Evolution is antithetical to racism

Some people degrade themselves for the sake of things which are actually worth having, like money or sex or fame or what-have-you.You debase yourself for the sake of hatred. And you do it in public, where we can all watch.

Dr Adequate Don't know why you want to continue this, but I'll see what I can do.How can we advance the discussion further?

You can either:1) Provide some evidence
2) Admit you have made this up in your head.

I said "advance the discussion".Neither option is of any help. One is dishonest and the other has been deemed "off-topic".It seems a bit odd to me, this situation. I'm said to have "falsely accused Marx of being racist evolutionist. I've already demonstrated some of his racism, so my great insult against him is calling him an "evolutionist"? That's funny. And I have to wonder what kind of defense you guys were planning...

Yeah, it's absolutely hilarious that you have not shown one iota of a link between his racism and the theory of evolution, I mean ... just because it is the topic of this thread, why should you?Because that is the difference between making an actual point and just posting a lot of irrelevant blather. Possibly that the truth shows your claim in Message 93: Is an absolute falsehood because you have not made the link to the theory of evolution. Heck you haven't even TRIED to make the link.That's a documented definite falsehood from your post. Deal with it.Then deal with the issue instead of creating a false blind of blather.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Who has told you that it would be off-topic? I am unable to find the post. I think that a demonstration "that racism is a necessary outcome of evolution" would be extremely germane to the topic, and I cannot see where the moderators have said otherwise. Who told you that you had "falsely accused Marx of being racist evolutionist"? I am unable to find the post. Is this something you made up?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Well, if the real world corresponded to the fantasy world in your head, then you could quote Marx's supposed demonstration "that racism is a necessary outcome of evolution."As he provided no such demonstration, and you know it, then you can't so much advance the discussion as run away from it.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Looks like we're done then. I'm not the one who said it's off topic to discuss the racist evolutionist founders of these philosophies. If you're all that interested, that Marx link has a good collection of his books and letters. Read all you can stomach.I finished my job, and offered to hang around. So, what's left?

quote:

---

Looks like we're done then. I'm not the one who said it's off topic to discuss the racist evolutionist founders of these philosophies.

---

Nobody said that it was off-topic, just that it had been dealt with.More importantly the issue you were asked to support was not the idea that Marx was racist to some small degree. You WERE asked to support your assertion that Marx had proved that evolutionary theory was racist. That WOULD be on-topic and advance the discussion. Or rather it would if there were such a proof.

Actually making an argument that the theory of evolution results in racism.Not one thing you have said has done this. Most of your argument consists of falsehoods and misrepresentations (documented above thread). If you think that is a "finished job" then you have no clue how to actually do the job. And I think you have created this little excuse to avoid dealing with the real issue -- showing that racism results from the theory of evolution -- for there is no evidence for this either. All this shows is racism, as noted several times above thread, with no connection to evolution or the theory of evolution. Your inability to see the shortcoming of your argument shows you do not know how to actually make the case you need to make.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

So, as I predicted, you're going to run away. Given that the phrase "it's off topic to discuss the racist evolutionist founders of these philosophies" appears in your post and not in anyone else's, it does appear that you are in fact the one who said this. You could provide some evidence for your ludicrous assertion that Marx and/or Nietzsche demonstrated that "racism is a necessary outcome of evolution".Or you could pretend that someone has told you that it would be off-topic to do so, as an excuse for running away from a claim which, while on-topic, is also utterly false.

The passages which you quote from Marx contain no reference to the theory of evolution, which is profoundly unsurprising given the fact that they were written seven years before the publication of that theory.If this is "gutter racism", then clearly Marx's "gutter racism" cannot be laid at Darwin's door, since it clearly pre-existed the publication of the Origin of Species.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Ha! Enough double talk. It'd be on-topic until I did it, and then it'd be 'off-topic' again.But in case nobody noticed, I said I had no interest in repeating his work, now didn't I?At this point, it doesn't contribute much, if anything, to demonstrate commonly-known facts to people who we all know will continue to deny them. That's just not how I define 'progress'.No. The opposition is simply looking to draw this out. They hope I'll make a mistake and they'll be able to attack my credibility. They hope 3rd party readers will be convinced that truth is determined by how many people wish a thing to be so.Until some flaw can be found in Huxley's logic, I don't see that there's much to argue about. The only flaw I've found is that it's based upon evolutionism...

Except that it wasn't. It was based on ordinary animal breeding techniques that has been practiced for thousands of years.Edited by Chiroptera, : added "techniques"

---

In many respects, the Bible was the world's first Wikipedia article. -- Doug Brown (quoted by Carlin Romano in The Chronicle Review)

So, you have no argument from evolution to racism, and you declare that you have "no interest" in presenting one, which I must admit is a fairly suave way of running sobbing and screaming from an argument that you have lost.But you still want to pretend that there is some argument from evolution to racism.You said that Marx had proved that racism followed from evolution, and you were wrong.You said that Nietzsche had proved that racism followed from evolution, and you were wrong.And now you are claiming that your drivel is "Huxley's logic", by which I presume that you mean that your crap has been proven correct by Huxley. Apparently you've given up on Marx, and you've given up on Nietzsche, but you hope that Thomas Huxley will prove that your delusions are right.And guess what ... you're wrong.Huxley's arguments against eugenics are not arguments in favor of racism. No arguments against eugenics are arguments in favor of racism. I myself have argued against eugenics, in public, while also being opposed to racism.Just because someone is against eugenics, that doesn't mean that somehow their "logic" makes them a racist.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.