THAT WAS A CLAIM I refuted when he said the same thing five years ago. One of dozens of claims he's made over the years which I refuted absolutely only to have him pretend that I haven't. He learned a small number of false cliches in his youth and he's never going to bother to find out that none of them are true. He's a lazy ass.
In the book Elie Wiesel: Conversations By Elie Wiesel, Robert Franciosi, he said:
When we study what happened a generation ago, we cannot but think
that it was prepared by the rationalists. If Darwin, the scientist, for
example, had not reduced man to the state of an animal, maybe people
would have thought twice before killing human beings.
That's what I come up with from memory in about 45 seconds. If I had
the time to research the issue I would find others, I'm sure. Anyone
who read what the Nazi racial theorists based their ideas of biological
supremacy on would find the same short links between the British
Darwinists and the German Darwinists and the proto-Nazi eugenicists
(they were the same people in a number of instances) and the Nazi
eugenicists whose biological dogmas were the explicit basis of the
various programs of mass murder the Nazis committed. In the case of
Ernst Haeckel and several others, the links go both ways from and to ol'
St. Chuck Darwin, himself.
And acknowledging that line of transmission from Darwin to Nazism, through Darwinism, isn't something that only the survivor Elie Wiesel noted. The Darwinist Stephen Jay Gould did as well.
[Haeckel's] evolutionary racism; his call to the German people for
racial purity and unflinching devotion to a “just” state; his belief
that harsh, inexorable laws of evolution ruled human civilization and
nature alike, conferring upon favored races the right to dominate
others; the irrational mysticism that had always stood in strange
communion with his grave words about objective science—all contributed
to the rise of Nazism,
Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny
While Gould may have been loathe to admit it, he had to have known that that interpretation of natural selection was something that Darwin, himself, endorsed and cited and, so, supported in the beginning of and all through the book The Descent of Man and in virtually every letter he wrote to Haeckel and in further statements, a relationship that was noted and elaborated on by his son Francis Darwin, as I've documented here (as I recall I did that in the link I gave concerning Haeckel, here the other day).
The idiot of Teaneck is invincibly ignorant, exactly like a Trump anti-vaxxer white-collar Q-dolt. They're just invincibly ignorant concerning different things. There's a lot of that over at Duncan's. Smart people don't waste time doing that kind of stuff that many decades. On that post from Kevin Drum's blog at Mother Jones, someone proposed that he and Duncan Black have a blog fight over self-driving cars, one of the comments pointed out it wouldn't happen because it would mean Duncan would have to put an effort into blogging, something he hasn't much done for the past sixteen years. And his regulars are even bigger buffalo butts than he is. Anyone who was interested in finding out the truth and learning new things left there long ago. It is a symptom of stupidity to hang out there.
Being an idiot who has never navigated an idea in his life, he doesn't realize that the Jews weren't the ones who carried out the Holocaust, it was the Nazis who did it. The Nazis are the only possible source of information as to what their motives were in doing it. And, as I showed, exhaustively, they did. The concept of invincible ignorance, the refusal to look at evidence and reasoned analysis of it is typical of modernism, I have come to believe, especially in its pop-culture decadent phase as is typical of those with college credentials today.
No comments:
Post a Comment