Can America Survive Evolutionary Humanism?
In addition to original Darwinism, today there are two other versions of evolutionary theory: punctuated equilibrium and neo-Darwinism, a revamped version of the original Darwinism. No matter the variant though, evolution serves as the creation myth for the theological and philosophical worldview of Evolutionary Humanism (Naturalism).
“Evolution is a religion,” declared evolutionary Humanist Michael Ruse. “This was true of evolution in the beginning and it is true still today…One of the most popular books of the era was ‘Religion Without Revelation,’ by Julian Huxley, grandson of Thomas Huxley…As always evolution was doing everything expected of religion and more.” (National Post, Canadian Edition, 5/13/2000)
“Humanism is a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view.” (Humanist Manifestos I & II, 1980, Introduction, Paul Kurtz)
The primary denominations of Evolutionary Humanism are Cultural Marxism/Communism, Secular Humanism, Postmodernism, and Spiritual Communism. The offshoots of these are among others, New Age/green environmentalism/Gaia, socialism, progressivism, liberalism, multiculturalism, and atheism. Individually and collectively, these are modernized versions of pre-Biblical naturalism (paganism).
All worldviews begin with a religious declaration. The Biblical worldview begins with, “In the beginning God…” Cosmic Humanism begins, “In the beginning Divine Matter.”
Communism, Postmodernism, and Secular Humanism begin with, “In the beginning Matter.” Matter is all there is, and it not only thinks, but is Divine:
“…matter itself continually attains to higher perfection under its own power, thanks to indwelling dialectic…the dialectical materialists attribution of ‘dialectic’ to matter confers on it, not mental attributes only, but even divine ones.” (Dialectical Materialism, Gustav A. Wetter, 1977, p. 58)
In explicitly religious language, the following religionists offer all praise, honor, and glory to their Creator:
“We may regard the material and cosmic world as the supreme being, as the cause of all causes, as the creator of heaven and earth.” (Vladimir Lenin quoted in Communism versus Creation, Francis Nigel Lee, 1969, p. 28)
“The Cosmos is all that is or ever will be.” (Carl Sagan, Cosmos, 1980, p. 4)
Evolutionary Humanism has demonstrated itself to be an extremely dangerous worldview. In just the first eighty-seven years of the twentieth century, the evolutionist project of radically transforming the world and mankind through the power of evolutionism has led to the extermination of between 100-170 million ‘subhuman’ men, women, and children.
Deadly Problems
First, in order that materialist ethics be consistent with the idea that life evolved by chance and continues to evolve over time, ethics must be built on human social instincts that are in a continuous process of change over evolutionary time. This view demolishes both moral ethics and social taboos, thereby liberating man to do as he pleases. Over time this results in a lawless climate haunted by bullies, predators, despots, psychopaths, and other unsavory elements.
Perhaps
Darwin could not envision the evil unleashed by his ideas. Nonetheless, he did have some inkling, for he wrote in his “Autobiography” that one who rejects God,
“…can have for his rule of life…those impulses and instincts which are strongest or…seem to him the best ones.” (Fatal Fruit, Tom DeRosa, p.7)
Humanist Max Hocutt realizes that materialist ethics are hugely problematical, but offers no solution. An absolute moral code cannot exist without God, however God does not exist, says Hocutt. Therefore,
“…if there were a morality written up in the sky somewhere but no God to enforce it, I see no reason why we should obey it. Human beings may, and do, make up their own rules.” (Understanding the Times, David Noebel, p. 138-139)
Jeffrey Dahmer, a psychopath who cannibalized his victims, acted on
Darwin’s advice. In an interview he said,
“If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then…what is the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought…I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime.” (Dahmer in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, 11/29/1994)
With clearly religious overtones, atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell summarizes the amoral materialist ethic:
“Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way.” (Russell, “Why I am not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects,” 1957, p. 115)
Next, materialist epistemology and metaphysics dispossesses man of soul, free will, conscience, mind, and reason, thereby dehumanizing (animalizing) man and totally destroying not only the worth, dignity, and meaning of human life, but the possibility of freedom. The essence of this annihilation is captured in the following quotes:
Man is “but fish made over…” declared biologist William Etkin (Pushing the Antithesis, Greg L. Bahnsen, p. 224). And his life is but a “partial, continuous, progressive, multiform and continually interactive, self-realization of the potentialities of atomic electron states,” explained J.D. Bernal (1901-1971), past Professor of Physics at the
University of
London (The Origin of Life, Bernal, 1967, xv). Furthermore, “The universe cares nothing for us,” trumpets William Provine, Cornell University Professor of Biology, “and we have no ultimate meaning in life.” (Scientists, Face It! Science and Religion are Incompatible,” The Scientist, Sept. 1988)
Man… “must be degraded from a spiritual being to an animalistic pattern. He must think of himself as an animal, capable of only animalistic reactions. He must no longer think of himself…as capable of ‘spiritual endurance,’ or nobility.” By animalizing man his “state of mind…can be ordered and enslaved.” (Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics, “Degradation and Shock,” Chapter viii)
Finally, Evolutionary Humanism posits the notion that despite the fact that man is “but fish made over…” there are in fact, some exceptions to this rule. For it happens—by chance of course—that some lucky ‘species’ and ‘races’ of the human animal are more highly evolved (superior) and therefore enlightened than the others, who are—unluckily for them—less evolved and as a consequence, subhuman. Paired to this view is the idea that if a species or race does not continue to evolve (progress up the evolutionary ladder), it will become extinct. Together, these ideas lead logically to the deadly conclusion that in order to preserve the fittest of the species—or the spiritually evolved, as is the case with Spiritual Communism— it is morally incumbent upon the superior to replace (via the science of eugenics and population control) and/or liquidate the subhumans. In his book, “The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex,” (1871) Charles Darwin foresaw this eventuality:
“At some future period…the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world…the anthropomorphous apes…will no doubt be exterminated.” (Descent, 2nd ed., p. 183)
In practice, the materialist worldview is a hellish recipe for catastrophe, as was amply demonstrated by the 20th century’s two most blood-soaked political movements— pagan Nazism and atheist Communism. Both rejected God, and both were animated by Darwinism
Nazi
Germany
Hitler’s murderous philosophy was built on Darwinian evolution and preservation of favored species. In his book, “Evolution and Ethics, British evolutionist Sir Arthur Keith notes,
“The leader of
Germany is an evolutionist not only in theory, but, as millions know to their cost, in the rigor of its practice.” (1947, p.230)
It was Darwinism that inspired Hitler to try to create—by way of eugenics— a superior race, the Aryan Man. In pursuit of his ambition, Hitler eliminated what he considered were inferior human animals, among which were for example, Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, and Christians.
Evolutionism in Nazi Germany resulted in gas chambers, ovens, and the liquidation of eleven million “useless eaters” and other undesirables. Evolutionist Niles Eldridge, author of “Darwin: Discovering the Tree of Life,” reluctantly concurs.
Darwin’s theory, he acknowledges,
“has given us the eugenics movement and some of its darker outgrowths, such as the genocidal practices of the Nazis.” (2005, p. 13)
The
Soviet Union
Even though Karl Marx wrote his Communist Manifesto before
Darwin published his “On the Species,” the roots of Communism are nonetheless found in Darwinism. Karl Marx wrote Fredrich Engels that
Darwin’s ‘Origin’,
“is the book which contains the basis in natural science for our view.” (Marxian Biology and the Social Scene, Conway Zirkle, 1959)
Stephane Courtois, one of the authors of The Black Book of Communism, relates that,
“In Communism there exists a sociopolitical eugenics, a form of Social Darwinism.” (p. 752)
Vladimir Lenin exulted that,
“
Darwin put an end to the belief that the animal and vegetable species bear no relation to one another (and) that they were created by God, and hence immutable.” (Fatal Fruit, Tom DeRosa, p. 9)
Lenin exercised godlike power over life and death. He saw himself as, “the master of the knowledge of the evolution of social species.” It was Lenin who “decided who should disappear by virtue of having been condemned to the dustbin of history.” From the moment Lenin made the “scientific” decision that the bourgeoisie represented a stage of humanity that evolution had surpassed, “its liquidation as a class and the liquidation of the individuals who actually or supposedly belonged to it could be justified.” (The Black Book of Communism, p. 752)
Alain Brossat draws the following conclusions about the
Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, and the ties that bind them:
“The ‘liquidation’ of the Muscovite executioners, a close relative of the ‘treatment’ carried out by Nazi assassins, is a linguistic microcosm of an irreparable mental and cultural catastrophe that was in full view on the Soviet Stage. The value of human life collapsed, and thinking in categories replaced ethical thought…In the discourse and practice of the Nazi exterminators, the animalization of Other…was closely linked to the ideology of race. It was conceived in the implacably hierarchical racial terms of “subhumans” and “supermen”…but in
Moscow in 1937, what mattered…was the total animalization of the Other, so that a policy under which absolutely anything was possible could come into practice.” (ibid, p. 751)
21st Century
America
Ronald Reagan loved God and
America.
America he said is, “the moral force that defeated communism and all those who would put the human soul into bondage.” (Republican National Convention, Houston TX, 8/17/1992)
Even though he was optimistic about America’s future he nevertheless cautioned that
America must maintain her reliance on God and her commitment to righteousness and morality. He liked quoting Alexis de Tocqueville’s insightful analysis of the source of
America’s greatness:
“Not until I went into the churches of
America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret and genius of her power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good,
America will cease to be great.” (In the Words of Ronald Reagan, by Michael Reagan)
As
America moves into the 21st century, we have yet to admit a shameful, dark secret. Evolutionism…the creation myth, that empowered Nazism and Communism, is being taught to
America’s youth in our government-controlled schools. The animalization of Americans is well advanced and coupled to a corresponding slow collapse of human worth. Already we hear of human life spoken of in dehumanizing categories such as ‘vegetable,’ “non-persons,” and ‘uterine content.’
Ominously, Evolutionary Humanism has also outstripped Judeo-Christian precepts in our universities, judiciary, federal bureaucracy, corporations, medicine, law, psychology, sociology, entertainment, news media and halls of Congress. As Biocentrism it fuels the nonhuman animal rights project, the gay rights movement, radical feminism, and the increasingly powerful and influential green environmentalist program, which demands that
America submit to the draconian mandates of the Kyoto Treaty.
America, the “moral force that defeated communism” is on the verge of completely rejecting God, the natural order, and moral absolutes and instead, embracing the godless religion of evolution, amorality, and the unnatural.
Evolutionary Humanism is the most dangerous delusion thus far in history. It begins with the ‘animalization of Other,’ in tandem with the elevation of the ‘superior,’ for whom this serves as a license to make up their own rules, abuse power, and force their will onto the citizens. This is accompanied by a downward spiraling process that pathologizes the natural order, moral ethics, virtue, and social taboos while simultaneously elevating narcissism, tyranny, cruelty, nihilism, confusion, perversion, sadism, theft, and lying to positions of politically correct “new morality,” which is then enforced through sensitivity training, speech codes, hate crime laws, and other intimidation tactics. If not stopped, as history warns us, this rapidly escalating downward process leads inevitably to totalitarianism, enslavement, and eventually mass murder.
In a portent of things to come, evolutionist B.F. Skinner said:
“A scientific analysis of behavior dispossesses autonomous man and turns the control he has been said to exert over to the environment. The individual…is henceforth to be controlled…in large part by other men.” (Understanding the Times, David Noebel, p. 232)
Copyright Linda Kimball 2007
Linda is the author of many published essays on culture, worldview, and politics. Her essays are published both nationally and internationally. She is a member of MoveOff.org
Possibly related posts...
| More from Linda Kimball
Stumble It!
[...] think this bizarre screed by Linda Kimball at Mensnewsdaily may be the single dumbest anti-evolution article ever written. [...]
The problem with LK’s approach is that she’s appealing to people who don’t understand or trust science. The irony here is that she is using a polemic style that reminds me of Emma Goldman: shrill, doctrinaire and ideological.
The worst thing that conservatives can do is slip headlong into buzz-word hell. The second worst thing is to emulate the opposition.
>The primary denominations of Evolutionary Humanism
> are Cultural Marxism/Communism, Secular Humanism,
> Postmodernism, and Spiritual Communism. The
> offshoots of these are among others, New Age/green
> environmentalism/Gaia, socialism, progressivism, liberalism,
> multiculturalism, and atheism. Individually and collectively,
> these are modernized versions of pre-Biblical naturalism (paganism).
Hmm. So what’s left over then? That seems to pretty much covers everything except “biblical not-naturalism”. I’m surprised that Darwin didn’t get blamed for pre-Biblical naturalism (whatever that is) as well. A brief summary of the argument (inasmuch as there is an argument) seems to be “everyone except True Christians ™ commit unspeakably evil acts”. But the irony is that it is precisely this kind of Us vs. Them thinking that is responsible for far more evil in the world than the unspeakable sin that Darwin committed of believing that things might actually be as they appear to be.
For the record, I have already expressed my disagreement with Linda Kimball in her last essay, which was focused then on “Darwinism.”
As I pointed out earlier, I think that the demonization of Darwin is just downright silly, and so is mentioning Darwin in the same breath as Jeffrey Dahmer. By the same token, I don’t think it’s useful to demonize “humanists” or to lay the woes of the world at the feet of godless materialists. Heck, I disdain godless materialists just as much as the next guy – but, let’s keep this in proportion.
In fact I am very sympathetic to Linda Kimball’s conviction that this is a morally ordered universe, and that sciientists are not immune from stupidity and self-delusion.
But polemics and pat rhetoric are not helpful, in my opinion.
[...] think this bizarre screed by Linda Kimball at Mensnewsdaily may be the single dumbest anti-evolution article ever written. [...]
Lloyd, I am very curious about this “creative force” which apparently opposes entropy. I do not find such a principle without merit. In fact, I suspect there is truth to it within the workings of the cosmos. Nonetheless, the molecular degrading principle you speak of concerns closed systems (atoms acting in total isolation will do precisely as you say). However, when there is an inflow of energy, the Third Law of Thermodynamics says nothing about a localized increase in entropy. That is the same BS argument creationists have repeated with total ignorance of the blatant misapplication of the equations. By your same extension of misapplying thermodynamics, refrigeration is also impossible as it amounts to a local increase in temperature gradients. Therefore, my refrigerator is God. All it takes is obliviousness of energy flow from an outside source.
Biology or not, a nonliving object such as a snowflake can exhibit crystal symmetry and thus possess a “creative force” with higher energy than a mere lump of ice. That is utterly different than an omnipotent being molding each flake into his flaky image. The wild-eyed nonscientific atheists (aka communists) and Christians alike are equally bigoted, in that they start with a conclusion and then work backwards for a justification.
To answer your last point on morals, every Christian I have debated with dodges the truth with vast historical inaccuracy, even though history is entirely non-essential in answering the core questions of creation. If it is a question of science, truth can be discovered anywhere in the universe. Any moral Christian code which mandates the murder of atheists is not moral at all. But if it is called “moral”, invariably many modern Christians are corrupt and evil in that they are failing to execute their murderous morals in this regard. If one asks “does God exist?”, and then is told “God is useful” because of a totally false moral decay argument, that entirely detonates your claim of “rational science”.
A useful pharmaceutical drug is NOT useful if it doesn’t even exist. That fact is inescapable. To claim the facts can be ignored when there is social consequence is the same as admitting your God could be a placebo and it matters not at all to you. As a consequence of those values, it is evident feminists and Nazis are therefore morally wrong only on a moral relativistic basis. Theirs is a different illusion, for which facts are too discomforting.
Whether an ideology is “morally useful” has to be subordinate to whether it is factually right and wrong to begin with. Otherwise, you cannot convince anyone of anything besides what opinion you find pleasant and/or useful. I could be wrong about this, but please correct me if I am mistaken. If you prefer to call the creative force GOD, how does in anyway prove the existance of God to those who define it by biblical depiction? I prefer to call my refrigerator God, so is that a valid proof?
No rational scientifically educated individual should doubt the existence of a creating force, that for lack of a better, term I will call GOD. Nor should any rational scientifically educated individual deny evolution. They are fully compatible and verifiable though scientific valid methods.
Anyone educated in “hard” science is aware of the “Third Law of Thermodynamics.” In a nut shell it says that all matter tends towards the lowest energy state, consistent with maximum disorder. It takes energy to order atoms into increasingly large molecules and bio-molecules are some of the largest most organized.
Leave these bio-molecules isolated for a few even a relatively short period of time and they degrade into smaller and smaller pieces, seeking the lowest energy state. They will never continuously increase in size regardless of the amount of energy supplied. Without an unknown creative force I call GOD, macromolecules would not exist. Our modern laws of science simply don’t explain the scientific fact of evolution, but rather force one to conclude that a creating force (GOD) must exist.
Just as our natural scientific laws are the results of repeated empirical observations, the moral laws can be empirically determined by analyzing history. Societies that have followed the righteous moral code of Christianity or other religious variations have flourished while those ignoring them end in ruin. Subordinating man’s ego to the will of the creating force is the foremost requirement for an enduring society.
While it is a sad pathetic bunch of gangsters in academia defending liberal filth, it is even more pathetic to wish for a cosmic Santa Claus who is all-knowing and clearly so much better than Allah. The drive to replace one illusion with another is America’s favorite pastime. Hollywood drama is our social reality, and so is Washington DC in politics. Or so we are told. Forget integrity. Seeking out the truth in our personal lives is too difficult — a chore best delegated to preachers, Rush Limbaugh, PBS, and the National Organization for Women. Yes, that is a fine way to proceed with civilization. Humanism is just one perverted artform, yet modern-day conservatives seem happy to defend the funding mechanism of what they claim to oppose. No wonder campuses are a liberal breeding ground.