About ten years ago, I called someone, who lived
through Nazi Germany to ask her what the Nazi's were
really like. She told me that the Nazi's saw themselves
as applied evolutionists. In other words they were putting
the idea of evolution into practice. Darwin and Haeckel were their heros. Richard Weikart's book FROM DARWIN TO HITLER confirms
this lady's comment, in a very scary way.
The book is thoroughly researched and extremely detailed.
While Dr. Weikart would not say there is direct link between Darwin
and Hitler, he writes it would be foolish to ignore the impact
of Darwinism on Hitler. He quotes and references scientists and
other intellectuals to show that Hitler did not operate in a vacuum. Other respected intellectuals were making statements similar to Hitler. Gene Veith in his book MODERN FASCISM points out that the supporters of fascism or Nazism were respected intellectuals of the day and read like something from the book of "Who's who" (e.g. Heidegger, the philosopher).
Dr. Weikart makes a good point of going to the philosophical FOUNDATIONS.
He shows that even Darwinists who were opposite the Nazi's on the political spectrum, were not that much different in their views upon
closer examination. For example, the Darwinian pacifist were not opposed to war because of the sanctity of life, but because war
destroyed the "fittest" and left the unfit to survive. The reasoning
of some Darwinian "pacifist" is that war should not be waged among
the "superior" European nations but against the "inferior" non-European
nations. So much for their pacifism.
And while there Hitler had points of agreement with traditional Judeo-Christian morality, his philosophical foundations were opposed
to the Judeo-Christian ethic. And even where there were points of agreement, the agreement was not total. For example,
like those who held to traditional morality the Nazi's opposed abortion.
But only in a qualified sense: no abortion for "Aryans," but abortion
for non-Aryans. When it came to the bottom line Hitler, believing
in "survival of the fittest" , despised the Judeo-Christian ethic.
By focusing on the foundations, I believe Weikart has presented
a much clearer picture of what Hitler was really all about. Others have
superficially focused on the "branches," such as Hitler's opposition to
abortion and erroneously concluded Hitler was a conservative. Dr. Weikart goes deeper and examines the "trunk" of the Nazi tree.
Unfortunately it seems as if people have not learned from the past.
Dr. Weikart notes that some bioethicists of today are using arguments
for euthanasia similar to ones used by people profiled in Weikart's book. Weikart is not the first to express alarm over euthanasia.
The famed British commentator,Malcom Muggeridge in his book A THIRD TESTAMENT, recounted how the church leaders stood up to the Nazi euthanasia program. He remarked how ironic it was that euthanasia was again being touted as a humane solution.
I guess there is a question or point of disagreement on my part
about the book. Dr. Weikart
mentions that Haeckel used the argument of ontogeny recapitulates
phylogeny to argue for that the embryo is less than human. I wonder
why he didn't mention that Haeckel's drawings were faked or doctored?
When I saw Haeckel's other drawings showing how the African was closer to the ape than the white man, the issue of the faked embryo drawings
came to mind. I wonder if those drawings are also faked? Francis Hitchings in his book THE NECK OF THE GIRAFFE described Haeckel as
a "rogue." Perhaps Hitchings was not far from the truth.
I must say that all in all Dr. Weikart has done a thorough job in describing the intellectual environment of Hitler's time.
# posted by GuyTak @ 12:36 PM
