Sunday, March 19, 2017

How Stupid Does a Snobby College Grad Have To Be To Tell That Lie in 2017?

Anyone who asserts that Charles Darwin and his theory,  natural selection, was not the instigator of eugenics. are either knowingly lying or too ignorant of the topic to have any idea on it that should matter.

Francis Galton, who is rightly credited as the inventor of the idea of eugenics was absolutely specific in naming his friend, colleague and cousin, Charles Darwin and his theory of natural selection as what gave him the idea of eugenics.  I've pointed that out repeatedly as well as the absolute fact that a list of just about every single figure in the history of eugenics who wrote on it in as a scientific matter made that very same attribution.  The list includes Francis Galton, Ernst Haeckel, Willhelm Schallmeyer, Alfred Ploetz, everyone of dozens of American and British eugenicists I reviewed in the past decade and virtually every German eugenicist right up through the Nazi period.  I can't remember an exception to that.  The list includes four eugenicists who had a unique authority in making that attribution of eugenics to Charles Darwin, his four sons Leonard, George, Francis and the far less voluble Horace, Darwin who all knew him even more intimately than even Francis Galton did.

The post-World War Two eugenics-free Charles Darwin is a post-war invention that no one I have ever found who knew the man claimed or who was presented in any claims about him before the eugenic crimes of the Nazis were revealed to the world.  It is, lock stock and barrel of plaster to make their phony St. Darwin with, a lie, a lie invented after the war with the intent to cover up that history and a lie to be repeated by those ignorant of that history - including all those folks at the BBC and PBS and those who wrote books in the post-war era that told that lie.

Now that virtually all of his writing, including a huge percentage of his correspondence is available for reading, online, free of charge, that lie which depended on the previous paper-based, library based means of conducting such research, that lie will, gradually, eventually, topple that statue.  Anyone who cares about legitimate research into evolution should get out of its shadow because, like it or not, it's coming down.  \

If you get upset with me for making this point, again, I'll point out that the lie is nearly ubiquitous among the college-allegedly educated class today so it is a lie that must be repeatedly contradicted if it is to be made innocuous.  Charles Murray and a number of neo-eugenicists with an ambition to effect government policy and laws regarding the distribution of resources away from the least among us to the richest among us depend on that lie which insists that British-American eugenics was innocuous and, anyway, something from the past.  No it isn't, some form or other of neo-eugenics is the common thinking of a dangerously large number of people, right now and it is embedded in the Trump budget and the aspirations of those like Paul Ryan.

Note:  A careful reader of this will note something they could point out as an inconsistency, I'm going to let that be as a test to see how well my trolls read.   I'm not expecting them to catch it.

1 comment:

  1. Hey Sparky -- you forgot to tell us not to mourn Chuck Berry because he was an SOB in his private life. You're slipping, pal.