PhillyTablet Inquirer Daily News
philly.com
email
font size
options
 
Wednesday, November 9, 2011

I've recieved dozens of thoughtful resposes to the column on alleged links between Darwinian evolution and Hitler's genocidal ideology. It was reprinted in a paper in Maine, where it was noted by a reader who wrote the reply below. This seems quite plausible, and yet it hadn't come up in my discussions with the historians on either side.

   I read with some interest your article (carried in the Lewiston [Maine] Sun Journal) in the Philadelphia Inquirer concerning the link between Darwin and Nazism.  I was surprised that you left out an important concept that is both Darwinian in concept and recognized and discussed by the Nazi hierarchy charged with the details of the Final Solution.

     The very act of attempting to eliminate all traces of a Race (of Jews, although we are A Human Race, and our use of the word here is incorrect) would bring about an unusual example of Darwinism.  There would be no way Heydrich and the SS could eliminate the Jews without some exceptions.  There might be escapees, uprisings, impregnations, etc. wherein members of the group being subjected to genocide would avoid extermination.  A high percentage of this group would exhibit superior genetic traits in survival skills and assertiveness.  If the SS failed to kill every single member of a group, the survivors would be, by the very nature of Darwinism, a superior group.  Furthermore, if the Final Solution was not carried out to its end (for example by the Third Reich's surrender), the surviving members would by physically superior, given that their bodies had withstood starvation, abuse and disease.

     I believe the SS leadership discussed this concept.  I have read many texts examining the Final Solution and believe that this is mentioned somewhere, perhaps in Eugene Kagan's The Theory and Practice of Hell, or one of the books on the Wannsee Conference (I would try to pin this down for you but I have recently moved to Western Maine and most of my small library is still boxed).  The arrogance of Nazi leadership prevented them from recognizing that any failure of their Pogrom would ironically result in an emergence of a Master Jewish Race, rather than the rise of Aryanism.

     If I find the references alluded to I will write again.  Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or want to sail (we have informal Sunfish class racing on the pond near my home).

And speaking of the misunderstood and explosive notion of race, I've just received the new book, "Race? Debunking a Scientific Myth" by Ian Tattersall and Rob DeSalle. It looks like a very important book. I'm going to quote from the blurb on the jacket:

"Although there is clearly some physical basis for the variations that underlie perceptions of race, clear boundaries among "races" remain highly elusive from a purely biological standpoint. In other words, differences among human populations that people intuitively view as "racial" are not only superficial, but are also of astonishingly recent origin." I'm looking forward to reading it.

Posted by Faye Flam @ 1:12 PM  Permalink | 8 comments
Comments   
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:28 PM, 11/09/2011
    Wow, if this is PMH's ida of how to rebuild the newspaper business and increase readership....
    I guess I was out of town and missed the clamor of people wanting to read about evolution.
    jimmymack
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 8:27 PM, 11/10/2011
    "If the SS failed to kill every single member of a group, the survivors would be, by the very nature of Darwinism, a superior group."

    This is a failure to understand evolutionary theory. Evolution does not produce "superior" organisms. It produces organisms that are genetically better adapted to their environment. While the survivors of Nazi pomgrams might, over enough time and under severe enough selection pressure, become genetically better able to reproduce under such conditions, it would not necessarily mean that they were, for example, more intelligent. It might result in them being less intelligent and, therefore, more willing to reproduce even though their children would likely die in horrible ways.
    John Pieret
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 6:42 AM, 11/11/2011
    John, what you are pointing out is one of the several ways in which movements like eugenics differ from evolutionary biology and are more similar to pre-darwinian (and today's anti-darwinian) notions. It is no wonder that people who are confused about evolution would project their confusion on others. It is clear that people often try to claim "scientific" basis for their "common sense".
    thoms
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 4:33 PM, 11/11/2011
    When will we get our 10 articles about the contribution of Newton's theory of gravity to the 1940 London Blitzkrieg?
    Jim Mauch
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 9:36 AM, 11/12/2011
    Jim, you may be interested to hear that some of the modern geocentrists (yes, there are people who seriously believe, on the basis of the Bible, that the Earth is fixed and the Sun goes around it) point out that Copernicus led to Hitler.
    thoms
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 4:12 PM, 11/14/2011
    Faye, This is a real hoot. The person who wrote this comment was alluding to the Wannsee Conference, where the Nazis actually made that exact argument. Here's the relevant section of the Wannsee Protocol:

    "Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.

    The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history."

    This substantiates my thesis, rather than undermining it, as it shows the Nazis believes in "natural selection." Didn't a prominent English scientist coin that phrase?
    Richard Weikart
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 7:03 PM, 11/15/2011
    I guess Mr. Weikart does not "believe" in "natural" selection. I suppose he thinks those who survived the Nazis' attempts at extermination and extinction were "selected" by an Intelligent Designer. But, whatever...

    Whatever he "believes", the Nazis did not understand Darwin any better than Mr. Weikart does. What he describes in his comment, and what the Nazis at Wansee described, is not "natural" selection.
    The process the Nazis used on the *undesirable* populations was not a form of "natural" selection. There was little "natural" about it. They murdered most outright and tried to work the rest to death, deliberately withholding food and medical treatment required for survival. This is hardly "natural" selection. It is completely unnatural and artificial, closer to how an Intelligent Designer might attempt "do-over" using a world-wide flood.

    The Nazis were trying to play Intelligent Designer.
    IDWatcher
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:22 AM, 11/16/2011
    Richard Weikart continues his disinformation campaign. Of course, by "natural causes," the Nazis meant "worked and starved to death." And by "resistant," they meant those most docile and capable of working under the harshest conditions. In short they weren't talking about NATURAL selection, they were talking about breeding domestic animals, a concept that long predated Darwin. That the Nazis dressed it up in pseudoscientific language says no more about the science of evolution than those "Gott Mit Uns" belt buckles they wore says about religion.
    John Pieret


8 comments
About Planet of the Apes
Faye Flam - writer
In pursuit of her stories, writer Faye Flam has weathered storms in Greenland, gotten frost nip at the South Pole, and floated weightless aboard NASA’s zero-g plane. She has a degree in geophysics from the California Institute of Technology and started her writing career with the Economist. She later took on the particle physics and cosmology beat at Science Magazine before coming to the Inquirer in 1995. Her previous science column, “Carnal Knowledge,” ran from 2005 to 2008. Her new column and blog, Planet of the Apes, explores the topic of evolution and runs here and in the Inquirer’s health section each Monday. Email Faye at fflam@phillynews.com.

Tony Auth, illustrator
Tony Auth graduated from UCLA with a degree in biological illustration. He was chief medical illustrator at a large teaching hospital in southern California before joining the Inquirer as staff editorial cartoonist in 1971. Like all practicing political cartoonists, he’s gotten more than his share of both awards and hate mail. Over the years Tony has written and/or illustrated eleven children’s books.