Why you should become a Bible-believing anarchist
who also believes the universe was created around 4004 B.C.
Here is the full title of Charles Darwin's famous book from 1859:
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,
or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
William Jennings Bryan understood the implications of the key words in Darwin's title, and believed that there was a conflict between Darwinism and Christianity:
Darwin was a White Supremacist. As was Abraham Lincoln. Darwin justified the racism, and Lincoln justified federal war-making power.
I personally know some white supremacists. I've sat across the table from them in a Bible study. They treat non-white races the same way you do, assuming you treat them with some measure of dignity and justice. Evolutionists, trying to defend Darwin, say the same thing about him. In 2025, there are only a handful of "white supremacists" in America, and they are no threat to anyone. Some are hateful, others are not. They are not plotting nor could they execute a conspiracy to enslave blacks under their control. They have goofy views, e.g., that God wants the races to be separate, and therefore condemns miscegenation (marriage between two races). Today's "white supremacists" are quaint and powerless.
What is dangerous is when a racist obtains a badge and a gun from the institution claiming a Monopoly of Violence.
In the early 1800's, anyone who advocated the abolition of slavery was told to "Listen to the Science!" There were "scientific" "experts" who said Negroes were inferior to whites and could never be assimilated into white society. Abraham Lincoln believed this. Charles Darwin believed this. A lot of white people believed this.
Consider two famous white supremacists and the influence they have had on our world. Both were born on the same day in 1809.
Lincoln was born on February 12, 1809.
Lincoln used the N-word and told racist jokes. He once said that Black people were inferior to Whites and he liked minstrel shows. He proposed ending slavery by shipping willing Black people back to Africa.
Lincoln also once floated an offer to the Confederates that would allow them to keep slaves until 1900 if they surrendered, according to a PBS film called "The Abolitionists." And at one White House meeting with Black ministers, Lincoln virtually blamed slaves for starting the Civil War.
If some of Lincoln's public utterances about Blacks were retweeted today, he would have been canceled on social media and likely run out of office.
During one of his famed senatorial debates with Stephen Douglas in 1858, Lincoln said:
"There is a physical difference between the White and Black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality."
Lincoln didn't even try to hide his racism. Why should he? His racist views were widely held in his day.
In his fourth debate with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln argued: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
Lincoln declared, "What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races...."
In 1860, Lincoln's racial views were explicit in these words: "They say that between the nigger and the crocodile they go for the nigger. The proportion, therefore, is, that as the crocodile to the nigger so is the nigger to the white man." ["Lincoln's Legacy at 200" by Mark Alexander]
There has been a conspiracy to present Lincoln to the American people (as public school students and consumers of American media) to hold Lincoln in high esteem as one of America's greatest Presidents.
But Lincoln was not only a racist, he was a tyrant, and surely one of America's worst Presidents. Lincoln believed that hundreds of thousands of human beings -- of all races -- could be murdered in order for him to retain his political power over their state governments.
More about Lincoln and his worship of political power.
Political power -- archism -- transforms quaint, goofy racists into mass murderers.
Lincoln himself did not kill nearly a million Americans. They killed each other, suffering from a form of "Mass Formation Psychosis" -- a belief in the reality of something that does not have a reality: the legitimate right of some people to rule over others. In a word, "civil government."
Darwin was born across the pond in England on the same day as Lincoln: February 12, 1809. Darwin often referred to blacks and indians as "savages," and said
“As barbarians do not regard the opinion of their women, wives are commonly treated like slaves. Most savages are utterly indifferent to the sufferings of strangers, or even delight in witnessing them. It is well known that the women and children of the North-American Indians aided in torturing their enemies. Some savages take a horrid pleasure in cruelty to animals, and humanity is an unknown virtue….. Many instances could be given of the noble fidelity of savages towards each other, but not to strangers; common experience justifies the maxim of the Spaniard, “Never, never trust an Indian.”
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, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked 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.”
Only whites are truly civilized:
“We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.”
According to Uncommon Descent, Darwin, who not only "listened to the science," but helped create many of modern science's most cherished psychoses, said:
It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but ‘a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla’ and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro.
“The above view of the origin and nature of the moral sense, which tells us what we ought to do, and of the conscience which reproves us if we disobey it, accords well with what we see of the early and undeveloped condition of this faculty in mankind…. A North-American Indian is well pleased with himself, and is honoured by others, when he scalps a man of another tribe; and a Dyak cuts off the head of an unoffending person, and dries it as a trophy. … With respect to savages, Mr. Winwood Reade informs me that the negroes of West Africa often commit suicide. It is well known how common it was amongst the miserable aborigines of South America after the Spanish conquest. … It has been recorded that an Indian Thug conscientiously regretted that he had not robbed and strangled as many travellers as did his father before him. In a rude state of civilisation the robbery of strangers is, indeed, generally considered as honourable.”
This is a bizarre paragraph. Not just for its racism, but for its moral reasoning. How does morality evolve? Darwin said he had a hard time figuring out how evolution could have produced the eye. I don't know how Darwin explained how "low and degenerate races" evolved from conscientiously believing murder and robbery are morally virtuous, to believing they are sinful. Is Darwin saying that thugs and cannibals are not immoral, or sinful, but simply less-evolved than non-robbing caucasians? Can we condemn robbery and murder if the murderer is simply less evolved? He's just engaged in a "struggle for life." That's perfectly "natural." Darwin says some cultures are morally less-evolved. How does he make that judgment without reference to Christianity and the Bible?
Of course, most people today recognize racism as a form of "mass formation psychosis." It is a belief that is not connected to reality. It is a belief that was widely held because of social pressure. It is a belief that was promoted by all the "smart" people. "Listen to the science" and recognize the superiority of the civilized whites over the uncivilized colored savages. Or so we were told.
So the kids in Dayton, Tennessee were told.
Darwin was by no means the first to propose evolution as a substitute for creation. And the Scopes Trial did not inaugurate a controversy between the two views. The controversy was centuries old.
Darwin's theory became popular in the late 1800's because it justified racism, which was rampant in the de-Christianizing/secularizing West. Non-whites were just not as evolved as whites. A convenient "scientific" explanation.
Missing the link between Darwin and racism · Creation.com
Some people say Darwin wasn't a racist because he advocated being kind to the help, and not mistreating inferior races.
Think about that.
In 1859, when Darwin's book was published -- one year before the beginning of the U.S. Civil War -- a lot of people believed in the inferiority of less-"Favoured Races."
|
|
John S. Haller, Jr., Outcasts from Evolution: Scientific Attitudes of Racial Inferiority, 1859-1900
They weren't "outcasts" back then. Today, maybe.
A "scientific" justification for racial inferiority was a "scientific" justification for racial subordination.
Subordination is not just racism, it is archism.
Evolution was the quest for archist-hood. (We'll see this in detail below.)
Racism motivated acceptance of "The Science" of evolution the same way
"Trump Derangement Syndrome" motivates acceptance of "The Science" of lockdowns and covid "models" which inaccurately project millions of deaths.
Sentencing 130 million poor people around the world to starvation and justifying that by claiming to "protect" less than 1% of the population who were going to die later that same year anyway is not a rational "public health policy." That's not pure, dispassionate, objective epidemiology. That's the adrenaline rush that an archist gets when exercising political control and influencing an upcoming Presidential election.
The U.S. military invasion of the Philippines began in 1899. This was perhaps a watershed year in America's transition from a Theocratic Christian Republic into a Progressive Atheist Empire. Evolutionism + archism = imperialism. A Secular Empire is the opposite of a "City upon a Hill."
It has been said that "Ideas Have Consequences,"
to which has been added, "Bad Ideas Have Victims."
The millions who starve because of a supply-chain destroyed by unwarranted COVID lockdowns are victims of the ideas entertained by quiet epidemiologists and exploited by power-hungry political archists. The tens of millions who have been killed, crippled, or made homeless during my lifetime by a thousand U.S. military bases around the world are victims of the ideas of evolutionary biologists appropriated by the Military-Industrial Complex. Consequential ideas are often lies. Human beings are complex, as are the societies they create. John Calvin began his Institutes of the Christian Religion by noting that the knowledge of God and the knowledge of man (self-knowledge) are intimately connected, and knowing ourselves and our motivations and deceptions is very hard work.
Some are more honest about their motivations than others.
Racism
Fascism
Adultery
Militarism
Here again is the full title of Charles Darwin's famous book from 1859:
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,
or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
Key words:
Public schools are atheistic by legal mandate. Teachers cannot "endorse" or "promote" "Creator-ism" as seen in the Declaration of Independence. Creationism is "anti-science," because "science" is atheistic.
Students are also taught that Washington D.C. is America's center of virtue and righteousness, and those who have an anti-government "conspiracy theory" are "anarchists" who foster disorder, chaos, lawlessness, and assassination.