Socialism and eugenics,
"....far from expressing views that were unique Haldane’s linked beliefs in socialism, inequality, and eugenics were widely shared on the left, particularly amongst Marxists and Fabians with scientific interests. Beatrice and Sidney Webb, George Bernard Shaw, Havelock Ellis, Eden and Cedar Paul, H.J. Laski, Graham Wallas, Emma Goldrnan, H.G. Wells, Edward Aveling, Julian Huxley, Joseph Needham, C.P. Snow, H.G. Muller and Paul Karnmerer—to note just some of the more prominent figures—all advocated (though in varying forms; some “positive” and some “negative,” some here and now and some only in the socialist future) the improvement of the genetic stock of the human race through selective breeding. It was Shaw who argued that “there is now no reasonable excuse for refusing to face the fact that nothing but a eugenic religion can save our civilization,” Eden Paul that “unless the socialist is a eugenicist as well, the socialist state will speedily perish from racial degradation” and H.J. Lash that “the different rates of fertility in the sound and pathological stocks point to a future swamping of the better by the worse. As a nation, we are faced by race suicide.” In the approximate half-century separating the work of Galton from the rise of fascism (which more than any other factor was responsible for the collapse of socialist enthusiasm for eugenics), such views were common."
(Eugenics and the Left
by Diane Paul
Journal of the History of Ideas,
Vol. 45, No. 4. (Oct. - Dec., 1984), pp. 567-568)
She has long lists of impeccable cites about this. For that's the way a peer reviewed journal of history is. Leftists seem to have forgotten quite a bit about how their use of "science" as a buzzword was already abused repeatedly to cloak philosophic naturalism in the past. They still are trying to construct a contradiction between "science" and "religion" and then claim that their ideology is just scientific.
Now it is the stem cells that the actors, writers, etc., are after. This will cure things. The caculated killing of some human lives so that other humans may live better is one step further removed, even down into things you cannot really see. So it is easier and easier to see no Evil, hear no Evil....which is actually the way it went in the past too. They did not have cameras everywhere in the past so much. In general, people did not know was going on, anymore than people these days are up to date on abortion procedures and know the details of them.
Instead, all of these things are secret. You will be censored on these types of issues the more you bring to light any brutality, like the so-called "gay rights" issue and all the terrible truths about it. If you begin to bring to light some things there then be prepared because you have just stirred something up that wants to remain hidden. It seems to have to do with fascism and that type of philosophy. They are always attacking against the person who tries to tell the truth. It seems that they dare not actually deal with what is being said as an issue of "Is it true."
For their scholarship is weak, quite weak. Fascist scholarship's "weakness is due not to inferior training but to the mendacity inherent in any scholarship that overlooks or openly repudiated all moral and spiritual values."
(Hitler's Proffessors: The Part of Scholarship in
Germany's Crimes against the Jewish People
By Max Weinreich (New York:The Yiddish
Scientific Institute, 1946) :7)
The term science is just a buzzword to them, which means that you agree with the mental retardation that comes with philosophic naturalism.
"For the biologists, the test of a scientific outlook was generally identified with a society’s attitude towards eugenics; that is, its willingness to adopt a genuinely scientific stance towards questions of what used to be called “race betterment.” The Marxist and Fabian biologists believed that Western societies had largely failed this test."
(Eugenics and the Left
by Diane Paul
Journal of the History of Ideas,
Vol. 45, No. 4. (Oct. - Dec., 1984), pp. :569)
It's important to remember that Nazism was very popular among the elites, very like the American Republic's blue states where the journalists and culture shapers tend to live. Fascism as a form of socialism was very popular among scientists and so on, as well.
(See: Hitler's Scientists, by John Cromwell)
How quickly this is forgotten by the same, those still trying to practice the same pseudo-science of evolutionism and their lil' fanboys, the journalists. The journalists tend to be even more mentally retarded about it. It is written in their use of buzzwords for the sake of simplistic Leftist pretentions about science and religion.
1 comment:
You can contrast the socialist pseudo-scientific cause of fascism with all that stood against this type of trend.
Example,
"Having always been an ardent partisan
of freedom, I turned to the Universities,
as soon as the revolution broke out in
Germany, to find the Universities took
refuge in silence. I then turned to the
editors of powerful newspapers, who,
but lately in flowing articles, had
claimed to be champions of liberty. These
men, as well as the Universities,
were reduced to silence in a few weeks. I
then addressed myself to the authors
individually, to those who passed
themselves off as the intellectual guides
of Germany, and among whom many had
frequently discussed the question of freedom
and its place in modern life. They
are in their turn very dumb. Only the
Church opposed the fight which Hitler was
waging against liberty. Till then I had
no interest in the Church, but now I
feel great admiration and am truly
attracted to the Church which had the
persistent courage to fight for spiritual
truth and moral freedom. I feel
obliged to confess that I now admire
what I used to consider of little value."
--Albert Einstein
(quoted in Ernst Christian Helmreich,
The German Churches Under Hitler:
Backround, Struggle, and Epilogue (Detriot:
Wayne State Univ. Press, 1979) :345)
Post a Comment