the eonic effect: a glimpse of evolution?!…//On Darwinism and the Abdication of Reason | Evolution News

This is an excellent piece of critical/secular Darwiniana, and in the context today of beating Marxists over the head, a useful reminder that a secular humanist can see through Darwinism and survive cancel culture, although I fear that being published in the ID site shows still dark clouds overhead. I have often berated Marxists for their inability to shake off Darwinism, with its atrocious social Darwinist crypto-ideology. Continue reading “the eonic effect: a glimpse of evolution?!…//On Darwinism and the Abdication of Reason | Evolution News”

Was Marx a hypocrite on the issue of Darwinism….??//Darwinism and Stalinism | Evolution News

Googling ‘natural selection + Stalin’, sure enough, I end up at Evolution News for a useful essay on the connection. But this conservative site would never acknowledge the connection of Darwinism/social Darwinism to capitalism, thus this piece/site while useful is hardly trustworthy.

In any case, our critiques of Marx are from the left and there the connection of Marx and Darwin needs careful examination. I am suspicious that Marx suspected from the first that Darwinism’s natural selection was ideological and then changed his mind, or else dissembled, under the influence of Engels, Marx one of the first to be wary of the rising orthodoxy set into motion by Darwin and his generation and which has produced so many hypocrites who must get on with their academic careers.

But, cf also:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=stalinism+natural+selection

Biographically speaking, reading Darwin’s Origin was seminal in Stalin’s own march toward a godless communism.

Source: Darwinism and Stalinism | Evolution News

 US, China: US, beacon of democracy or continental rape by a bunch of hooligans…?

This book on China is compelling and invites comparison with the US.
I should refrain instead, it is VERY hard to get it right, but some speculative warnings. There is something tragic about both China and the US. China is easy to underestimate, but it has a solid place in historical evolution as the eonic effect shows, it created Zen Buddhism, where the US is far more fragile in the long run. It could lose its economic powerhouse status in a blink and then confront its real legacy of democratic hope and utterly dismal record of capitalist mayhem, imperialism and genocide, covert fascism, and racism. The US preaches democracy where it doesn’t really exist. History moves on from its democratic failures, we could end like Athens in limbo after 400 BCE. The US, like Russia was marginal to the eonic series but became an open field for the English (and French) transition zones and just around the end of the modern transition becomes the bearer for especially the English modernity. The US will gain a huge plus to its legacy in the defeat of slavery, but so far still mired in racism. I am by no means equipped for this judgment and the Chinese case is almost too tricky to discuss. I have been critical here on the grounds of its faux communism, but as the book suggests that outer appearance is the second coming, or third, of manderin exam-sifted elites with trappings of Marx/Engels. More study needed here. With China one hardly knows what one is seeing.

One should definitely set down some notes, toward a final judgment, as a scare tactic at least. And as an aside denounce the damage done by Darwinism. People have truly come to believe they are in a social darwinist struggle of men and nations, but that is not true. In classical occidental antiquity we see that the Darwinian survivors don’t advance but degrade civilization: look at the starting point: the great Greek flowering, followed by the slow but steady social darwinist victory of the Romans and what an ugly endpoint, a cul de sac. Note that something had to intervene in history to repair the damage of the Darwinian struggle. That’s the puzzle of Christianity whose own legacy is also problematical. And it is not a question of theism. Christianity was almost as flawed as a religion as the Rome world was as a pack of wolves.
Enough: we can’t move to a conclusion. But the US has no grounds for complacency.

The idea that China is going to sino-form the whole planet is provocative in the extreme. China is in no position to do much of anything: it can’t even handle Tiber or the Uighuirs, so have a tragedy in motion. The socialist is a failed outcome in China. The future must redefine socialism all over again.

I think the title is wrong here, but the book is a highly useful perspective, however correct, on the enigma of China, its history, and distinct characteristics.

Source: You Will Be Assimilated: China’s Plan to Sino-form the World – – 1848+: The End(s) of History

  The dangers of Darwinian delusion

The scientific community has done an immense disservice to the general community. Against the views of better thinkers the views of Darwin took hold, soon exposed, but then recast as the hard paradigm. We cited Jacques Barzun from the 1940’s noting the problems of theory and then after the paradigm became hardcore and all the figures like Barzun disappeared. Dissent suddenly became a strategy of the religious right, as a menacing cancel culture took hold. Figures like Marx who saw the problem suddenly became converts. Marx should have dissented here and stopped the runaway train. But it didn’t happen.
The ID group in our century appeared in the religious right, and this was often useful critique of the problems of evolution, but the suspicion of theological bias was impossible to escape. And in any case ‘design’, which is resonant in nature, turns into a naturalist question, still unsolved. Theism just doesn’t work here.

Something that shouldn’t have happened did happen and when it collapses people will look back and ask how a whole cadre of professionals could be rigidly mesmerized by a pseudo-science of natural selection. Darwinists have corrupted the thought of a whole civilization, oblivious to the most obvious cautionary double-check. A myth as flimsy as the doctrine of the resurrection took over and created a bizarre religious ‘true belief’ syndrome. The damage done is immense and snowballs into tens of thousands of books written on false assumptions. Almost every profession has been confused here. The scale of the question is on the level of tragedy.
The ‘tough’ guys took over and made the theory into a kind of social Darwinist world view (already present in Darwin) and its connection to economic reasoning was invaluable as propaganda: what the need for ethics if natural selection as violent competition is so central in nature? Wrong again, but good for the economy, if you are a capitalist. The capitalists could care less. It’s good for business, so lie about it.

Darwinists are going to discredit a whole civilization and leave thousands in a state of hopeless confusion. One suspects the hidden control factor is indeed the hidden fiat of capitalist ideology.Too bad, fellows, if you cheat at science for ideological reasons, the result is….aha, not science

Those who see this boat heading toward the falls have learned the hard way that the cult believers are beyond reach. That Darwinism upholds a very drastic view with no evidence is a paradox of bad science, really bad science. It should be a matter of a thirty second warning the theory has no evidence, all in vein.

Source: Asked, why did you become a Darwin critic? – 1848+: The End(s) of History