James von Brunn: “Evolutionist”?

INSANE people do insane things, and sometimes such events are followed by insane commentary attempting to explain it all.

A good example is this freakish essay: James von Brunn, Evolutionist, by a creationist named David Klinghoffer, who blames a recent shooting incident on Darwin.

Klinghoffer, as Wikipedia informs us, is a Senior Fellow of the Discovery Institute. Need we say more? As one of the neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids), Klinghoffer can be expected to hold stridently anti-rational and anti-scientific opinions on virtually everything.

Klinghoffer’s essay on James von Brunn is all that we’ve come to expect from the Discoveroids. Let us offer you a few choice excerpts, with bold added by us:

Now isn’t this fascinating. James von Brunn, the white-supremacist suspect in today’s Holocaust Memorial Museum shooting in which the guard who was shot has now tragically died, describes the relevance of evolution to his sick thinking. He’s obsessed with “genetics.”

Genetics? Darwin wrote nothing about genetics. The subject was unknown to him. Let’s read on, as Klinghoffer quotes from von Brunn’s writings:

Approval of inter-racial breeding is predicated on idiotic Christian dogma that God’s children must love their enemies (a concept JEWS totally reject); and on LIBERAL/MARXIST/JEW propaganda that all men/races are created equal.

This is difficult material to slog through. As we do, however, bear in mind that it was Darwin (hardly a “liberal/Marxist/jew”) who — contrary to the opinion of biologists of his own time — concluded that all humans on earth were one single species. This concern with “inter-racial breeding” is alien to Darwin’s work, but it’s right at home in the ravings of ignorant fringe groups.

We read on, as Klinghoffer continues to quote von Brunn:

As with ALL LIBERAL ideologies, miscegenation is totally inconsistent with Natural Law: the species are improved through in-breeding, natural selection and mutation. Only the strong survive. Cross-breeding Whites with species lower on the evolutionary scale diminishes the White gene-pool while increasing the number of physiologically, psychologically and behaviorally deprived mongrels.

Although we didn’t follow his example, Klinghoffer put that entire passage in bold. It’s important to him. Why? Presumably because in Klinghoffer’s Discoveroid brain, those deranged words from von Brunn have something to do with the work of Charles Darwin.

We must ask ourselves — can Klinghoffer read? If he can, then how can he find in von Brunn’s writing anything that Darwin ever wrote? Specifically, did Darwin really write anything remotely similar to von Brunn’s claim that “the species are improved through in-breeding”? Of course he didn’t. It’s biologically absurd. Indeed, it’s well-known that Darwin was even worried about his own marriage to his cousin.

You don’t believe that Klinghoffer could write something so unhinged? Here’s more, and these are Klinghoffer’s own words:

Like Hitler in Mein Kampf, he [von Brunn] draws lessons from his interpretation of Darwinism. He’s very big on dangers to the Aryan “gene pool.”

That really is crazed. Hitler never even mentioned Darwin in his writings. As we’ve pointed out in Hitler and Darwin, in Mein Kampf, Hitler clearly indicates that he’s a creationist. Check it for yourself: Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler, Volume Two, Chapter X:

For it was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties. Whoever destroys His work wages war against God’s Creation and God’s Will.

There’s certainly no “Darwinism” there, nor is there any in von Brunn’s scribblings. Both of them — Hitler and von Brunn — are just idiotic babblers. But Klinghoffer somehow sees Darwin in them. Perhaps Klinghoffer also sees Darwin in tea leaves and goat entrails. There’s no way to predict the workings of a disordered mind.

At the end of his rant, which is little more than a confession of brain-death, Klinghoffer says:

No, he [von Brunn] doesn’t cite Darwin by name in the part of his book that’s readable online — the first 6 of 12 chapters. But do you get the general drift? And you want to tell me that ideas don’t have consequences?

Yes, we get the general drift. Klinghoffer is capable of seeing the devil — oops, we mean Darwin — as the cause of any depraved act. Okay, that’s how his brain functions. Now we all know.

We also know that Klinghoffer is respected among his comrades at that sink hole in Seattle they call a think tank. They’ve made him a “Senior Fellow.” He’s one of their top thinkers. Do we need to know more?

Update: Klinghoffer has posted a defense of his article, and this is our response: Klinghoffer, von Brunn, & Darwin: Part II.

Second Update: Klinghoffer has posted at the Discoveroid blog. Our response: Discovery Institute Exploits James von Brunn.

Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

9 responses to “James von Brunn: “Evolutionist”?

  1. Von Brunn also has close ties to “Captain Eric May”, and it appears that May may have ties to Steve Reimink (the real owner of Von Brunn’s website), and to various Islamic groups:




  2. I doubt that after “Expelled” there are many people left who buy the pretense that the DI has a scientific objection to evolution (as opposed to the cherry picking, quote mining and other bait-and-switch tactics that are clearly “designed” to promote unreasonable doubt). But if there are, Klinghoffer’s paranoid rant should set most of them straight.

  3. Frank J says:

    I doubt that after “Expelled” there are many people left who buy the pretense that the DI has a scientific objection to evolution…

    I donno. I’d guess that the same people who were impressed by ID before are still impressed.

  4. Curmudgeon wrote: “I’d guess that the same people who were impressed by ID before are still impressed.”

    But they’re the ones who will admit that it’s all about religion/politics, even if they do fall for the phony scientific claims.

  5. It’s unfortunate that so many of the ill-informed fall prey to guilt by association arguments. I’m not sure what it is in those people’s minds that links abuse of an idea with the truth value of the idea, but I sure would like to see them take a few critical thinking classes and get off the anti-intelligence, anti-education, anti-science wagon.

    The guy was* a loon, his mind was broken, crushed, and sieved through a filter of hateful lies and violence. His claim to atheism or religion is irrelevant and had little affect on his mush of a brain.

    *He is dead, or soon will be I hope.

  6. Tundra Boy says: “It’s unfortunate that so many of the ill-informed fall prey to guilt by association arguments.”

    This guy was a bit of a lone wolf, so it’s difficult to tie him down to any group. I think only the Discoveroids are making the Darwin connection. Other than maybe Ben Stein, no one else is likely to see such a connection.

  7. Gabriel Hanna

    A species IS improved through inbreeding. Stock breeders have done it for thousands of years.

    If you’ve got a bad gene, and you mate brothers to sisters over a few generations, then you are going to get so many serious birth defects that the bad gene will be eliminated in short order.

    If you outbreed, it takes hundreds or thousands of years to breed the gene out.

    So if you have lots of inbreeding you can quickly weed out the bad stuff, then breed the different “clean” groups together.

    Darwin bred pigeons and I am sure he knew about this. Stock breeders cull the birth defects–but in humans we call this “murder”.

    Birth defects in humans are a tragedy; we take care of people who suffer them and spend a lot of effort and money trying to make their lives as near to normal as possible, which we should. Stock breeders can feed whatever they don’t to take care of to the pigs.

    Inbreeding does not CREATE the bad genes.

    What is good for the species may be a tragedy for a family or a person.

    There is no conflict with Darwinism

  8. What’s truly sad about this is that Mr. Klinghoffer, a writer with a lot of promise a few years back, ended up on the payroll of such a disreputable PR firm.

  9. John Farrell says: “What’s truly sad about this …”

    Klinghoffer has chosen his path. It’s sad when a promising career is ruined by an accident, but when it’s by deliberate choice, all that can be said is that it’s a waste.