The California Collection/TheCaliforniaCollection.cdr/his094/eugen_1.arj/EUGEN-1.TXT

Text File | 1989-09-30 | 7KB | 123 lines

   THE EVOLUTION OF A MONSTER!

   Adolf Hitler and Eugenics

   BY ED GARRETT, B.S.
   This article is taken from the magazine:
   CREATION
   EX NIHILO
   SEPTEMBER, 1986

   When Darwin proposed his theory of evolution, it was hailed by many
as the end of any scientific justification for the existence of a
Creator God. Science was now freed from having to conform to `outdated'
Biblical ideas. In the resulting vacuum of religious authority, men
such as Darwin's agnostic cousin, Francis Galton, founded a new
religion based on the idea of improving the human race according to the
theory of evolution.  In 1883,   Galton called this improved-race idea
`eugenics.'

   A group arose called the `Social Darwinists', and taking their clue
from evolutionary theory they divided humanity into the `fit' and the
`unfit'.  Eugenics was seen as a way of making sure that the `fit' had
children and the `unfit' did not.  Books on eugenics were written by
scientists which argued that the most humane method of preventing
reproduction of the unworthy was a `gentle, painless death.' It was
claimed `where the life of the state is threatened [by the presence of
mental defectives] extreme measures may and must be taken.'

   In Germany, the leaders of the eugenics movement, using evolution as
their justification, caused sterilization laws and immigration
restriction laws to be enacted during the 1930's.  Immigration
should be limited, they said, owing to the `biological inferiority' of
people from southern and eastern Europe.  The racism of such leaders
was founded on evolution, and the German people were being prepared to
regard themselves as the superior race.

   Many scientists came to see the promotion of eugenic programs as
almost a religious duty imposed by the theory of evolution.  Leading
eugenists became Nazi officials, and the eugenics movement in Germany
became totally interwoven into the Nazi system.  Eugenics became the
scientific justification for Hitler's extermination program.

   Many scientists had seen the dangers.  In 1916, Franz Boas, Margaret
Mead's trusted counselor, had issued a condemnation of eugenics in the
November issue to The Scientific Monthly.  This began a split in the
biological science community, with Boas as the leader of the group that
believed that social stimulus was much more of a determining factor
than genetic inheritance.  He warned that the idea of eliminating
the unfit was not a panacea that would cure human ills.  but a
dangerous sword which might well turn against those who relied on its
strength.

   In the 1920's, Ironically, eugenics as applied to humans was found
to be incorrect owing to a misunderstanding of Mendel's laws of
heredity. Humans were more complex than the peas which were the basis
of Mendel's experiments.  Apparently, however, many eugenists had made
a religious commitment to the movement sufficient to continue expansion
of eugenic ideas.  Statements were still being made in 1940 by top
American scientists about the `inexcusable process of allowing the
feebleminded to reproduce  their kind.'

   Modern-day apologists for evolution might say that eugenics was a
perversion of evolution.  But the fact remains that this `perversion'
became very popular.  It could become popular primarily because
evolution had seemed to do away with the need for a sovereign
Creator with absolute moral laws.  And the `good' evolutionists had no
right to say that the `bad' eugenists were wrong, since change - not
moral law - was the only constant.  There was no foundation on which to
base their argument for the immorality of `eugenic selection' - that
is, sterilizing or removing those judged to be unfit - except their own
intuition.  However, they could not expect the eugenists to yield to
intuition.

   SUPER-RACE

   After the world had seen what Hitler was actually doing, and the
lengths to which he was taking his `super-race' idea, the history of
eugenics was promptly forgotten.  For instance, a 1971 book on genetic
improvement titled The Heredity Factor did not mention the word
`eugenics.' A history of genetics given in the book, beginning
with Darwin, gave no hint of the existence of anything called
`eugenics', although it gave a glowing review of the contribution of
Francis Galton to genetics.  The popular encyclopedia, World Book, had
and article under the heading `eugenics' in the 1955 edition which
explained how eugenics led to Hitler. In the 1983 edition, all
reference to Hitler had been deleted.

   Hitler did not form his ideas in a mysterious vacuum, which is the
impression that history books give us.  He was instructed by the IDEA
called `eugenics, ' which was derived from the so-called `fact' of
evolution by a cousin of the originator of the scientific
respectability of evolution.

   As much as they wish that the general public would forget all about
eugenics, evolutionists must accept the fact that their favorite idea,
`the fact of evolution, ' was the basis for eugenics, which led
directly to Hitler's death camps.  The idea of an evolutionary
theory, which Darwin timidly proposed, was seized upon by many men of
great intellect and forced on the scientific world as fact.  The
motivation of those men should be clear - by excluding God and
accepting themselves as members of the evolutionary superior species,
they decided they could be as God.

   Media analysts sometimes use Hitler to give warnings of the dangers
of religious zeal.  It is interesting that the `religious zeal' that
really contributed to the rise of Hitler - zeal for evolution as fact -
is never associated with him.

   Hitler's case teaches us the danger of denying the existence of a
sovereign Creator, who judges disobedience to His law.  To be sure,
Hitler believed in gods, but not the Creator God of the Bible.
Even so, the basis for his actions had been laid down before by those
men of great intellect who so eagerly promoted the idea of eugenics
which had no real place for any religion except secular humanism.

   Geneticists and others in the scientific community are quite aware
of the history of eugenics, but somehow it never gets into print,
especially with the logical connection of evolution with eugenics, and
eugenics with Hitler.  These men are knowingly forgetting history and
dooming themselves to repeat it.