Why not just admit that Darwin rejected eugenic ideas, and his later followers demonstrated that they were scientifically unsound? The Nazis followed Luther, not Darwin.
The guy was explicit about his source for his injection of a ‘cause’ into the evolutionary framework that had already existed through the works of Smith and Steno,and it does lead to the gas chambers of Auschwitz and national slavery.
Even a brief summary of the trajectory of Malthus through Darwin to the Nazis is fairly straightforward and a reader who does not come away with a direct observation of why Darwin’s injection of ‘cause’ is unscientific then I do not think any other documents brought forward could highlight it more. -
Here is Darwin’s ‘eureka’ moment -
“One day something brought to my recollection Malthus’s “Principles of Population,” which I had read about twelve years before. I thought of his clear exposition of “the positive checks to increase”—disease, accidents, war, and famine—which keep down the population of savage races to so much lower an average than that of civilized peoples. It then occurred to me that these causes or their equivalents are continually acting in the case of animals also… because in every generation the inferior would inevitably be killed off and the
superior would remain—that is, the fittest would survive.… The more I thought over it the more I became convinced that I had at length found the long-sought-for law of nature that solved the problem of the origin of species.” Charles Darwin
Here is his nationalistic supremacy source -
“Till at length the whole territory, from the confines of China to the shores of the Baltic, was peopled by a various race of Barbarians, brave, robust, and enterprising, inured to hardship, and delighting in war. Some tribes maintained their independence. Others ranged themselves under the standard of some barbaric chieftain who led them to victory after victory, and what was of more importance, to regions abounding in corn, wine, and oil, the long wished for consummation, and great reward of their labours. An Alaric, an Attila, or a Zingis Khan, and the chiefs around them, might fight for glory, for the fame of extensive conquests, but the true cause that set in motion the great tide of northern emigration, and that continued to propel it till it rolled at different periods against China, Persia, italy, and even Egypt, was a scarcity of food, a population extended beyond the means of supporting it.” Thomas Malthus
Here,in the same vein is somebody who put national surpremacy based on the same reasoning into practice -
“Without consideration of traditions and prejudices, Germany must find the courage to gather our people and their strength for an advance along the road that will lead this people from its present restricted living space to new land and soil, and hence also free it from the danger of vanishing from the earth or of serving others as a slave nation. The National Socialist Movement must strive to eliminate the disproportion between our population and our area—viewing this latter as a source of food as well as a basis for power politics—between our historical past and the hopelessness of our present impotence” Adolf Hitler
The trajectory of Malthus’s view (he is not promoting supremacy but just commenting on it as an opinion) is identical to national socialism but in reality it does not lead to survival of the fittest or a great nation but to its slavery and to the gas chambers.
This German Pope has a real chance to atone for his nation and show Christians what their real scientific heritage is and that what is now called ‘science’ is really empiricism,a detestable Arian cult that was fought by all Christians with Spirit in their hearts .
