A Short History of Darwinism
Before we turn to the pain and disasters that Darwinism has brought to
the world, let us take a brief look at its history. Many people believe
the theory of evolution, first put forward by Charles Darwin, to be a
theory based on firm scientific evidence, observation and experiment.
Whereas, as the originator of the theory of evolution is not Darwin, so
the source of the theory is not scientific proof.
At one period in Mesopotamia, when idol-worshipping religions had hegemony,
superstitions and myths regarding the roots of life and the universe abounded:
one of these was the belief "evolution." According to the Enuma-Elish
epic, which dates back to the Sumerians, there was a raging flood, and
from this the gods called Lahmu and Lahamu suddenly emerged. According
to the superstition, these idols first created themselves and then, becoming
universal, formed other matter and living creatures. In other words, according
to Sumerian myth, life suddenly came into being from the non-living watery
chaos, evolved and developed.
We can see that this belief shows a close accordance with the theory
of evolution's claim that "living things developed and evolved from non-living
things." From this we can see that the idea of evolution does not belong
to Darwin, but originally to Sumerian idol-worshippers.
Later, the myth of evolution found more space to live in another idol-worshipping
civilisation, Ancient Greece. Ancient Greek materialist philosophers counted
matter as the only thing which existed. They turned to the myth of evolution,
an inheritance from the Sumerians, to explain how living things came about.
In this way, materialist philosophy and the myth of evolution came together
in Ancient Greece. From there it was carried to the culture of Rome.
A picture depicting the Sumerian water god. Just like the Sumerians,
Darwinists believe that life emerged by coincidence from water.
In other words, they see water as a god which created life.
These two concepts, each a myth belonging to idol-worshipping cultures,
appeared in the modern world in the 18th century. Some European thinkers
who studied ancient Greek sources took a liking to materialism. The common
feature of these thinkers was that they were opponents of religion.
In this environment the first person to take the theory of evolution
on in a detailed way was the French biologist Jean Baptiste Lamarck. In
his theory, which would later be understood to be false, Lamarck proposed
that all living creatures evolved from one another by small changes throughout
their lives. One person who repeated Lamarck's claims, in a slightly different
way, was Charles Darwin.
Darwin put forward this theory in his book The Origin of Species, which
he published in England in 1859. In this book, the myth of evolution,
which had come down from ancient Sumer, was put forward in some detail.
He claimed that all species of living creatures came from one ancestor,
born by chance in the water, and that they had grown different from one
another by small changes which came about by coincidence.
Like idol-worshipping societies, Darwinists believe that life
emerged by coincidence in water as a result of natural effects.
According to this nonsensical claim, the unconscious atoms in the
"primitive soup" in the picture joined together and decided to form
This claim of Darwin's did not win much general acceptance from the men
of science of his time. Fossil experts in particular were aware that Darwin's
claim was nothing but the product of a fantasy. But despite this Darwin's
theory began to win more support from different circles as time passed.
Because Darwin and his theory provided the missing foundation for the
forces ruling in the 19th century.
The Reason for the Acceptance of Darwinism is
In the period when Darwin published his book The Origin of Species and put
forward his theory of evolution, science was very backward. For example,
the cell, which is today known to possess a most complicated system, was
only visible as a blot through the simple microscopes in use at the time.
For this reason Darwin saw no problem in claiming that life came about by
chance from non-living material.
In the same way, the insufficiency of the fossil record at that time
made it possible for it to be claimed that living creatures had come about
from each other by minute changes. Whereas today, it is certain that the
fossil record, as we explained a short while above, offers not one piece
of evidence to support Darwin's claim that living creatures had come about
by developing from one another. Up until recently, evolutionists used
to try to get over the dilemma facing them by saying, "It will be found
one day in the future." But they are now in the position of being unable
to hide behind this explanation. (For detailed information see Chapter
"The Misconception of Evolution")
Compared to today, the microscopes available in the 19th century
were quite primitive and, as in the picture, could only view cells
Whatever the case, there was no change in the Darwinists' attachment
to the theory of evolution. Supporters of Darwin have come down to our
day by handing their faithfulness to Darwin on to one another like an
inheritance for the last 150 years.
All right, what is the reason for Darwinism, despite the fact that its
scientific invalidity is now openly apparent, appealing to certain circles,
and for heavy propaganda being made regarding it?
The most defining feature of Darwin's theory is its denial of the existence
of a Creator. According to the theory of evolution, life formed itself,
by coincidence, from innate matter. This claim of Darwin provided a false
scientific support for all atheist philosophies, beginning with materialist
philosophy. Because up until the 19th century the great majority of men
of science looked at science as a method of learning and discovering what
God had created. Because this belief was widespread, atheist and materialist
philosophies were unable to find suitable ground in which to develop.
But by denying the existence of a Creator and forming an illusory support
for atheist and materialist belief, the theory of evolution was a wonderful
opportunity for them. For this reason they both identified with Darwinism
and adapted the theory to their own ideologies.
Beside Darwinism's denial of the existence of God, another claim emerged
to support 19th century materialistic ideologies: "The development of
living creatures is linked to the struggle for life in nature. This struggle
goes to the strongest. The weak are condemned to defeat and extinction."
Darwinism's co-operation with ideologies which have brought pain and
disaster to the world is clearly revealed in this point.
Social Darwinism: The Adaptation of the Law of
the Jungle to Human Behaviour
of the most important claims of the theory of evolution is its basing the
development of living creatures on the "fight for survival" in nature. According
to Darwin, in nature there is a pitiless fight for survival, an eternal
conflict. The strong always overcome the weak, and this makes development
possible. The subtitle of the book The Origin of Species summed up this
point of view. "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the
Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life".
The source of Darwin's inspiration on this matter was the English economist
Thomas Malthus's book An Essay on the Principle of Population. This book
indicated that a rather dark future awaited mankind. Malthus had calculated
that left to itself, the human population would increase at enormous speed.
The numbers would double every 25 years. However, food supplies would
in no way increase at the same rate. In this event, mankind faced the
permanent danger of starvation. The forces keeping population under control
were disasters, such as war, famine, and disease. In short, in order for
some people to live, it was necessary for others to die. Existence meant
Darwin declares that it was Malthus's book which made him think about
the struggle for existence: In October, 1838, that is, fifteen months after
I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus
on population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for
existence which everywhere goes on from long continuous observation of
the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these
circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved and unfavourable
ones to be destroyed. The result of this would be the formation of new
species. Here, then, I had at last got a theory by which to work.2
In the 19th century Malthus's ideas had been adopted by quite a wide public.
Upper-class European intellectuals in particular supported Malthus's ideas.
The importance that 19th century Europe gave to Malthus's ideas on population
is put across in the article The Scientific Background of the Nazi "Race
Purification" Programme: 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
Thomas Malthus, who influenced Darwin and proposed that war and
scarcity balanced the rapid rise in world population.
As a result of this cruel policy, the strong would defeat the weak in
the struggle for survival, and in this way the rapidly increasing population
would be balanced. In 19th century England this "crush the poor" programme
was actually implemented. An industrial system was founded where children
of eight or nine were made to work 16 hours a day in the coal mines and
where thousands died from the bad conditions. The theoretical "struggle
for survival" which Malthus's theory found necessary, condemned millions
of poor people in England to a life full of suffering.
Darwin, influenced by Malthus, applied this view to the whole of nature,
and proposed that this war, which actually existed, would be won by the
strongest and the fittest. This claim of Darwin's included all plants,
animals, and human beings. He also stressed that the struggle for survival
in question was a permanent and unchanging law of nature. By denying creation
he was inviting people to abandon their religious beliefs and in this
way aiming at all ethical principles that might be an obstacle to the
ruthlessness of this "struggle for survival."
For this reason Darwin's theory found the support of the Establishment
at its back, right from the moment it came to be heard, first in England
and later in the entire West. The imperialists, capitalists and other
materialists who greeted this theory, which provided a scientific justification
for the political and social system they had founded, did not delay in
taking it up. Within a short time the theory of evolution was brought
to be the sole criterion in every sphere of interest to human societies,
from sociology to history, from psychology to politics. In every sphere
the basic idea was the slogan of the "fight for survival" and "the survival
of the fittest," and political parties, nations, administrations, commercial
firms, and individuals began to live in the warmth of these slogans. Because
the ruling ideologies in society had identified with Darwinism, Darwinist
propaganda began to be carried out in every field, from education to art,
from politics to history. It was attempted to establish links between
every subject and Darwinism and to shed light on them from a Darwinist
viewpoint. As a result of this, even if people did not know Darwinism,
models of society living the lives predicted by Darwinism began to be
himself recommended that his views based on evolution be applied to ethical
understanding and social sciences. Darwin said the following to H. Thiel
in a letter in 1869:
You will readily believe how much interested
I am in observing that you apply to moral and social questions analogous
views to those which I have used in regard to the modification of species.
It did not occur to me formerly that my views could be extended to such
widely different, and most important, subjects.4
With the struggle in nature also being accepted as being in human nature,
conflicts in the name of racism, Fascism, Communism, and imperialism, and
the efforts of strong peoples to crush peoples they perceived as weaker
were by now clothed in a scientific façade. It was now impossible to reproach
or obstruct those who carried out barbarous massacres, treated human beings
like animals, turned peoples against each other, who despised others on
account of their race, who closed down small businesses in the name of competition,
and who refused to extend the hand of help to the poor. Because they were
doing this in accordance with a "scientific" natural law.
This new scientific account came to be known as "Social Darwinism." One of the foremost evolutionist scientists
of our own time, the American palaeontologist Stephen Jay Gould accepts
the truth by writing that following the publication of The Origin of Species
in 1859, "subsequent arguments for slavery, colonialism, racial differences,
class struggles, and sex roles would go forth primarily under the banner
One point requires careful attention here. All periods of human history
have seen wars, atrocities, ruthlessness, racism, and conflict. But there
was at all times a divine religion teaching people that what they were doing
was wrong and calling them to peace, justice, and calm. Because human beings
knew this divine religion, they at least had a measure of understanding
that what they were doing was wrong when they engaged in violence. But from
the 19th century, Darwinism showed that the struggle for profit and injustice
had an element of scientific justification to them, and said that all of
these were part of human nature, that man carried savage and aggressive
tendencies left over from his ancestors, and that in the same way that as
the strongest and most aggressive animal survived, the same laws applied
to human beings. Under the influence of this thinking, wars, suffering,
and massacres began to affect a very large part of the world. Darwinism
supported and encouraged all those movements which brought pain, blood,
and oppression to the world, showed them to be reasonable and justified,
and backed all their practical applications. As a result of this so-called
scientific backing all these dangerous ideologies grew increasingly stronger,
and stamped the name "the age of suffering" on the 20th century.
In his book Darwin, Marx, Wagner professor of history Jacques Barzun
evaluates the scientific, sociological, and cultural causes of the terrible
moral breakdown of the modern world. These comments from Barzun's book
are striking from the point of view of Darwinism's influence on the world:
… in every European country between 1870 and
1914 there was a war party demanding armaments, an individualist party
demanding ruthless competition, an imperialist party demanding a free
hand over backward peoples, a socialist party demanding the conquest of
power, and a racialist party demanding internal purges against aliens-all
of them, when appeals to greed and glory failed, or even before, invoked
Spencer and Darwin, which was to say, science incarnate… Race was biological,
it was sociological, it was Darwinian.6
In the 19th century, when Darwin put forward his claim that living things
had not been created, that they had emerged by coincidence, and that the
human being had a common ancestor with animals and had emerged as the
most highly developed organism as the result of coincidence, perhaps most
people could not imagine what the results of this claim would be. But
in the 20th century the end result of the claim was lived out in terrible
experiences. Those who saw human beings as a developed animal, did not
hesitate to rise by treading on the weak, to find a way of disposing of
the sick and weak, and to carry out massacres to get rid of races which
they saw as different and inferior. Because their theory with a mask of
science told them that this was a "law of nature."
The author of "Darwin, Marx, Wagner," professor of history Jacques
The disasters Darwinism brought to the world began in this way, and gathering
speed, spread over the whole world. Whereas in the 19th century, until
materialism and atheism grew stronger through the support they received
from Darwinism, the great majority of people believed that God created
all living things and that human beings, unlike other living creatures,
possessed a soul created by God. From whatever race or people, human beings
were each seen as a servant created by God. Lack of religion, however,
brought about and strengthened by Darwinism, gave rise to social groups
with a competitive and ruthless world view, attaching no importance to
morals, seeing human beings as highly developed animals. People who denied
that they had any responsibility to God brought about a culture where
every type of selfishness was justified. From this culture were born many
"isms," and each of these became a calamity, in the real sense of the
world, for mankind.
In the following pages we will examine the ideologies in question to
which Darwinism lent justification, the close relationships between these
ideologies and Darwinism, and what this co-operation has cost the world.