lava
Sep 29 2007, 04:25 AM
all quoted from Harun Yahya
Most people think the theory of evolution was first proposed by Charles Darwin, and rests on scientific evidence, observations and experiments. However, the truth is that Darwin was not its originator, and neither does the theory rest on scientific proof. The theory consists of an adaptation to nature of the ancient dogma of materialist philosophy. Although it is not backed up by scientific discoveries, the theory is blindly supported in the name of materialist philosophy.
This fanaticism has resulted in all kinds of disasters. Together with the spread of Darwinism and the materialist philosophy it supports, the answer to the question "What is a human being?" has changed. People who used to answer: "Human beings were created by God and have to live according to the beautiful morality He teaches", have now begun to think that "Man came into being by chance, and is an animal who developed by means of the fight for survival." There is a heavy price to pay for this great deception. Violent ideologies such as racism, fascism and communism, and many other barbaric world views based on conflict have all drawn strength from this deception.
This article will examine the disaster Darwinism has visited on the world and reveal its connection with terrorism, one of the most important global problems of our time.
The Darwinist Lie: 'Life is conflict'
Darwin set out with one basic premise when developing his theory: "The development of living things depends on the fight for survival. The strong win the struggle. The weak are condemned to defeat and oblivion."
According to Darwin, there is a ruthless struggle for survival and an eternal conflict in nature. The strong always overcome the weak, and this enables development to take place. The subtitle he gave to his book The Origin of Species, "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life", encapsulates that view.
Furthermore, Darwin proposed that the 'fight for survival' also applied between human racial groups. According to that fantastical claim, 'favoured races' were victorious in the struggle. Favoured races, in Darwin's view, were white Europeans. African or Asian races had lagged behind in the struggle for survival. Darwin went further, and suggested that these races would soon lose the "struggle for survival" entirely, and thus disappear:
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes… will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.1
The Indian anthropologist Lalita Vidyarthi explains how Darwin's theory of evolution imposed racism on the social sciences:
His (Darwin's) theory of the survival of the fittest was warmly welcomed by the social scientists of the day, and they believed mankind had achieved various levels of evolution culminating in the white man's civilization. By the second half of the nineteenth century racism was accepted as fact by the vast majority of Western scientists
lava
Sep 29 2007, 04:29 AM
Darwin's Source of Inspiration: Malthus's Theory of Ruthlessness
Darwin's source of inspiration on this subject was the British economist Thomas Malthus's book An Essay on the Principle of Population. Left to their own devices, Malthus calculated that the human population increased rapidly. In his view, the main influences that kept populations under control were disasters such as war, famine and disease. In short, according to this brutal claim, some people had to die for others to live. Existence came to mean "permanent war."
In the 19th century, Malthus's ideas were widely accepted. European upper class intellectuals in particular supported his cruel ideas. In the article "The Scientific Background of the Nazi 'Race Purification' Programme", the importance 19th century Europe attached to Malthus's views on population is described in this way:
In the opening half of the nineteenth century, throughout Europe, members of the ruling classes gathered to discuss the newly discovered "Population problem" and to devise ways of implementing the Malthusian mandate, to increase the mortality rate of the poor: "Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations,"and so forth and so on.3
As a result of this cruel policy, the weak, and those who lost the struggle for survival would be eliminated, and as a result the rapid rise in population would be balanced out. This so-called "oppression of the poor" policy was actually carried out in 19th century Britain. An industrial order was set up in which children of eight and nine were made to work sixteen hours a day in the coal mines and thousands died from the terrible conditions. The "struggle for survival" demanded by Malthus's theory led to millions of Britons leading lives full of suffering.
Influenced by these ideas, Darwin applied this concept of conflict to all of nature, and proposed that the strong and the fittest emerged victorious from this war of existence. Moreover, he claimed that the so-called struggle for survival was a justified and unchangeable law of nature. On the other hand, he invited people to abandon their religious beliefs by denying the Creation, and thus undermined at all ethical values that might prove to be obstacles to the ruthlessness of the "struggle for survival."
Humanity has paid a heavy price in the 20th century for the dissemination of these callous views which lead people to acts of ruthlessness and cruelty.
AmazingAtheist
Sep 29 2007, 04:30 AM
QUOTE(lava @ Sep 29 2007, 04:25 AM)

all quoted from Harun Yahya
Most people think the theory of evolution was first proposed by Charles Darwin, and rests on scientific evidence, observations and experiments. However, the truth is that Darwin was not its originator, and neither does the theory rest on scientific proof. The theory consists of an adaptation to nature of the ancient dogma of materialist philosophy. Although it is not backed up by scientific discoveries, the theory is blindly supported in the name of materialist philosophy.
This fanaticism has resulted in all kinds of disasters. Together with the spread of Darwinism and the materialist philosophy it supports, the answer to the question "What is a human being?" has changed. People who used to answer: "Human beings were created by God and have to live according to the beautiful morality He teaches", have now begun to think that "Man came into being by chance, and is an animal who developed by means of the fight for survival." There is a heavy price to pay for this great deception. Violent ideologies such as racism, fascism and communism, and many other barbaric world views based on conflict have all drawn strength from this deception.
This article will examine the disaster Darwinism has visited on the world and reveal its connection with terrorism, one of the most important global problems of our time.
The Darwinist Lie: 'Life is conflict'
Darwin set out with one basic premise when developing his theory: "The development of living things depends on the fight for survival. The strong win the struggle. The weak are condemned to defeat and oblivion."
According to Darwin, there is a ruthless struggle for survival and an eternal conflict in nature. The strong always overcome the weak, and this enables development to take place. The subtitle he gave to his book The Origin of Species, "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life", encapsulates that view.
Furthermore, Darwin proposed that the 'fight for survival' also applied between human racial groups. According to that fantastical claim, 'favoured races' were victorious in the struggle. Favoured races, in Darwin's view, were white Europeans. African or Asian races had lagged behind in the struggle for survival. Darwin went further, and suggested that these races would soon lose the "struggle for survival" entirely, and thus disappear:
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes… will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.1
The Indian anthropologist Lalita Vidyarthi explains how Darwin's theory of evolution imposed racism on the social sciences:
His (Darwin's) theory of the survival of the fittest was warmly welcomed by the social scientists of the day, and they believed mankind had achieved various levels of evolution culminating in the white man's civilization. By the second half of the nineteenth century racism was accepted as fact by the vast majority of Western scientists
I think I'll believe that we were developed and evolved .. rather than all that God crap you just mentioned ..
Notice that no one has ever taken a wars name in Atheism?
Theres HUNDREDS of religious though .
Darwin put up a better proposal than a religious person ever will .
lava
Sep 29 2007, 04:32 AM
What 'The Law of the Jungle' Led to: Fascism
As Darwinism fed racism in the 19th century, it formed the basis of an ideology that would develop and drown the world in blood in the 20th century: Nazism.
A strong Darwinist influence can be seen in Nazi ideologues. When one examines this theory, which was given shape by Adolf Hitler and Alfred Rosenberg, one comes across such concepts as "natural selection", "selective mating", and "the struggle for survival between the races", which are repeated dozens of time in the works of Darwin. When calling his book Mein Kampf (My Struggle), Hitler was inspired by the Darwinist struggle for survival and the principle that victory went to the fittest. He particularly talks about the struggle between the races:
History would culminate in a new millennial empire of unparalleled splendour, based on a new racial hierarchy ordained by nature herself.4
In the 1933 Nuremberg party rally, Hitler proclaimed that "a higher race subjects to itself a lower race… a right which we see in nature and which can be regarded as the sole conceivable right".
That the Nazis were influenced by Darwinism is a fact that almost all historians who are expert in the matter accept. The historian Hickman describes Darwinism's influence on Hitler as follows:
(Hitler) was a firm believer and preacher of evolution. Whatever the deeper, profound, complexities of his psychosis, it is certain that [the concept of struggle was important because]… his book, Mein Kampf, clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and the extermination of the weak to produce a better society.5
Hitler, who emerged with these views, dragged the world to violence that had never before been seen. Many ethnic and political groups, and especially the Jews, were exposed to terrible cruelty and slaughter in the Nazi concentration camps. World War II, which began with the Nazi invasion, cost 55 million lives. What lay behind the greatest tragedy in world history was Darwinism's concept of the "struggle for survival."
The Bloody Alliance: Darwinism and Communism
While fascists are found on the right wing of Social Darwinism, the left wing is occupied by communists. Communists have always been among the fiercest defenders of Darwin's theory.
This relationship between Darwinism and communism goes right back to the founders of both these "isms". Marx and Engels, the founders of communism, read Darwin's The Origin of Species as soon as it came out, and were amazed at its 'dialectical materialist' attitude. The correspondence between Marx and Engels showed that they saw Darwin's theory as "containing the basis in natural history for communism". In his book The Dialectics of Nature, which he wrote under the influence of Darwin, Engels was full of praise for Darwin, and tried to make his own contribution to the theory in the chapter "The Part Played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man".
Russian communists who followed in the footsteps of Marx and Engels, such as Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, all agreed with Darwin's theory of evolution. Plekhanov, who is seen as the founder of Russian communism, regarded marxism as "Darwinism in its application to social science".6
Trotsky said, "Darwin's discovery is the highest triumph of the dialectic in the whole field of organic matter." 7
'Darwinist education' had a major role in the formation of communist cadres. For instance, historians note the fact that Stalin was religious in his youth, but became an atheist primarily because of Darwin's books.8
Mao, who established communist rule in China and killed millions of people, openly stated that "Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." 9
The Harvard University historian James Reeve Pusey goes into great detail regarding Darwinism's effect on Mao and Chinese communism in his research book China and Charles Darwin.10
In short, there is an unbreakable link between the theory of evolution and communism. The theory claims that living things are the product of chance, and provides a so-called scientific support for atheism. Communism, an atheist ideology, is for that reason firmly tied to Darwinism. Moreover, the theory of evolution proposes that development in nature is possible thanks to conflict (in other words "the struggle for survival") and supports the concept of "dialectics" which is fundamental to communism.
If we think of the communist concept of "dialectical conflict", which killed some 120 million people during the 20th century, as a "killing machine" then we can better understand the dimensions of the disaster that Darwinism visited on the planet.
lava
Sep 29 2007, 04:34 AM
Darwinism and Terrorism
As we have so far seen, Darwinism is at the root of various ideologies of violence that have spelled disaster to mankind in the 20th century. The fundamental concept behind this understanding and method is "fighting whoever is not one of us."
We can explain this in the following way: There are different beliefs, worldviews and philosophies in the world. It is very natural that all these diverse ideas have traits opposing one another. However, these different stances can look at each other in one of two ways:
1) They can respect the existence of those who are not like them and try to establish dialogue with them, employing a humane method. Indeed, this method conforms with the morality of the Qur'an.
2) They can choose to fight others, and to try to secure an advantage by damaging them, in other words, to behave like a wild animal. This is a method employed by materialism, that is, irreligion.
The horror we call terrorism is nothing other than a statement of the second view.
When we consider the difference between these two approaches, we can see that the idea of "man as a fighting animal" which Darwinism has subconsciously imposed on people is particularly influential. Individuals and groups who choose the way of conflict may never have heard of Darwinism and the principles of that ideology. But at the end of the day they agree with a view whose philosophical basis rests on Darwinism. What leads them to believe in the rightness of this view is such Darwinism-based slogans as "In this world, the strong survive", "Big fish swallow little ones", "War is a virtue", and "Man advances by waging war". Take Darwinism away, and these are nothing but empty slogans.
Actually, when Darwinism is taken away, no philosophy of 'conflict' remains. The three divine religions that most people in the world believe in, Islam, Christianity and Judaism, all oppose violence. All three religions wish to bring peace and harmony to the world, and oppose innocent people being killed and suffering cruelty and torture. Conflict and violence violate the morality that God has set out for man, and are abnormal and unwanted concepts. However, Darwinism sees and portrays conflict and violence as natural, justified and correct concepts that have to exist.
For this reason, if some people commit terrorism using the concepts and symbols of Islam, Christianity or Judaism in the name of those religions, you can be sure that those people are not Muslims, Christians or Jews. They are real Social Darwinists. They hide under a cloak of religion, but they are not genuine believers. Even if they claim to be serving religion, they are actually enemies of religion and of believers. That is because they are ruthlessly committing a crime that religion forbids, and in such a way as to blacken religion in peoples' eyes.
For this reason, the root of the terrorism that plagues our planet is not any of the divine religions, but in atheism, and the expression of atheism in our times: "Darwinism" and "materialism."
AmazingAtheist
Sep 29 2007, 04:36 AM
QUOTE(lava @ Sep 29 2007, 04:34 AM)

[size=2]Darwinism and Terrorism
As we have so far seen, Darwinism is at the root of various ideologies of violence that have spelled disaster to mankind in the 20th century. The fundamental concept behind this understanding and method is "fighting whoever is not one of us."
Well it's better than religion - Kill people because our seemingly fake god told us to .
camlax
Sep 29 2007, 04:46 AM
To be honest I do not even feel like refuting this garbage, but will do so nonetheless.
[/color]
QUOTE(lava @ Sep 29 2007, 12:25 AM)

all quoted from Harun Yahya
Most people think the theory of evolution was first proposed by Charles Darwin, and rests on scientific evidence, observations and experiments. However, the truth is that Darwin was not its originator, and neither does the theory rest on scientific proof. The theory consists of an adaptation to nature of the ancient dogma of materialist philosophy. Although it is not backed up by scientific discoveries, the theory is blindly supported in the name of materialist philosophy.[color="#FF0000"]Darwin was not the only person to come up evolution in the way that he did. A guy by the name of Wallace did as well, both are supported by vast amounts of scientific evidence, vast enough its far beyond the purview of this rebuttal to start posting all of it. Simply ignoring is ones choice to make, it however does not change reality.
This fanaticism has resulted in all kinds of disasters. Together with the spread of Darwinism and the materialist philosophy it supports, the answer to the question "What is a human being?" has changed. People who used to answer: "Human beings were created by God and have to live according to the beautiful morality He teaches", have now begun to think that "Man came into being by chance, and is an animal who developed by means of the fight for survival." There is a heavy price to pay for this great deception. Violent ideologies such as racism, fascism and communism, and many other barbaric world views based on conflict have all drawn strength from this deception.I am not even sure this segment here deserves comment.
This article will examine the disaster Darwinism has visited on the world and reveal its connection with terrorism, one of the most important global problems of our time.
The Darwinist Lie: 'Life is conflict'
Darwin set out with one basic premise when developing his theory: "The development of living things depends on the fight for survival. The strong win the struggle. The weak are condemned to defeat and oblivion."Please read up on your history, Darwin set out with no such ideas. He actually came back on the Beagle, with no idea of evolution. It was not till much experimentation and review of his notes he realized what he had discovered.
According to Darwin, there is a ruthless struggle for survival and an eternal conflict in nature. The strong always overcome the weak, and this enables development to take place. The subtitle he gave to his book The Origin of Species, "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life", encapsulates that view.Quite obviously, you have never observed nature. It is an arms race that humbles the cold war. I am just going to assume you have never read origin of species. Are you aware the word evolution appears only once in OoS? Care to guess where it appears?
Furthermore, Darwin proposed that the 'fight for survival' also applied between human racial groups. According to that fantastical claim, 'favoured races' were victorious in the struggle. Favoured races, in Darwin's view, were white Europeans. African or Asian races had lagged behind in the struggle for survival. Darwin went further, and suggested that these races would soon lose the "struggle for survival" entirely, and thus disappear: Slave ownership, eugenics and the idea of more intelligent races existed long before Darwin. Some of our favorite people from the early 20th century bought into eugenics, but it goes much farther back than that!
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes… will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.1
The Indian anthropologist Lalita Vidyarthi explains how Darwin's theory of evolution imposed racism on the social sciences:
His (Darwin's) theory of the survival of the fittest was warmly welcomed by the social scientists of the day, and they believed mankind had achieved various levels of evolution culminating in the white man's civilization. By the second half of the nineteenth century racism was accepted as fact by the vast majority of Western scientistsDid Darwin say "survival of the fittest? Sounds like a bad high school education incoming!
Atheist God
Sep 29 2007, 04:51 AM
It is quite clear the OP does not know what science it seeing as how there IS empirical evidence in fact irrefutable evidence to back up Darwin's theory into the realm of factual scientific information.
camlax
Sep 29 2007, 05:01 AM
QUOTE(lava @ Sep 29 2007, 12:29 AM)

Darwin's Source of Inspiration: Malthus's Theory of Ruthlessness
Darwin's source of inspiration on this subject was the British economist Thomas Malthus's book An Essay on the Principle of Population. Left to their own devices, Malthus calculated that the human population increased rapidly. In his view, the main influences that kept populations under control were disasters such as war, famine and disease. In short, according to this brutal claim, some people had to die for others to live. Existence came to mean "permanent war."
In the 19th century, Malthus's ideas were widely accepted. European upper class intellectuals in particular supported his cruel ideas. In the article "The Scientific Background of the Nazi 'Race Purification' Programme", the importance 19th century Europe attached to Malthus's views on population is described in this way:
In the opening half of the nineteenth century, throughout Europe, members of the ruling classes gathered to discuss the newly discovered "Population problem" and to devise ways of implementing the Malthusian mandate, to increase the mortality rate of the poor: "Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations,"and so forth and so on.3 Some of Malthus's views were rather barbaric, but nothing less than I would expect from a high society Victorian. Darwin, however, did not take away what you claim from Malthus's works. What he took away from Malthus's works were a species produces more offspring then are capable of surviving. Malthus's found this true with humans spot on, and its true of animals as well. There is a nifty graph he created (which I am feeling to lazy to post an image for you at the moment) that was population vs. food production. What Malthus's postulated was that production of goods was linear in nature (this is a true statement and a foundation of even some modern economics). He also stated that population growth is not linear, but exponential (another true statement). Now since one is linear, the other is bound to catch it. At the point they intersect 1 or 2 things can happen. You can find a way to increase food production to accommodate the population growth OR you can die. In a way you can say, Malthus's discovered carrying capacity before modern biology understood it. Anyway, Malthus thought that we should simply let the poor die, as they drain the resources. But as I said, this is not what Darwin took from his works, he took this idea of exponential growth and populations producing more offspring than the resources could support. A key to Natural selection.
As a result of this cruel policy, the weak, and those who lost the struggle for survival would be eliminated, and as a result the rapid rise in population would be balanced out. This so-called "oppression of the poor" policy was actually carried out in 19th century Britain. An industrial order was set up in which children of eight and nine were made to work sixteen hours a day in the coal mines and thousands died from the terrible conditions. The "struggle for survival" demanded by Malthus's theory led to millions of Britons leading lives full of suffering.
Influenced by these ideas, Darwin applied this concept of conflict to all of nature, and proposed that the strong and the fittest emerged victorious from this war of existence. Moreover, he claimed that the so-called struggle for survival was a justified and unchangeable law of natureAnd it is. Evolution works on humans too!. On the other hand, he invited people to abandon their religious beliefs by denying the Creation, and thus undermined at all ethical values that might prove to be obstacles to the ruthlessness of the "struggle for survival."Darwin, never much delved into religion or creation of life for that matter. His wife, was deeply religious and he feared upsetting her beliefs. Oddly, origin of species does not explain origin of life, only how speciation occurs. Of course, working on the assumption you have never read origin of species I can understand the error.
Humanity has paid a heavy price in the 20th century for the dissemination of these callous views which lead people to acts of ruthlessness and cruelty.
People are ruthless, get over yourself and your romantic views. Some people like, violence and cruelty. Man is an animal. Society and technology protect us from nature and our natural behaviors, but they still occur in the world. You make it sound as if Darwin introduced cruelty into the world. Correct me if I am wrong, was it not the Judeo-Christian god that murdered all the first born children of a specific people?
Genocide:
Deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.
destruction of a culture and its people through physical extermination.
From the word genus (race) and (cide), killing.
Sounds like your god beat Darwin to the punch by a few thousand years.
camlax
Sep 29 2007, 05:19 AM
QUOTE(lava @ Sep 29 2007, 12:32 AM)

What 'The Law of the Jungle' Led to: Fascism
As Darwinism fed racism in the 19th century, it formed the basis of an ideology that would develop and drown the world in blood in the 20th century: Nazism.
A strong Darwinist influence can be seen in Nazi ideologues. When one examines this theory, which was given shape by Adolf Hitler and Alfred Rosenberg, one comes across such concepts as "natural selection", "selective mating", and "the struggle for survival between the races", which are repeated dozens of time in the works of Darwin. When calling his book Mein Kampf (My Struggle), Hitler was inspired by the Darwinist struggle for survival and the principle that victory went to the fittest. He particularly talks about the struggle between the races:
History would culminate in a new millennial empire of unparalleled splendour, based on a new racial hierarchy ordained by nature herself.4
In the 1933 Nuremberg party rally, Hitler proclaimed that "a higher race subjects to itself a lower race… a right which we see in nature and which can be regarded as the sole conceivable right".
That the Nazis were influenced by Darwinism is a fact that almost all historians who are expert in the matter accept. The historian Hickman describes Darwinism's influence on Hitler as follows:
(Hitler) was a firm believer and preacher of evolution. Whatever the deeper, profound, complexities of his psychosis, it is certain that [the concept of struggle was important because]… his book, Mein Kampf, clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and the extermination of the weak to produce a better society.5
Hitler, who emerged with these views, dragged the world to violence that had never before been seen. Many ethnic and political groups, and especially the Jews, were exposed to terrible cruelty and slaughter in the Nazi concentration camps. I guess you never heard of the dark ages? Oh we would not want to talk about what Christian knights did during crusades, Or should we? They must have been influenced by Darwin, Sent back in time by the devil!World War II, which began with the Nazi invasion, cost 55 million lives. What lay behind the greatest tragedy in world history was Darwinism's concept of the "struggle for survival."
You know, I almost hate to have be the person to point this out, but you do realize that Hitler was motivated to create this master race because he believed it his God given right? Also you realize that he wanted to recreate the Holy Roman empire correct? And I am sure know, the Nazis undertook what was to be one of the largest archaeological searches for Christian artifacts of history. But alas, must have been the devil at work again. It couldn't have been someone who was clearly crazy and actually thought they spoke with god.
The Bloody Alliance: Darwinism and Communism
While fascists are found on the right wing of Social Darwinism, the left wing is occupied by communists. Communists have always been among the fiercest defenders of Darwin's theory.
This relationship between Darwinism and communism goes right back to the founders of both these "isms". Marx and Engels, the founders of communism, read Darwin's The Origin of Species as soon as it came out, and were amazed at its 'dialectical materialist' attitude. The correspondence between Marx and Engels showed that they saw Darwin's theory as "containing the basis in natural history for communism". In his book The Dialectics of Nature, which he wrote under the influence of Darwin, Engels was full of praise for Darwin, and tried to make his own contribution to the theory in the chapter "The Part Played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man".
Russian communists who followed in the footsteps of Marx and Engels, such as Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, all agreed with Darwin's theory of evolution. Plekhanov, who is seen as the founder of Russian communism, regarded marxism as "Darwinism in its application to social science".6
Trotsky said, "Darwin's discovery is the highest triumph of the dialectic in the whole field of organic matter." 7
'Darwinist education' had a major role in the formation of communist cadres. For instance, historians note the fact that Stalin was religious in his youth, but became an atheist primarily because of Darwin's books.8
Mao, who established communist rule in China and killed millions of people, openly stated that "Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." 9
The Harvard University historian James Reeve Pusey goes into great detail regarding Darwinism's effect on Mao and Chinese communism in his research book China and Charles Darwin.10
In short, there is an unbreakable link between the theory of evolution and communism. The theory claims that living things are the product of chance, and provides a so-called scientific support for atheism. Communism, an atheist ideology, is for that reason firmly tied to Darwinism. Moreover, the theory of evolution proposes that development in nature is possible thanks to conflict (in other words "the struggle for survival") and supports the concept of "dialectics" which is fundamental to communism.
If we think of the communist concept of "dialectical conflict", which killed some 120 million people during the 20th century, as a "killing machine" then we can better understand the dimensions of the disaster that Darwinism visited on the planet.
Oh yea, they sure loved Darwin, Natural Selection and Mendalian genetics alright. Why don't you use your google button there and type "Lysenkoism" into your search box. Also, I think you fail to realize that communism does not work if people, ideas and institutions are allowed free thought. This means, stomping out things like religion, social gatherings, etc is highly necessary unless the government maintains complete control.
camlax
Sep 29 2007, 05:25 AM
QUOTE(lava @ Sep 29 2007, 12:34 AM)

Darwinism and Terrorism
As we have so far seen, Darwinism is at the root of various ideologies of violence that have spelled disaster to mankind in the 20th century. The fundamental concept behind this understanding and method is "fighting whoever is not one of us."
We can explain this in the following way: There are different beliefs, worldviews and philosophies in the world. It is very natural that all these diverse ideas have traits opposing one another. However, these different stances can look at each other in one of two ways:
1) They can respect the existence of those who are not like them and try to establish dialogue with them, employing a humane method. Indeed, this method conforms with the morality of the Qur'an.
2) They can choose to fight others, and to try to secure an advantage by damaging them, in other words, to behave like a wild animal. This is a method employed by materialism, that is, irreligion.
The horror we call terrorism is nothing other than a statement of the second view.
When we consider the difference between these two approaches, we can see that the idea of "man as a fighting animal" which Darwinism has subconsciously imposed on people is particularly influential. Individuals and groups who choose the way of conflict may never have heard of Darwinism and the principles of that ideology. But at the end of the day they agree with a view whose philosophical basis rests on Darwinism. What leads them to believe in the rightness of this view is such Darwinism-based slogans as "In this world, the strong survive", "Big fish swallow little ones", "War is a virtue", and "Man advances by waging war". Take Darwinism away, and these are nothing but empty slogans.
Actually, when Darwinism is taken away, no philosophy of 'conflict' remains. The three divine religions that most people in the world believe in, Islam, Christianity and Judaism, all oppose violence. All three religions wish to bring peace and harmony to the world, and oppose innocent people being killed and suffering cruelty and torture. Conflict and violence violate the morality that God has set out for man, and are abnormal and unwanted concepts. However, Darwinism sees and portrays conflict and violence as natural, justified and correct concepts that have to exist.
For this reason, if some people commit terrorism using the concepts and symbols of Islam, Christianity or Judaism in the name of those religions, you can be sure that those people are not Muslims, Christians or Jews. They are real Social Darwinists. They hide under a cloak of religion, but they are not genuine believers. Even if they claim to be serving religion, they are actually enemies of religion and of believers. That is because they are ruthlessly committing a crime that religion forbids, and in such a way as to blacken religion in peoples' eyes.
For this reason, the root of the terrorism that plagues our planet is not any of the divine religions, but in atheism, and the expression of atheism in our times: "Darwinism" and "materialism."
Honestly, I'll leave this last post for whoever wants it. The sad thing is, your lobotomized ideas required a full 15 minutes of my life, had you done your research in the first place you may have saved that 15 minutes for me (and whatever grueling hours you spent typing this jumble of words passed off as an idea).
Religion has committed some of the most cruel and inhumane acts in witnessed history. Not only do we have records of religions acts of depravity, but we also records of the consent given by religious peoples in power. Let's not kid ourselves here either, not only do we have real witnessed events, but even your mythology incorporates acts of depravity, and not just the bad guys either!
Nestle Wilson
Sep 29 2007, 05:30 AM
I don't think this is going to do much good, but...
QUOTE(lava @ Sep 29 2007, 12:25 AM)

Violent ideologies such as racism, fascism and communism, and many other barbaric world views based on conflict have all drawn strength from this deception.
Are you seriously trying to convince people that Darwinism is responsible for more pain and suffering than Religion is? Two words:
Puh lease!I hate the very idea of Communism for a variety of reasons, but I fail to see how the concept is "violent," "barbaric" or in any way influenced by the idea of evolution. It's actually sort of the opposite, no? And a lot of religious Europeans were making it their ultimate goal to kill everyone who didn't look like them long before anyone suggested anything akin to Darwinism, weren't they? The people who are really to blame for all the terror in the world are the cowardly, weak-minded people who immediately equate the idea of "survival of the fittest" with violence and racism. The first thing I think of when I hear "survival of the fittest" is that the people who work the hardest and make the most out of their lives are given the chance to push society forward and change the world around them. But apparently some people hear "survival of the fittest" and immediate get the idea to kill everyone who isn't like them.
In general I don't think it's at all fair to pin any of the nonsense you referenced on Charles Darwin, as if he's somehow the root of all evil in the world. A man who brought to light of fact of life and human nature, however terrible you may or may not think that fact it, cannot be held responsible for the crimes committed by people who are too weak to control that nature. People need to stop looking for some grand villain to blame for all of man's wrongdoing and take the initiative to guide the people around them to peace instead of just condemning everyone they disagree with.
SilverCougar
Sep 29 2007, 05:44 AM
And yet...
The main bulk or terrorists...
are religious fanatics.
bball
Sep 29 2007, 05:58 AM
This is unbelievable. So many contradictions alongside so many idiotic, uneducated remarks. This sounds like some kind of anti-science pep rally, used to recruit. And ufortunately, it works.
Something Like Laughter
Sep 29 2007, 01:59 PM
In regard to the OPs, are you talking about Social Darwinism? If you are, then you are probably more right than everyone else in this thread will give you credit for. Abuse of Darwinism has led to some really nasty things.
QUOTE(Complex @ Sep 28 2007, 11:30 PM)

Notice that no one has ever taken a wars name in Atheism?
They prefer to kill their own populations, and they've been more effective at it than anyone in history.
Chokmah
Sep 29 2007, 10:52 PM
QUOTE(SilverCougar @ Sep 29 2007, 06:44 AM)

And yet...
The main bulk or terrorists...
are religious fanatics.
Haven't you heard SC? You get 72 virgins if you blow yourself up.

Imagine all that awkwardness.
QUOTE(Something Like Laughter @ Sep 29 2007, 02:59 PM)

They prefer to kill their own populations, and they've been more effective at it than anyone in history.
Atheism is not Communism. Atheism is only in Communism due to the wanting of complete power for the gov't and none for outsider interference - religious athorities ectect.
To the Original Post; Who'd have ever have guessed propaganda in religion =o It's purely and utterly shocking...
SilverCougar
Sep 30 2007, 03:10 AM
QUOTE(Chokmah @ Sep 29 2007, 10:52 PM)

Haven't you heard SC? You get 72 virgins if you blow yourself up.

Imagine all that awkwardness.
Long as they're young.. elven.. and with long hair.. and male... and can serve a good rum, it's all good.
Chokmah
Sep 30 2007, 03:30 AM
QUOTE(SilverCougar @ Sep 30 2007, 04:10 AM)

Long as they're young.. elven.. and with long hair.. and male... and can serve a good rum, it's all good.
Male?
Wow... Sucks to be an islamic terrorist...
truethat
Sep 30 2007, 03:37 AM
I didn't really read all that because the minute I got to "the strong survive" and the weak die off I knew he was talking out his ear.
Survival of the fittest doesn't mean "fit" like you go to the gym. It means you are best suited to the environment. The ones who adapt the best.
Many weak creatures outnumber the strong. People for example come to mind in every way possible.
Mekorig
Sep 30 2007, 03:37 AM
Well, at least this time isnt a christian trying to bash science and common sense.
SilverCougar
Sep 30 2007, 03:43 AM
QUOTE(Chokmah @ Sep 30 2007, 03:30 AM)

Male?
Wow... Sucks to be an islamic terrorist...
FOR ME!! That's all for ME!! *cackles evily*
camlax
Sep 30 2007, 04:50 AM
QUOTE(truethat @ Sep 29 2007, 11:37 PM)

I didn't really read all that because the minute I got to "the strong survive" and the weak die off I knew he was talking out his ear.
Survival of the fittest doesn't mean "fit" like you go to the gym. It means you are best suited to the environment. The ones who adapt the best.
Many weak creatures outnumber the strong. People for example come to mind in every way possible.
Trust me, do not waste the 10 minutes of your life reading it. Life is far to short to afford time for such brain killers.
Guardsman Bass
Sep 30 2007, 05:51 AM
Obviously, the dumbsh** who wrote that OP never read Hobbes, or he would have realized that Hobbes proposed the idea that man was essentially selfish, self-interested, and violent in the early 1600s (more than two centuries before Darwin proposed his theory). Apparently, Darwin is now so influential, he's influencing moral philosophy centuries before he was born.
questionmark
Oct 1 2007, 08:52 PM
QUOTE(Guardsman Bass @ Sep 30 2007, 08:51 AM)

Apparently, Darwin is now so influential, he's influencing moral philosophy centuries before he was born.
Nah, just one more proof that Darwin was .... an instrument of the devil
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.