There Is No Rational Argument That Separates Darwin From German Eugenics That Case Is Settled Fact

I am not going to dip into my unused research into the Darwinian nature of eugenics, including Nazi eugenics and write on that topic right now.   I wrote huge amounts of stuff about that which gave citations of everything I said.  I didn't "claim" anything, I exposed what Darwin, Galton, Haeckel, Schallmeyer, Ploetz,.... and most crucial to confirming the link of Darwinism to the strain of German eugenics from which Hitler adopted his policy of mass murder, the German scientists Fritz Lenz (a student of Alfred Ploetz), Erwin Baur and Eugen Fischer whose massive book on eugenics, full of citations of Darwin and conventional Darwinists,  Hitler was reading in prison as he was writing his book, the central work of Nazi ideology, Mein Kampf.  Literally everything held by the Nazis as biological fact is a product of a totally conventional Darwinian definition of natural selection.  The only difference is in the list of who was to die and there was considerable overlap, especially in the case of the disabled and many racial and ethnic identities.

You can read not only what Darwin, himself, said in his second major work on his theory, The Descent of Man in which he presents the early deaths of those he deemed unfit due to their economic class and, explicitly, their racial and ethnic identity as a boon for the survivors, you can read the even more explicit calls for murder in the work of Ernst Haeckel, whose Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte explicitly ranks human races in order of "fitness" and enthusiastically anticipates the extinction of the "less fit" by the "most fit."  That is a view which Charles Darwin explicitly endorsed in Descent of Man saying that if he had known his friend and esteemed colleague Haeckel was writing it he wouldn't have written The Descent of Man because he agreed with what Haeckel said.  In that book Haeckel praised Darwin, Darwinism and his natural selection as giving the "final triumph" to his depraved, amoral vision of material monism.  Darwin read the book, he cited it repeatedly with the highest praise, he knew what Haeckel advocated on the basis of natural selection, he endorsed Haeckel's views.  That alone makes the connection between Darwinism and mass murder based on their shared view of natural selection an absolute fact and there is far more than that to cement the case.

Read the things in the two indexes I linked to the other day.  Since the case is made in the words of Darwin, Galton - the inventor of eugenics, Schallmeyer - the independent "inventor" of German eugenics - Darwin's children, especially Leonard Darwin and a host of others, I'm afraid my point has to be considered as proved beyond a reasonable doubt.   It doesn't much matter if creationists found some of that before, they weren't the first to discover it, all that means is that the conventional post-war Darwin hagiographic effort has been one big lie from its start to today and it was a lie that can only be believed as long as you don't go to the effort of reading what Darwin and his inner circle, his children and virtually every conventional Darwinist up to 1940 knew he had said.

The Darwin industry is still peddling that crap*  that can only be believed by people on the basis of ignorance of what he said.  It's no surprise that it's popular with the post-literate, even such as those who are alleged to be educated.   You wonder why they don't feel ashamed of lying about it but they don't seem to much care about the truth or even in that evidence they're always claiming to be the champions of.

*  An example I would go into if I had the time is a website from a major American university I came across this weekend.  It claims there were major differences between Darwin and Haeckel, claiming that Haeckel's belief in a form of Lamarkian inheritance as its proof.  Well, the fact is that Darwin and Haeckel both believed in the inheritance of acquired traits, as both Galton and Haeckel (as well as Darwin's sons) noted on different occasions.   Whoever wrote that thing had to have either done so in complete ignorance of Darwin's claims and citations in The Descent of Man and Haeckel's highest praise for Darwin's theory in Die Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte, the book which Darwin cited with as extravagant praise, or through the intentional misrepresentation of both.   And that's hardly the only university based, clearly ideologically motivated falsification of the record I've run into.

There is both a major effort to rehabilitate Haeckel, distancing him from his own, repeated statements about the desirability of mass murder even as there is one to separate Haeckel and Darwin, something Darwin, himself, never did during his lifetime.

Update:  The usual dunces are making the usual, content free claims against what I've said here.  There isn't any way to force them to read their St. Darwin or I'd force them to read what he said, something that seems to most often happen in inverse proportion to the esteem he's held in.

I will note, yet again, that when I started doing the research that resulted in these posts, I fully believed I would find the statements in Darwin that refuted the accusation that he supported eugenics. I hadn't read ten pages of The Descent of Man and the sources he supported his views with before my entirely conventional faith in the post-war plaster St. Charles Darwin was shattered.   Every subsequent step in looking at the evidence did nothing but smash up the pieces into dust.

I can only challenge people to read the primary record instead of the huge volume of lies written on this topic after the Second World War.  The secondary, tertiary, etc. record is so corrupted with ideological lies that it is virtually useless.

Update 2:  Simps is, yet again, verifying what I said about him making an accusation of antisemitism on those frequent occasions when he's got nuthin'.   He's mostly got nuthin' and when he's got something it's something someone else said before he did.

He will not, of course, read the primary documentary record.   That's not unusual, it's my experience that the Darwin fan club will not even as they make false claims about it.   Many of them college and university faculty, some full professors.