IF you already know who David Klinghoffer is, you can skip the next paragraph:
David Klinghoffer is a “Senior Fellow” (i.e., full-blown creationist) among the neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids). David also operates his own blog, Kingdom of Priests, a part of Beliefnet. What Klinghoffer writes at Beliefnet sometimes shows up at the Discoveroids’ blog, so we regard each blog as an extension of the other.
David Klinghoffer has written a series of bizarre essays attempting to link Charles Darwin to:
Those essays, Klinghoffer’s fantasy account of Darwin’s legacy, are void of scientific content and are thus utterly unrelated to Darwin’s theory of evolution. Rather, we regard them as Klinghoffer’s continuing and increasingly desperate cry for help. We can’t help him; we doubt that anyone can.
Anyway, he’s just done it again. We present to you, dear reader, some excerpts from Darwin and Mao, which appears at the Beliefnet blog.
We won’t excerpt much of it. Most of David’s essay consists of his quoting someone else. We don’t know if David’s source is being quoted fairly. We suspect that there’s a lot wrong with David’s scholarship, but we haven’t checked It’s really too much bother, considering that we’re dealing with Klinghoffer. He’s got a track record. The lad has cried “Hitler” too many times.
We’ll give you some of David’s own writing, which appears after he’s finished quoting his source, and then you can draw your own conclusions The bold font was added by us:
Yet I’m guessing that this is the first time you’ve heard of the Darwin-Mao connection, as most people don’t know about the Marx-, Lenin-, and Hitler-Darwin connections. Most who’ve heard of it, dismiss it since that’s the prestige attitude to take.
Or maybe prestige has nothing to do with it. Perhaps it’s because embracing such imaginary connections is — shall we say — a bit daft? Let’s read on:
I just wonder why this thread of history is suppressed. I mean, the abuses of religion are well known. The Crusades are part of the Christian legacy, despite the fact the nothing at all in the New Testament would lead you to expect such an abuse.
Religious maniacs usually justify their actions with quotes from scripture. But Marx didn’t justify his goofy economics with quotes from Darwin. Neither did Hitler quote (or even mention) Darwin in Mein Kampf; and although we’ve never read Mao, we’re confident that he didn’t quote Darwin either. Also, none of those people were biologists. Biologists don’t exhibit such behavior. But the Crusades were initiated and sanctioned by clergymen. See the difference, David?
Here’s the end of his essay:
When it comes to evaluating the relationship between ideas and their consequences, why does Darwinism always get a free pass and a whitewash while religion is held to strict account? This is not a rhetorical question. Please do help me understand.
As we said, this is a cry for help.
Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.