darwinism to Racial Hygiene":
The publication of Charles Darwin's _Origin of Species_
[_by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of
Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life_] in 1859
represents a watershed in the history of biological
determinism in general and scientific racism in particular.
Prior to Darwin, it was difficult to argue against the
Judeo-Christian conception of the unity of man, based on
the single creation of Adam and Eve. Darwin's theory
suggested that humans had evolved over hundreds of
thousands, even millions of years, and that the races of
men had diverged while adapting to the particularities of
local conditions. The impact of Darwin's theory was
enormous. Scholars in both Europe and America, excited
by the prospect of founding a science of man on
biological principles, began to apply the principle of
natural selection to the science and ethics of human
society. Opinions differed widely, however, over just
how Darwin's theory was to be applied.
When Hitler planned his attack on Russia, Poland, the Ukraine,
he was only implementing plans 30 years old, the claim Slavs
were inferior races infesting land superior Aryans deserved.
2004 Kater
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1126752603.953619.262940%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Himmler, a former chicken farmer..., was ruled by very
strong beliefs regarding the application of breeding
theories to humans-- by way of positive selection for the
"Aryans" and negative selection for their natural enemies,
the Slavs, Gypsies, and Jews.
"When Hitler planned his attack on Russia"
1866 Rolle and 1941 Hitler parallel
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118762703.384545.317610%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Ford plays on the general lack of knowledge of such thing, the real
source of German racism and the holocaust.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "James" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
26 Oct 2005 01:46:22 AM |
|
|
Mike Lepore wrote:
"John Baker" wrote:
Evidence to back up the claim: zero. Par for the course for Ford.
True, but it's also important to realize that, even if he were right in his
claim that Hitler did his deeds in the name of Darwin, it would still be
no reflection whatsoever on Darwin.
Yes, that's an important distinction to make. Regardless of the
premise, guilt by association won't provide a reliable conclusion. As
David knows perfectly well, since this (on top of the other glaring
errors he has made) has also been pointed out to him on several occasions.
Whatever later people do supposedly
"in the name of" someone of an earlier generation has no relevance
in evaluating the thinker of the earlier generation. Ironically, Christians
should
be among the first to realize this, since they know intimately of the
Inquisiiton
and the witch hunts that were conducted in the name of Jesus. I'm a
socialist who realizes this principle well, since the vast evil done by
the murderous Stalin and Mao and some others is no reflection at all on
the compassionate humanism of Marx and Engels. To understand things
clearly, we must disregard what may be called, and contrast what they
are said to be with what they genuinely are.
A prairie dog is not a kind of dog. Bluegreen algae is not a type of algae.
Electromotive force is not a force.
... and tyrants and despots, and their ideologies, almost never correspond
to their self-descriptions.
Mike Lepore email lepore delete the 5 at bestweb dot net
http://www.deleonism.org/
--
James B
aa #944
"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
-David Hume
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
26 Oct 2005 11:04:19 AM |
|
|
James wrote:
Mike Lepore wrote:
"John Baker" wrote:
Evidence to back up the claim: zero. Par for the course for Ford.
True, but it's also important to realize that, even if he were right in his
claim that Hitler did his deeds in the name of Darwin, it would still be
no reflection whatsoever on Darwin.
Yes, that's an important distinction to make. Regardless of the
premise, guilt by association won't provide a reliable conclusion. As
David knows perfectly well, since this (on top of the other glaring
errors he has made) has also been pointed out to him on several occasions.
"glaring errors he [df] has made"
Examples?
Whatever later people do supposedly
"in the name of" someone of an earlier generation has no relevance
in evaluating the thinker of the earlier generation. Ironically, Christians
should
be among the first to realize this, since they know intimately of the
Inquisiiton
and the witch hunts that were conducted in the name of Jesus. I'm a
socialist who realizes this principle well, since the vast evil done by
the murderous Stalin and Mao and some others is no reflection at all on
the compassionate humanism of Marx and Engels. To understand things
clearly, we must disregard what may be called, and contrast what they
are said to be with what they genuinely are.
A prairie dog is not a kind of dog. Bluegreen algae is not a type of algae.
Electromotive force is not a force.
... and tyrants and despots, and their ideologies, almost never correspond
to their self-descriptions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "James" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
26 Oct 2005 11:58:33 PM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
James wrote:
Mike Lepore wrote:
"John Baker" wrote:
Evidence to back up the claim: zero. Par for the course for Ford.
True, but it's also important to realize that, even if he were right in his
claim that Hitler did his deeds in the name of Darwin, it would still be
no reflection whatsoever on Darwin.
Yes, that's an important distinction to make. Regardless of the
premise, guilt by association won't provide a reliable conclusion. As
David knows perfectly well, since this (on top of the other glaring
errors he has made) has also been pointed out to him on several occasions.
"glaring errors he [df] has made"
Examples?
<snip>
First post in, actually. You claim that Hitler was an "adherent of
atheism," yet quotes from Mein Kampf prove otherwise. You claim that
Hitler's "encounter with the TOE as a child" was a "victory for
atheism," yet Hitler was not an atheist, nor is the TOE involved in any
way with atheism. You claim the same for Stalin, with are shown to be
false in a similar manner. And even though you *are* utterly incorrect
in your arguments, you nevertheless manage to take a flawed premise to
an even more flawed conclusion: namely, that by associating a scientific
theory with something distasteful, it somehow makes the discipline less
valid.
Look, I have no interest in picking apart each of your links again.
I've done some of them before, and I'm not willing to sift through old
posts to rehash what you've already been told. Your ignorance has
become something you willfully pursue, and there's absolutely nothing
anyone can do for you afterwards.
--
James B
aa #944
"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
-David Hume
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Claim: Hitler exploited racist Darwinism to justify genocide |
27 Oct 2005 02:15:57 PM |
|
|
James wrote:
david ford wrote:
James wrote:
Mike Lepore wrote:
"John Baker" wrote:
Evidence to back up the claim: zero. Par for the course for Ford.
True, but it's also important to realize that, even if he were right in his
claim that Hitler did his deeds in the name of Darwin, it would still be
no reflection whatsoever on Darwin.
Yes, that's an important distinction to make. Regardless of the
premise, guilt by association won't provide a reliable conclusion. As
David knows perfectly well, since this (on top of the other glaring
errors he has made) has also been pointed out to him on several occasions.
"glaring errors he [df] has made"
Examples?
<snip>
First post in, actually. You claim that Hitler was an "adherent of
atheism," yet quotes from Mein Kampf prove otherwise.
2 examples, please, of "quotes from Mein Kampf [that] prove otherwise."
2001 Abraham Foxman: Hitler was a big liar
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1128010617.235272.105530%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
One who turns to _Mein Kampf_ in the hope of
learning the truth about Hitler's personal
development and rise to power will be disappointed--
or, worse, misled. Historians have recognized that
the lengthy autobiographical sections of this book
are more than the common and generally innocuous
attempts of a writer to portray himself favorably;
they must be construed, rather, as pieces of
propaganda, actively omitting, fabricating, and
twisting historical fact to achieve a desired effect.
....
At best, then, _Mein Kampf_ is unreliable as a
source of historical data, though useful, perhaps, to
professional historians who have the ability to detect
its lies, omissions, and half-truths.
The majority of _Mein Kampf_, of course, is taken
up not with historical narration but with Hitler's
ideological discourses. Perhaps, then, the value of
the book lies in its explication of Hitler's ideas?
Perhaps. Here too, however, we must be handle it
with caution, lest its presentation mislead the reader.
Written relatively early in Hitler's political career,
_Mein Kampf_ avoids points that might alienate
potential supporters; its silence on the subject of
Christianity, given Hitler's documented antagonism
toward that religion, is the most noteworthy
example.
You claim that
Hitler's "encounter with the TOE as a child" was a "victory for
atheism," yet Hitler was not an atheist, nor is the TOE involved in any
way with atheism.
Do you agree with Dawkins that [Dawkins]"Darwin made it possible to be
an intellectually fulfilled atheist"?
Dawkins in _The Blind Watchmaker_ (1987), 6:
An atheist before Darwin could have said... 'I have no
explanation for complex biological design. All know is
that God isn't a good explanation, so we must wait and
hope that somebody comes up with a better one.' I can't
help feeling that such a position, though logically sound,
would have left one feeling pretty unsatisfied, and that
although atheism might have been _logically_ tenable
before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an
intellectually fulfilled atheist.
Do you agree with Dawkins that [Dawkins]"the whole _point_ of the
theory of evolution by natural selection was that it provided a
_non_-miraculous account of the existence of complex adaptations"?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
[Richard Crawford]"it really opened my eyes to how scientists
can bring their own doctrines and agendas to science"
Did the scientist Dawkins [RC]"bring" his [RC]"own doctrines
and agendas to science" when writing this?:
Dawkins, Richard. 1987. _The Blind Watchmaker: Why the
evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design_ (NY:
W.W. Norton & Company), 332+pp. On 248-249, 3 paragraphs
with all ellipses being Dawkins's:
The Duke of Argyll, for instance, accepted the evidence
that evolution had happened, but he wanted to smuggle
divine creation in by the back door. He wasn't alone.
Instead of a single, once and for all creation in the Garden
of Eden, many Victorians thought that the deity had
intervened repeatedly, at crucial points in evolution.
Complex organs like eyes, instead of evolving from
simpler ones by slow degrees as Darwin had it, were
thought to have sprung into existence in a single instant.
Such people rightly perceived that such instant 'evolution',
if it occurred, would imply supernatural intervention: that
is what they believed in. The reasons are the statistical
ones I have discussed in connection with hurricanes and
Boeing 747s. 747 saltationism is, indeed, just a
watered-down form of creationism. Putting it the other
way around, divine creation is the ultimate in saltation. It
is the ultimate leap from inanimate clay to fully formed
man. Darwin perceived this too. He wrote in a letter to Sir
Charles Lyell, the leading geologist of his day:
If I were convinced that I required such additions to
the theory of natural selection, I would reject it as
rubbish ... I would give nothing for the theory of
Natural selection, if it requires miraculous additions at
any one stage of descent.
This is no petty matter. In Darwin's view, the whole
_point_ of the theory of evolution by natural selection was
that it provided a _non_-miraculous account of the
existence of complex adaptations. For what it is worth, it is
also the whole point of this book. For Darwin, any
evolution that had to be helped over the jumps by God was
not evolution at all. It made a nonsense of the central point
of evolution. In the light of this, it is easy to see why
Darwin constantly reiterated the _gradualness_ of
evolution. It is easy to see why he wrote that sentence
quoted in Chapter 4:
If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ
existed, which could not possibly have been formed
by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my
theory would absolutely break down.
There is another way of looking at the fundamental
importance of gradualness for Darwin. His
contemporaries, like many people still today, had a hard
time believing that the human body and other such
complex entities could conceivably have come into being
through evolutionary means. If you think of the
single-celled _Amoeba_ as our remote ancestor-- as, until
quite recently, it was fashionable to do-- many people
found it hard in their minds to bridge the gap between
_Amoeba_ and man. They found it inconceivable that
from such simple beginnings something so complex could
emerge. Darwin appealed to the idea of a gradual series of
small steps as a means of overcoming this kind of
incredulity. You may find it hard to imagine an _Amoeba_
turning into a man, the argument runs; but you do not find
it hard to imagine an _Amoeba_ turning into a slightly
different kind of _Amoeba_. From this it is not hard to
imagine it turning into a slightly different kind of slightly
different kind of . . . , and so on. As we saw in Chapter 3,
this argument overcomes our incredulity only if we stress
that there was an extremely large number of steps along the
way, and only if each step is very tiny. Darwin was
constantly battling against this source of incredulity, and he
| | | | | | |