Communism's Seeds of Death
by Richard Barnes
March 2001 - We begin (without seeking to offend our neo-Darwinian readers) with Darwin's Origin of the Species, which purported to explain why some "races" are superior to others (this purpose, actually in its original subtitle, is rarely mentioned today, and new editions omit the subtitle). The book was published in 1859; its first 1,250 copies sold out overnight. It was not the common folks, but rather the intellectual elite, which bought it out and began to apply it, for it gave a patina of scientific support to the ancient desire to divorce oneself from the claims of a Creator. Claims seen in many political founding documents until then, such as the Declaration of Independence, which presupposed that we are created men and women with God-given (inalienable) rights. (The authors of the Declaration knew pagan history; they knew the pagan idea of the eternity of matter, of ascending circles of existence. This preceded Darwin by millennia. Yet, though knowing this, the authors rejected it. They knew that inalienable rights couldn't be grounded on a la-la theory.)

Another 19th century seed, Karl Marx (1818-1883), first dedicated Das Kapital, to Charles Darwin, who, in a rare fit of prudence, declined. Darwin could never fully shake off his Christian heritage. His doubts pursued him to the grave. That was not the case with Marx. For more on this monster, known for "howling gigantic curses", we would recommend Johnson's Intellectuals. For our purpose, suffice it to mention that this seed reaped a more overt harvest than Darwin and Nietzsche (see below). Darwin and Nietzsche's harvests are obvious to anyone who pauses but a moment. But to see Marx's harvest doesn't require a pause; it merely requires that one be sentient. His assertion that man is a mere economic animal fits nicely, as intended, with Darwin's theory. In either case, man is declared to be an animal.

The third seed, Frederick Nietzsche (1844-1900), whose most famous work was Thus Spake Zarathustra, was grossly antichristian. His most salient ideas were a despising of the weak, the mediocre, and the altruistic. He exalted war and chaos as a stimulus for energy and the triumphant life. He was hostile to Christian morality. To him, each individual defines his or her morality. But he did reach a morality of the Lords and a morality of the Slaves. The former, a superior morality, is characterized by power and dominion; the latter, a weak morality, is characterized by compassion, humility and patience. He died a madman.

We hardly need to comment on the 20th century harvest of these seeds. The thoughtful reader will recognize how the above philosophies prevail in today's political and corporate life. We will simply summarize that harvest in terms of a basic rule: the good tends to life; the evil tends to death. Clearly the harvest of the 20th century has tended to death. The following statistics are conservative estimates. More data is now becoming available which reflects numbers far higher than these. Nonetheless, the data below will suffice for our purposes. It declares the 20lh century tale of deaths caused by deliberate state policy:

Communist states--------95.2 million deaths; 477 per 10,000 population
Dictatorship------------20.3 million deaths; 495 per 10,000 population
Partially free-----------3.1 million deaths; 48 per 10,000 population
Free----------------------.8 million deaths; 22 per 10,000 population

The above figures exclude: the 40 million deaths caused by abortions since 1973 in the United States and Puerto Rico; the 35.7 million deaths caused by 20th century wars; and the 15 million deaths caused by the state- sponsored Ukraine famine of the early 1930s. Be reminded: the first two state systems in the list above are/were atheistic, antichristian systems, whose usual first order of business was to suppress the Bible and the Christians. This is well documented and overt; but hardly ever stated in polite company. If the Spanish Inquisition of a few centuries back deserves censure, then surely the regimes alluded to above deserve opprobrium. But the public elite has never been known for consistency.

The biggest characters (using that term deliberately) associated with the statistics above, were ALL disciples of the ideas of Darwin, Marx, and Nietzsche.

But we remain optimistic for the 21st century because we have seen some good 20th century seeds, imperceptible to most, but germinating nonetheless. We'll mention only one: the great shift in education from a state sponsored function back to a father and mother duty. From the state to the home. This is a tectonic shift back to first principles. We are already seeing some impact, in that Harvard and Yale are actively seeking home-educated children or at least those, whose education has been closely overseen by their parents. In sharp contrast to the mindset of many since the mid-19th century, the late 20th century mindset of many is that the child is on loan to the father and mother by God. And it is the family's duty, not the state's, to educate him. We are convinced this shift tends to life and, therefore, will result in a more compassionate and a more life supporting 21st century.

May our children see that day!

Fortifying
The
Family

BACK

Patrick L. Hurd
Weatherford, Texas
PHurdWford@AOL.com

EST. 01/01/01