Darwinisme Theory



Under the pen-name HARUN YAHYA, the author has published many books on political and

faith-related issues. An important body of his work deals with the materialistic world view and

the impact of it in world history and politics. (The pen-name is formed from the names ‘Harun’

[Aaron] and ‘Yahya’ [John] in the esteemed memory of the two Prophets who struggled against


His works include The ‘Secret Hand’ in Bosnia, Behind the Scenes of Terrorism, Israel’s Kurdish

Card, A National Strategy for Turkey, Solution: The Morals of the Qur’an, Darwin’s Antagonism

Against the Turks, Articles 1, Articles 2, The Evolution Deceit, Perished Nations, The Prophet

Musa, The Golden Age, God’s Artistry in Colour, Glory is Everywhere, The Truth of the Life of

This World, Confessions of Evolutionists, The Blunders of Evolutionists 1, The Blunders of Evolutionists

2, The Dark Magic of Darwinism, The Religion of Darwinism, The Qur’an Leads the

Way to Science, The Real Origin of Life, The Consciousness of the Cell, The Creation of the Universe,

Miracles of the Qur’an, The Design in Nature, Self-Sacrifice and Intelligent Behaviour Models

in Animals, Eternity Has Already Begun, Children Darwin Was Lying!, The End of Darwinism,

Deep Thinking, Timelessness and the Reality of Fate, Never Plead Ignorance, The Secrets

of DNA, The Miracle of the Atom, The Miracle in the Cell, The Miracle of the Immune System,

The Miracle in the Eye, The Creation Miracle in Plants, The Miracle in the Spider, The Miracle in

the Ant, The Miracle in the Gnat, The Miracle in the Honeybee, The Miracle of Seed, The Miracle

in the Termite, The Miracle of the Human Body, The Miracle of Man’s Creation, Realities 1.

Among his booklets are The Mystery of the Atom, The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution: The

Fact of Creation, The Collapse of Materialism, The End of Materialism, The Blunders of Evolutionists

1, The Blunders of Evolutionists 2, The Microbiological Collapse of Evolution, The Fact of

Creation, The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution in 20 Questions, The Biggest Deception in the

History of Biology: Darwinism.

The author’s other works on Quranic topics include: Ever Thought About the Truth?, Devoted to

God, Abandoning the Society of Ignorance, Paradise, The Theory of Evolution, The Moral Values

of the Qur’an, Knowledge of the Qur’an, Qur’an Index, Emigrating for the Cause of God, The

Character of Hypocrites in the Qur’an, The Secrets of the Hypocrite, The Names of God, Communicating

the Message and Disputing in the Qur’an, The Basic Concepts in the Qur’an, Answers

from the Qur’an, Death Resurrection Hell, The Struggle of the Messengers, The Avowed

Enemy of Man: Satan, Idolatry, The Religion of the Ignorant, The Arrogance of Satan, Prayer in

the Qur’an, The Importance of Conscience in the Qur’an, The Day of Resurrection, Never Forget,

Disregarded Judgements of the Qur’an, Human Characters in the Society of Ignorance, The Importance

of Patience in the Qur’an, General Information from the Qur’an, Quick Grasp of Faith

1-2-3, The Crude Reasoning of Disbelief, The Mature Faith, Before You Regret, Our Messengers

Say, The Mercy of Believers, The Fear of God, The Nightmare of Disbelief, Prophet Isa Will Come,

Beauties Presented by the Qur’an for Life, Bouquet of the Beauties of God 1-2-3-4, The Iniquity

Called “Mockery”, The Secret of the Test, The True Wisdom According to the Qur’an, The

Struggle with the Religion of Irreligion, The School of Yusuf, The Alliance of the Good, Slanders

Spread Against Muslims Throughout History, The Importance of Following the Good Word,

Why Do You Deceive Yourself?, Islam: The Religion of Ease, Enthusiasm and Vigor in the

Qur’an, Seeing Good in Everything, How does the Unwise Interpret the Qur’an?, Some Secrets

of the Qur’an, The Courage of Believers, Being Hopeful in the Qur’an, Justice and Tolerance in

the Qur’an


The reason why a special chapter is assigned to the collapse of the theory of evolution

is that this theory constitutes the basis of all anti-spiritual philosophies. Since Darwinism

rejects the fact of creation, and therefore the existence of God, during the last 140

years it has caused many people to abandon their faith or fall into doubt. Therefore,

showing that this theory is a deception is a very important duty, which is strongly related

to the religion. It is imperative that this important service be rendered to everyone.

Some of our readers may find the chance to read only one of our books. Therefore, we

think it appropriate to spare a chapter for a summary of this subject.

In all the books by the author, faith-related issues are explained in the light of the

Qur’anic verses and people are invited to learn God’s words and to live by them. All

the subjects that concern God’s verses are explained in such a way as to leave no room

for doubt or question marks in the reader’s mind. The sincere, plain and fluent style

employed ensures that everyone of every age and from every social group can easily

understand the books. This effective and lucid narrative makes it possible to read them

in a single sitting. Even those who rigorously reject spirituality are influenced by the

facts recounted in these books and cannot refute the truthfulness of their contents.

This book and all the other works of the author can be read individually or discussed

in a group at a time of conversation. Those readers who are willing to profit from the

books will find discussion very useful in the sense that they will be able to relate their

own reflections and experiences to one another.

In addition, it will be a great service to the religion to contribute to the presentation

and reading of these books, which are written solely for the good pleasure of God. All

the books of the author are extremely convincing. For this reason, for those who want

to communicate the religion to other people, one of the most effective methods is to

encourage them to read these books.

It is hoped that the reader will take time to look through the review of other books on

the final pages of the book, and appreciate the rich source of material on faith-related

issues, which are very useful

and a pleasure to read.

In these books, you will not find, as in some other books, the personal views of the

author, explanations based on dubious sources, styles that are unobservant of the

respect and reverence due to sacred subjects, nor hopeless, doubt-creating, and pessimistic

accounts that create deviations in the heart.


{C} All rights reserved

All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be

Reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,

photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the

prior written consent of the publisher.

Title: The Disasters Darwinism Brought To Humanity

Author: Harun Yahya

Translated by: Carl Rossini

Copyright: All rights reserved

Printed: 2001

Printing supervised by: M.R.Attique

Printed at : Toronto Ð Canada

First Published by Vural YayÝncÝlÝk, Üstanbul, Turkey in October 2000

{C} Al-Attique Publishers Inc. Canada 2001

ISBN 1-894264-44-4

Published by: Al-Attique Publishers Inc.Canada

65-Treverton Drive Tel: (416) 615-1222

Scarborough Ont. Fax: (416) 615-0375


E-mail: quran@istar.ca Website: http://www.al-attique.com

E-mail: al-attique@al-attique.com


Islamic Education & Media

730 East 10th street, C.F,

Brooklyn, NY 11230

T+F: (718) 421-5428


Dar-Al-Hadyan Publishers & Distributors

P/O Box No : 15031


T+F (966) 1-463-1685

Branch in Pakistan:

89 Qamer st People Colony

Shahdara Lahore

T+F : 9242-791-1678

Website: http://www.harunyahya.orghttp://www.harunyahya.com

http://www.harunyahya.net email: info@harunyahya.org




























he 20th century, which we have just left behind us, was a

century of war and conflict, leading to disasters, pain,

massacres, poverty, and enormous destruction. Millions

of people were killed, massacred, abandoned to hunger

and death, and left without home or shelter, protection, or support. And

all for nothing: in the name of serving deviant ideologies. Millions were

left exposed to inhuman treatment that not even animals should be

allowed to suffer. On nearly every occasion there were despots’ and dictators’

signatures beneath all the suffering and disasters: Stalin, Lenin,

Trotsky, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Mussolini, FrancoÉ While some of these

men shared the same ideology, others were enemies to the death. For the

simple reason that their ideologies were opposed to each other, they

dragged societies into conflict and turned brother against brother, having

them start wars, throw bombs, burn and destroy cars, homes, and shops,

and hold riotous demonstrations. Putting weapons in their hands, they

had them pitilessly beat the young, the old, men, women, and children to

death or stand them against a wall and shoot themÉ They were ruthless

enough to hold a gun to a person’s head and, looking into his eyes, kill

him, and crush his head with their feet, just because he supported another

idea. They ejected people from their homes, whether women, children,

or the elderlyÉ

That is a short resume of the nightmares of the 20th century that we have

just emerged from: people who supported conflicting ideas and who drowned

mankind in pain and blood in the name of supporting these ideologies.

Fascism and Communism come at the head of the ideologies that

caused mankind to suffer those dark days. These are seen as enemies, as

ideas that tried to destroy each other. In actual fact, there is a most interesting

truth here: for these ideologies were nourished by a single ideological

source, drew strength and support from that source, and, thanks to

that source, were able to draw societies to their side. At first sight, this

source has never drawn any attention, has always remained behind the

scenes up until now, and has always shown people its innocent-looking

face. That source is the materialist philosophy, and DARWINISM, the

I N T R O D U C T I O N 9


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 10 O H U M A N I T Y

state of that philosophy as adapted to nature.

Darwinism emerged in the 19th century as the restating of a myth,

dating back to the Sumerians and Ancient Greece, by the amateur biologist

Charles Darwin, and has since then formed the fundamental idea

behind all the ideologies that have been harmful to mankind. Wearing a

so-called scientific mask, it allowed these ideologies and their supporters’

practical measures to win a false legitimacy.

By means of this false legitimacy the theory of evolution soon left the

fields of knowledge of biology and palaeontology and began to comment on

fields from human relations to history, and to influence fields from politics

to social life. Because some particular claims of Darwinism supported several

currents of thought which began to come into motion and take shape in

the 19th century, it gained wide support from these circles. In particular, people

began trying to apply the idea that there is a “fight for survival” among

living creatures in nature, and as a result, the idea that “the strong survive,

the others are defeated and disappear” began to be applied to human

thought and behaviour. When Darwinism’s claim that nature was a place of

struggle and conflict began to be applied to human beings and societies,

Hitler’s deviation of building a master race, Marx’s claim that “the history of

mankind is the history of class struggle,” capitalism’s provision for the

“strong growing even stronger at the expense of the weak,” the colonisation

of third world countries by such imperialist nations as Britain and their suffering

inhuman treatment, together with the fact that coloured people still

face racist attacks and discrimination, all found some kind of justification.

Despite his being an evolutionist, Robert Wright, the author of the

book The Moral Animal summarises the disasters that the theory of evolution

has brought to the history of mankind in this way:

Evolutionary theory, after all, has a long and largely sordid history of application

to human affairs. After being mingled with political philosophy

around the turn of the century to form the vague ideology known as

“social Darwinism,” it played into the hands of racists, fascists, and the

most heartless sort of capitalists.1

As will be seen in this book and from the evidence it contains, Darwinism

is not just a theory which attempts to explain the origin of life and which

is restricted to the field of scientific knowledge. Darwinism is a dogma still

stubbornly defended by the supporters of certain ideologies, despite the fact

that it has been proven totally invalid from the scientific point of view. In our

day many scientists, politicians and men of ideas, whether aware or not of

Darwinism’s dark face, lend their support to this dogma.

If everyone comes to know the scientific invalidity of this theory,

which acts as an inspiration for cruel dictators, and ruthless, inhuman,

and self-centred mentalities and currents of thought, that will spell the

end of these harmful ideologies. Those who do and systematise evil will

be unable to defend themselves by saying, “But this is a law of nature.”

They will have no more so-called scientific backing for their self-centred,

selfish, and pitiless world view.

Once the idea of Darwinism, the root of harmful ideologies, is finally

overturned, only one truth will remain. That is the truth that all human

beings and the universe itself were created by Allah (God). People who

understand this will also realise that the only reality and the only truth are in

the holy book He sent down to us. When a large majority of people come to

realise this truth, the pains, troubles, massacres, disasters, injustices, and

poverty in the world will be replaced by enlightenment, openness, wealth,

plenty, health and abundance. For this, every false idea harmful to humanity

must be conquered and left to rot by the holy idea which will bring beauty to

mankind. To reply to stones by throwing others, to answer blows with blows,

to answer the aggressor with more aggression is not a solution. The solution

is to bring down the ideas of those who do these things and to explain,

patiently and kindly, the one truth with which they must replace them.

The aim in writing this book is to show those who defend Darwinism

without seeing its dark face, knowingly or unknowingly, what it is

they are actually supporting, and to explain what their responsibility will

be as long as they pretend not to see the truth of it. Another aim is to warn

those who do not believe in Darwinism, but who also do not see Darwinism

as a threat to humanity.

I N T R O D U C T I O N 11

efore we turn to the pain and disasters that Darwinism

has brought to the world, let us take a brief look at its

history. Many people believe the theory of evolution,

first put forward by Charles Darwin, to be a theory

based on firm scientific evidence, observation and experiment. Whereas,

as the originator of the theory of evolution is not Darwin, so the source of

the theory is not scientific proof.

At one period in Mesopotamia, when idol-worshipping religions had

hegemony, superstitions and myths regarding the roots of life and the universe

abounded: one of these was the belief “evolution.” According to the

Enuma-Elish epic, which dates back to the Sumerians, there was a raging

flood, and from this the gods called Lahmu and Lahamu suddenly

emerged. According to the superstition, these idols first created themselves

and then, becoming universal, formed other matter and living creatures.

In other words, according to Sumerian myth, life suddenly came into

being from the non-living watery chaos, evolved and developed.

We can see that this belief shows a close accordance with the theory

of evolution’s claim that “living things developed and evolved from nonliving

things.” From this we can see that the idea of evolution does not

belong to Darwin, but originally to Sumerian idol-worshippers.

Later, the myth of evolution found more space to live in another idolworshipping

civilisation, Ancient Greece. Ancient Greek materialist

philosophers counted matter as the only thing which existed. They turned

to the myth of evolution, an inheritance from the Sumerians, to explain

how living things came about. In this way, materialist philosophy and the

myth of evolution came together in Ancient Greece. From there it was carried

to the culture of Rome.

A S H O R T H I S T O R Y O F D A R W I N I S M 13


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 14 O H U M A N I T Y

These two concepts, each a myth belonging to idol-worshipping cultures,

appeared in the modern world in the 18th century. Some European

thinkers who studied ancient Greek sources took a liking to materialism.

The common feature of these thinkers was that they were opponents of


In this environment the first person to take the theory of evolution on

in a detailed way was the French biologist Jean Baptiste Lamarck. In his

theory, which would later be understood to be false, Lamarck proposed

that all living creatures evolved from one another by small changes

throughout their lives. One person who repeated Lamarck’s claims, in a

slightly different way, was Charles Darwin.

Darwin put forward this theory in his book The Origin of Species,

which he published in England in 1859. In this book, the myth of evolution,

which had come down from ancient Sumer, was put forward in some

detail. He claimed that all species of living creatures came from one ancestor,

born by chance in the water, and that they had grown different from

one another by small changes which came about by coincidence.

This claim of Darwin’s did not win much general acceptance from

the men of science of his time. Fossil experts in particular were aware that

Darwin’s claim was nothing but the product of a fantasy. But despite this

A picture depicting the

Sumerian water god.

Just like the Sumerians,


believe that life

emerged by coincidence

from water. In

other words, they see

water as a god which

created life.

Darwin’s theory began to win more support from different circles as time

passed. Because Darwin and his theory provided the missing foundation

for the forces ruling in the 19th century.

The Reason for the Acceptance of

Darwinism is Ideological

In the period when Darwin published his book The Origin of Species

and put forward his theory of evolution, science was very backward. For

example, the cell, which is today known to possess a most complicated

system, was only visible as a blot through the simple microscopes in use

at the time. For this reason Darwin saw no problem in claiming that life

came about by chance from non-living material.

A S H O R T H I S T O R Y O F D A R W I N I S M 15

Like idol-worshipping societies, Darwinists believe that life emerged by

coincidence in water as a result of natural effects. According to this nonsensical

claim, the unconscious atoms in the “primitive soup” in the picture

joined together and decided to form living creatures.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 16 O H U M A N I T Y

In the same way, the insufficiency of the fossil record at that

time made it possible for it to be claimed that living creatures

had come about from each other by minute

changes. Whereas today, it is certain that

the fossil record, as we explained a

short while above, offers not one

piece of evidence to support

Darwin’s claim that living

creatures had come about by

developing from one another.

Up until recently, evolutionists

used to try to get over the

dilemma facing them by saying, “It

will be found one day in the future.”

But they are now in the position of being

unable to hide behind this explanation. (For

detailed information see Chapter “The Misconception of Evolution”)

Whatever the case, there was no change in the Darwinists’ attachment

to the theory of evolution. Supporters of Darwin have come down

to our day by handing their faithfulness to Darwin on to one another like

an inheritance for the last 150 years.

All right, what is the reason for Darwinism, despite the fact that its

scientific invalidity is now openly apparent, appealing to certain circles,

and for heavy propaganda being made regarding it?

The most defining feature of Darwin’s

theory is its denial of the existence of

a Creator. According to the theory of evolution,

life formed itself, by coincidence,

from innate matter. This claim of Darwin

provided a false scientific support for all

atheist philosophies, beginning with mate-


to today,

the microscopes

available in

the 19th century

were quite primitive

and, as in the

picture, could

only view

cells as blots.



rialist philosophy. Because up until the 19th century the great majority of

men of science looked at science as a method of learning and discovering

what God had created. Because this belief was widespread, atheist and

materialist philosophies were unable to find suitable ground in which to

develop. But by denying the existence of a Creator and forming an illusory

support for atheist and materialist belief, the theory of evolution was a

wonderful opportunity for them. For this reason they both identified with

Darwinism and adapted the theory to their own ideologies.

Beside Darwinism’s denial of the existence of God, another claim

emerged to support 19th century materialistic ideologies: “The development

of living creatures is linked to the struggle for life in nature. This

struggle goes to the strongest. The weak are condemned to defeat and


Darwinism’s co-operation with ideologies which have brought pain

and disaster to the world is clearly revealed in this point.

Social Darwinism: The Adaptation of the Law

of the Jungle to Human Behaviour

One of the most important claims of the theory of evolution is its basing

the development of living creatures on the “fight for survival” in

nature. According to Darwin, in nature there is a pitiless fight for survival,

an eternal conflict. The strong always overcome the weak, and this makes

development possible. The subtitle of the book The Origin of Species

summed up this point of view. “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural

Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”.

The source of Darwin’s inspiration on this matter was the English

economist Thomas Malthus’s book An Essay on the Principle of Population.

This book indicated that a rather dark future awaited mankind. Malthus

had calculated that left to itself, the human population would increase at

enormous speed. The numbers would double every 25 years. However,

food supplies would in no way increase at the same rate. In this event,

mankind faced the permanent danger of starvation. The forces keeping

A S H O R T H I S T O R Y O F D A R W I N I S M 17

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 18 O H U M A N I T Y

population under control were disasters, such as war, famine, and disease.

In short, in order for some people to live, it was necessary for others

to die. Existence meant “permanent war.”

Darwin declares that it was Malthus’s book which made him think

about the struggle for existence:

In October, 1838, that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic

inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on population, and

being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere

goes on from long continuous observation of the habits of animals

and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable

variations would tend to be preserved and unfavourable ones to be

destroyed. The result of this would be the formation of new species. Here,

then, I had at last got a theory by which to work.2

In the 19th century Malthus’s ideas had been adopted by quite a wide

public. Upper-class European intellectuals in particular supported

Malthus’s ideas. The importance that 19th century Europe gave to

Malthus’s ideas on population is put across in the article The Scientific

Background of the Nazi “Race Purification” Programme:

In the opening half of the nineteenth century, throughout Europe, members

of the ruling classes gathered to discuss the newly discovered “Population

problem” and to devise ways of implementing the Malthusian mandate, to

increase the mortality rate of the poor: “Instead of recommending cleanliness

to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we

should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and

court the return of the plague. In the country we

should build our villages near stagnant pools,

and particularly encourage settlements in all

marshy and unwholesome situations,” and so

forth and so on.3

As a result of this cruel policy, the strong

would defeat the weak in the struggle for sur-

Thomas Malthus, who influenced Darwin and proposed

that war and scarcity balanced the rapid rise in

world population.

vival, and in this way the rapidly increasing population would be balanced.

In 19th century England this “crush the poor” programme was actually

implemented. An industrial system was founded where children of

eight or nine were made to work 16 hours a day in the coal mines and

where thousands died from the bad conditions. The theoretical “struggle

for survival” which Malthus’s theory found necessary, condemned millions

of poor people in England to a life full of suffering.

Darwin, influenced by Malthus, applied this view to the whole of

nature, and proposed that this war, which actually existed, would be won

by the strongest and the fittest. This claim of Darwin’s included all plants,

animals, and human beings. He also stressed that the struggle for survival

in question was a permanent and unchanging law of nature. By denying

creation he was inviting people to abandon their religious beliefs and in

this way aiming at all ethical principles that might be an obstacle to the

ruthlessness of this “struggle for survival.”

For this reason Darwin’s theory found the support of the Establishment

at its back, right from the moment it came to be heard, first in England

and later in the entire West. The imperialists, capitalists and other materialists

who greeted this theory, which provided a scientific justification for the

political and social system they had founded, did not delay in taking it up.

Within a short time the theory of evolution was brought to be the sole criterion

in every sphere of interest to human societies, from sociology to history,

from psychology to politics. In every sphere the basic idea was the slogan

of the “fight for survival” and “the survival of the fittest,” and political

parties, nations, administrations, commercial firms, and individuals began

to live in the warmth of these slogans. Because the ruling ideologies in society

had identified with Darwinism, Darwinist propaganda began to be carried

out in every field, from education to art, from politics to history. It was

attempted to establish links between every subject and Darwinism and to

shed light on them from a Darwinist viewpoint. As a result of this, even if

people did not know Darwinism, models of society living the lives predicted

by Darwinism began to be formed.

Darwin himself recommended that his views based on evolution be

A S H O R T H I S T O R Y O F D A R W I N I S M 19

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 20 O H U M A N I T Y

applied to ethical understanding and social sciences. Darwin said the following

to H. Thiel in a letter in 1869:

You will readily believe how much interested I am in observing that you

apply to moral and social questions analogous views to those which I

have used in regard to the modification of species. It did not occur to me

formerly that my views could be extended to such widely different, and

most important, subjects.4

With the struggle in nature also being accepted as being in human

nature, conflicts in the name of

racism, Fascism, Communism,

and imperialism, and the efforts

of strong peoples to crush peoples

they perceived as weaker

were by now clothed in a scien21

With Darwinism the lie that conflict

and struggle are in man’s

nature was accepted. As a sad

result of this, in many places in

the world wars, killings, and barbarity

were wrapped in a socalled

scientific mantle, and the

20th century became a century of

suffering and pitilessness.




T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 22 O H U M A N I T Y


According to Social Darwinism, the weak,

poor, sick, and backward must be eliminated,

and done away with without mercy. These

people believe that this is necessary for the

evolution of mankind. One of the reasons

why in the 20th century no

answer came to millions

of peoples’ cries for

help, from Bosnia to

Ethiopia, was this ideology

which was ruthlessly

imposed on


tific faade. It was now impossible to reproach or obstruct those who carried

out barbarous massacres, treated human beings like animals, turned

peoples against each other, who despised others on account of their race,

who closed down small businesses in the name of competition, and who

refused to extend the hand of help to the poor. Because they were doing

this in accordance with a “scientific” natural law.

This new scientific account came to be known as “Social Darwinism.”

One of the foremost evolutionist scientists of our own time, the

American palaeontologist Stephen Jay Gould accepts the truth by writing

that following the publication of The Origin of Species in 1859, “subsequent

arguments for slavery, colonialism, racial differences, class struggles, and sex

roles would go forth primarily under the banner of science.”5

One point requires careful attention here. All periods of human history

have seen wars, atrocities, ruthlessness, racism, and conflict. But

there was at all times a divine religion teaching people that what they

were doing was wrong and calling them to peace, justice, and calm.

Because human beings knew this divine religion, they at least had a measure

of understanding that what they were doing was wrong when they

engaged in violence. But from the 19th century, Darwinism showed that

the struggle for profit and injustice had an element of scientific justification

to them, and said that all of these were part of human nature, that

man carried savage and aggressive tendencies left over from his ancestors,

and that in the same way that as the strongest and most aggressive

animal survived, the same laws applied to human beings. Under the

influence of this thinking, wars, suffering, and massacres began to affect

a very large part of the world. Darwinism supported and encouraged all

those movements which brought pain, blood, and oppression to the

world, showed them to be reasonable and justified, and backed all their

practical applications. As a result of this so-called scientific backing all

these dangerous ideologies grew increasingly stronger, and stamped the

name “the age of suffering” on the 20th century.

In his book Darwin, Marx, Wagner professor of history Jacques

A S H O R T H I S T O R Y O F D A R W I N I S M 23

Barzun evaluates the scientific, sociological,

and cultural causes of the terrible moral

breakdown of the modern world. These

comments from Barzun’s book are striking

from the point of view of Darwinism’s influence

on the world:

É in every European country between 1870 and

1914 there was a war party demanding armaments,

an individualist party demanding ruthless

competition, an imperialist party demanding

a free hand over backward peoples, a socialist

party demanding the conquest of power, and a

racialist party demanding internal purges

against aliensÐall of them, when appeals to greed

and glory failed, or even before, invoked Spencer and Darwin, which was to

say, science incarnateÉ Race was biological, it was sociological, it was Darwinian.


In the 19th century, when Darwin put forward his claim that living

things had not been created, that they had emerged by coincidence, and

that the human being had a common ancestor with animals and had

emerged as the most highly developed organism as the result of coincidence,

perhaps most people could not imagine what the results of this

claim would be. But in the 20th century the end result of the claim was

lived out in terrible experiences. Those who saw human beings as a developed

animal, did not hesitate to rise by treading on the weak, to find a

way of disposing of the sick and weak, and to carry out massacres to get

rid of races which they saw as different and inferior. Because their theory

with a mask of science told them that this was a “law of nature.”

The disasters Darwinism brought to the world began in this way, and

gathering speed, spread over the whole world. Whereas in the 19th century,

until materialism and atheism grew stronger through the support they

received from Darwinism, the great majority of people believed that God

created all living things and that human beings, unlike other living crea-

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 24 O H U M A N I T Y

The author of “Darwin, Marx,

Wagner,” professor of history

Jacques Barzun.

tures, possessed a soul created by God. From whatever race or people,

human beings were each seen as a servant created by God. Lack of religion,

however, brought about and strengthened by Darwinism, gave rise

to social groups with a competitive and ruthless world view, attaching no

importance to morals, seeing human beings as highly developed animals.

People who denied that they had any responsibility to God brought about

a culture where every type of selfishness was justified. From this culture

were born many “isms,” and each of these became a calamity, in the real

sense of the world, for mankind.

In the following pages we will examine the ideologies in question to

which Darwinism lent justification, the close relationships between these

ideologies and Darwinism, and what this co-operation has cost the world.

A S H O R T H I S T O R Y O F D A R W I N I S M 25

arwin’s close friend Professor Adam Sedgwick was

one of the people who saw what dangers the theory

of evolution would give rise to in the future. He

remarked, after reading and digesting The Origin of

Species, that “if this book were to find general public acceptance, it

would bring with it a brutalisation of the human

race such as it had never seen before.”7 And truly,

time showed that Sedgwick was right to have

doubts. The 20th century has gone down in history

as a dark age when people underwent massacres

simply because of their race or ethnic origins.

Of course, there were discrimination and

eradication based on it in human history long

before Darwin. But Darwinism lent this discrimination

a false scientific respectability and a

false rightfulness.

The Preservation of Favoured Races…

Most Darwinists in our day claim that Darwin was never a racist but

that racists comment on Darwin’s ideas in a biased manner for the purpose

of supporting their own views. They claim that the expression “By

the Preservation of Favoured Races” in the subtitle to The Origin of Species is

used only for animals. However, what those who make this claim ignore

is what Darwin says about human races in his book.

According to the views put forward by Darwin in this book, human

races represent different stages of evolution, and some races have evolved

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 27


Professor Adam Sedgwick

and progressed more than others. Some of them, in fact, were pretty much

at the same level as monkeys.

Darwin claimed that the “fight for survival” also applied between

human races. “Favoured races” emerged victorious from this struggle.

According to Darwin the favoured race were the European whites. As for

Asian and African races, they had fallen behind in the fight for survival.

Darwin went even further: these races would soon completely lose the

world-wide fight for survival and disappear, he claimed.

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the

civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the

savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous

apes É will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and

his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a

more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some

ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian

and the gorilla.8

Again in another part of The Origin of Species, Darwin claimed that it

was necessary for the inferior races to disappear and that there was no

need for developed peoples to try to protect them and keep them alive.

He compared this situation to people who raised breeding animals:

With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those

that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men,

on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we

build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poorlaws;

and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every

one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved

thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed

to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate

their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals

will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man.9

As we have seen, in his book The Origin of Species Darwin saw the

natives of Australia and Negroes as being at the same level as gorillas and

claimed that these races would disappear. As for the other races which he

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 28 O H U M A N I T Y

saw as “inferior,” he maintained that it was essential to prevent them multiplying

and so for these races to be brought to extinction. So the traces of

racism and discrimination which we still come across in our time were

approved and lent justification by Darwin in this way.

As for the task befalling the “civilised person,” according to Darwin’s

racist idea, it was to speed this evolutionary period up a little, as we shall

see in the details which follow. In this situation there was no objection,

from the “scientific” point of view, to these races, which were going to disappear

anyway, being done away with now.

Darwin’s racist side showed its effect in much of his writing and

observations. For example, he openly set out his racist prejudices while

describing the natives of Tierra del Fuego whom he saw on a long voyage

he set out on in 1871. He described the natives as living creatures “wholly

nude, submerged in dyes, eating what they find just like wild animals,

uncontrolled, cruel to everybody out of their tribe, taking pleasure in torturing

their enemies, offering bloddy sacrifices, killing their children, illtreating

their wives, full of awkward superstitions”. Whereas the

researcher W. P. Snow, who had travelled the same region ten years

before, presents a very different picture. According to Snow, the Tierra del

Fuegians were “fine powerful

looking fellows; they were

very fond of their children;

some of their artefacts

were ingenious; they

recognised some

sort of rights over

property; and they

accepted the

authority of several

of the oldest


As has been seen from

these examples Darwin was a

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 29

The journeys Darwin embarked on

revealed his racist side. For example,

Darwin considered the term

“wild animals” suitable for tribes

whose culture and abilities other

researchers had discussed.

The South Atlantic


Southern Ocean

complete racist. As a matter of fact, in the words of the author of the book

What Darwin Really Said, Benjamin Farrington, Darwin made many comments

regarding “the greater differences between men of distinct races”

in his book The Descent of Man.11

Furthermore, Darwin’s theory’s denying the existence of God had

been the cause of peoples’ not seeing that man was something created by

God and that all men were created equal. And this was one of the factors

behind the rise of racism and the acceleration of its acceptance in the

world. The American scientist James Ferguson announces the strict link

between the denial of creation and the rise of racism in this way:

The new anthropology soon became a theoretical background between two

opposed schools of thought on the origin of humans. The older and more

established of these was ‘monogenism,’ the belief that all humankind, irrespective

of colour and other characteristics, was directly descended from

Adam and from the single and original act of God’s creation. Monogenism

was promulgated by the Church and universally accepted until the 18th

century, when opposition to theological authority began to fuel the rival

theory of ‘polygenism,’ (theory of evolution) which held that different

racial communities had different origins.12

The Indian anthropologist Lalita Vidyarthi explains how Darwin’s

theory of evolution led racism to be accepted by social sciences:

His (Darwin’s) theory of the survival of the fittest was warmly welcomed

by the social scientists of the day, and they believed mankind had achieved

various levels of evolution culminating in the white man’s civilization. By

the second half of the nineteenth century racism was accepted as fact by

the vast majority of Western scientists.13

As for the Darwinists who came after Darwin, they put up a great

struggle to prove his racist views. In the name of doing so they had no

scruples about making many scientific inconsistencies and falsehoods.

They thought that when they had proved these, they would have scientifically

proven their own superiority and “rights” to oppress, colonise,

and if needs be exterminate other races.

In the third chapter of his book The Mismeasure of Man, Stephen Jay

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 30 O H U M A N I T Y

Gould pointed out that some anthropologists were not above falsifying

their data to prove the “superiority” of the white race. According to

Gould, the method they used most was falsifying the brain size of the fossilised

skulls they found. Gould mentions in his book that, assuming

brain size had something to do with intelligence, many anthropologists

intentionally exaggerated the size of Caucasian skulls and underestimated

the size of skulls from Blacks and Indians.14

In his book Ever Since Darwin, Gould explains the unbelievable

claims the Darwinists undertook to demonstrate that some races were


Haeckel and his colleagues also invoked recapitulation to affirm the racial

superiority of northern European whites. They scoured the evidence of

human anatomy and behaviour, using everything they could find from

brains to belly buttons. Herbert Spencer wrote that “the intellectual traits of

the uncivilized.. are traits recurring in the children of the civilized.” Carl

Vogt said it more strongly in 1864: “The grown up Negro partakes, as

regards his intellectual faculties, of the nature of the

childÉ Some tribes have founded states, possessing a

peculiar organization, but, as to the rest, we may boldly

assert that the whole race has, neither in the past nor

in the present, performed anything tending to the

progress of humanity or worthy of preservation.”15

And the French medical anatomist Etienne

Serres really did argue that black males are primitive

because their belly buttons were in

a lower level.

Darwin’s contemporary, the

evolutionist Havelock Ellis, supported

the distinction between

superior and inferior races with an

alleged “scientific” explanation, saying:

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 31

Stephen Jay Gould and

his book which revealed

Darwin’s racist side.

The child of many African races is scarcely if at all less intelligent than the

European child, but while the African as he grows up becomes stupid and

obtuse, and his whole social life falls into a state of hidebound routine, the

European retains much of his childlike vivacity.16

The French Darwinist anthropologist Vacher de Lapouge suggested,

in his work titled Race et Milin Social Essais d’Anthroposociologie (Paris

1909) that non-white classes were the descendants of savages who had not

learnt to be civilised, or else the degenerate representatives of mixedblood

classes. He produced results by measuring the skulls from Paris’

upper and lower classes in graveyards. According to his results, depending

on their skulls some people were inclined to be rich, self-confident,

and free, and others conservative, content with little, and possessing all

the qualities of a good servant, classes were the products of social selection,

society’s upper classes went together with superior races, the degree

of wealth was in proportion to the skull index. Lapouge later made a

prophesy, “It is my view that in years to come people will kill each other

because their heads are round or pointed,” he said17, and this prophesy

came true, as we shall see in detail in later pages of this book, and the 20th

century saw massacres carried out for reasons of racismÉ!

And it was not only anthropologists: entomologists (those who study

insects) also jumped on the racist bandwagon that Darwinism had set in

motion with unbelievable claims. For example, in the year 1861, one English

entomologist arrived at the conclusion, after collecting lice that lived

on peoples’ bodies in different parts of the world, that the lice of one race

could not live on the bodies of another, which when looked at from the scientific

level of today, is just plain ridiculous.18 When even people with the

status of scientists made such announcements, it was not surprising that

some dogmatic racists should use such illogical, unintelligent, and completely

meaningless slogans as “even Negroes’ lice are Negro.”

In short, the racist side to Darwin’s theory found very fertile ground

in the second half of the 19th century. Because at that time the European

“white man” was still waiting for such a theory to justify his own crimes.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 32 O H U M A N I T Y

British Colonialism and Darwinism

The country which profited most from Darwin’s racist views was

Darwin’s own land, Britain. In the years when Darwin put forward his

theory, Great Britain was in the position of having founded the world’s

number one colonialist empire. All the natural resources of an area

stretching from India to Latin America were exploited by the British

Empire. The “white man” was plundering the world for his own interests.

But, of course, starting with Great Britain, no colonialist country

wanted to be seen as a “plunderer” and to go down in history as such. For

this reason, they were looking for an explanation to show that they were

right in what they were doing. Such an explanation might be to portray

the colonised peoples as “primitive people” or “animal-like living creatures.”

In this way, for those who were massacred and subjected to inhuman

treatment to be able to be seen not as human beings, but as halfhuman

half-animal creatures, and their mistreatment would not be

regarded as a crime.

Actually, this search was not new: the first spread of colonialism in

the world went back to the 15th and 16th centuries. Claims to the effect that

some races had semi-animal characteristics were first put forward by

Christopher Columbus on his American journey. According to these

claims, Native Americans were not human beings, but a species of developed

animal. For this reason they could be put to the service of the Spanish


No matter how much Columbus is portrayed in films about the discovery

of America as having a warm and humane attitude to the natives,

the fact is that Columbus did not regard the native people as human.19

Christopher Columbus was the person who first set in motion a great

massacre. Columbus established Spanish colonies in the places he discovered,

made slaves of the natives and was responsible for the starting of the

slave trade. The Spanish “conquistadors” saw the policy of oppression

and exploitation that Columbus implemented, and continued it: the massacres

carried out reached unbelievable dimensions. For example, the

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 33

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 34 O H U M A N I T Y

population of one island, 200,000 when Columbus first came to it, was

only 50,000 20 years later, and by 1540 only a thousand people remained.

When the most famous of the Spanish conquistadors, Cortes, first set foot

in Mexico in February 1519, the total native population was 25 million,

but in 1605 this had fallen to 1 million. On the island of Hispaniola, the

population, which was 7-8 million in 1492, fell to 4 million in 1496, and to

just 125 people in 1570. According to historians’ figures, in less than a century

after Columbus first set foot on the continent 95 million were massacred

by the colonialists. When Columbus discovered America 30 million

natives were living on the continent. As a result of the massacres

between then and now they have come to the position of being a lost race

of less than 2 million.

The reason for these massacres reaching such pitiless proportions

was the indigenous peoples’ not being seen as human beings, as being

looked on as animals.

But these claims of the colonialists did not win many supporters. In

Europe at that time, the truth that all people were created equal by God


With Christopher Columbus’ discovery

of America there began a dreadful massacre

of the Native Americans.

and that they all descended from one ancestorÐAdamÐwas so widely

accepted that the Catholic Church in particular took a clear position

against such plundering invasions. One of the best known examples of

this is the reply by the bishop of Chiapas, Bartolome de las Casas, who set

foot in the New World together with Columbus, who said that the natives

were “each a real human being,” in reply to the colonists’ claim that the

natives were “a species of animal.” Pope Paul III cursed the savage treatment

of the natives in a papal bull in 1537, and declared that the natives

were real human beings with the capacity for faith.20

But in the 19th century the situation changed. Together with the

spread of materialist philosophy and societies’ growing distant from religion,

the truth that human beings were created by God began to be

denied. This, as was touched on in the preceding pages, was at the same

time the rise of racism.

With the rise of Darwinist-materialist philosophy in the 19th century,

racism grew stronger, and this created a great support for Europe’s imperialist


James Joll, who spent long years as professor of history

at such universities as Oxford, Stanford and Harvard, in his

source book Europe Since 1870, which is still used as a text

book in universities, describes the ideological relationship

between Darwinism, imperialism, and racism.

The most profound groups of ideas inspiring the concept of

imperialism were those which can be roughly classified as

‘social Darwinism’, and which saw the relations between

states as a perpetual struggle for survival in which some

races were regarded as ‘superior’ to others in an evolutionary

process in which the strongest had constantly

to assert themselves.

Charles Darwin, the English naturalist whose

books On the Origin of Species, published in 1859,

and The Descent of Man, which followed in 1871,

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 35

Queen Victoria and the principal actor in

the above massacres, the Spaniard Cortes.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 36 O H U M A N I T Y

launched controversies which affected many branches of European

thoughtÉ The ideas of Darwin, and of some of his contemporaries such as

the English philosopher Herbert Spencer, Éwere rapidly applied to questions

far removed from the immediate scientific onesÉ The element of Darwinism

which appeared most applicable to the development of society was

the belief that the excess of population over the means of support necessitated

a constant struggle for survival in which it was the strongest or the

‘fittest’ who won. From this it was easy for some social thinkers to give a

moral content to the notion of the fittest, so that the species or races which

did survive were those morally entitled to do so.

The doctrine of natural selection could, therefore, very easily become associated

with another train of thought developed by the French writer, Count

Joseph-Arthur Gobineau, who published an Essay on the Inequality of Human

Races in 1853. Gobineau insisted that the most important factor in development

was race; and that those races which remained superior were those

which kept their racial purity intact. Of these, according to Gobineau, it was

the Aryan race which had survived bestÉ It was.. Houston Stewart Chamberlain

who contributed to carrying some of these ideas a stage furtherÉ

Hitler himself admired the author (Chamberlain) sufficiently to visit him on

his deathbed in 1927.21

As has been shown, there is an ideological chain linking Darwin to

racist thinkers and imperialists, and stretching from there as far as Hitler.

Darwinism is the ideological basis of both imperialism, which drowned

the world in blood in the 19th century, and Nazism, which did the same

thing in the 20th.

Victorian Great Britain also found its so-called “scientific basis” in

Darwinism. Great Britain made great profits out of colonialism, and saw

no reason not to visit disasters upon the heads of those living under that

colonialism for its own advantage. One example of British imperialism’s

dirty politics was the “Opium Wars” against China. Great Britain began to

smuggle the opium it grew in India into China from the first quarter of the

19th century. This opium smuggling was speeded up as time passed to

make good the deficit in its foreign trade. The flow of the drug into the

country also had the effect of weakening the Chinese state’s authority

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 37


ne of the most interesting indications

of the inspiration the theory

of evolution offered to British

imperialism, was the Piltdown man scandal.

In 1912, a strange skull was found in Piltdown,

England. Charles Dawson, the scientist

who found the skull together with

his team, declared that it belonged to a

creature which was half ape-half human.

Arthur Keith, the renowned evolutionist

anatomist examined the fossil and confirmed

the results.

However, Dawson and Keith emphasised

an important point. The brain of the fossil

was as big as that of modern man. The jawbone,

however, had ape-like features.

Suddenly the brain of Piltdown man

became a matter of pride for the British.

Since this skull was found in England, it

had to be the ancestor of the British.

According to the British people, the greater

volume of the brain indicated that British

had evolved before other races, and were

thus superior to other races.

That is why the discovery

of Piltdown

man aroused great

excitement in England.

Newspapers ran

headlines and crowds joyously celebrated

the discovery. The British government, on

the other hand, granted a knighthood to

Arthur Keith for his famous discovery.

The famous evolutionist palaeontologist,

Don Johanson, describes the relationship

between the Piltdown fossil and English


The Piltdown discovery was very

eurocentric. Not only did the brain

have pre-eminence, but the English

had pre-eminence, too.*

The inspiration the English derived from

Piltdown man lasted only until 1953, when

Kenneth Oakley, a scientist who re-examined

the fossil in detail, revealed it to be

the greatest forgery of the 20th century. The

fossil had been produced by affixing an

orang-utan jaw to a human skull.

*Don Johanson, In Search of Human Origins,

1994 WGBH Educational Foundation


over its own territory. The collapse in society soon reached serious dimensions.

The prohibition of opium, which the Chinese government had to

implement after a long period of doubt, led to the first Opium War (1838-

1842). There is no doubt that this war dragged the country to bankruptcy.

China was forced to bow its head because of the inadequacy of its army

in every confrontation with the foreign forces and to accept their evergrowing

demands. The Westerners slowly formed settlement centres

inside Chinese territory from the year 1842. They took large port quarters

(concessions) from out of the hands of the Chinese, rented their fields, and

obliged the country to open up to the outside world in a way that would

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 38 O H U M A N I T Y

bring the most benefit to themselves. As a result of all of this, the poverty

in the country, the weakness of the government, and the slow loss of Chinese

territory led to many rebellions.

The experiences in China were only one of the results of British policy.

Throughout the 19th century the oppression and painful dimensions of

British imperialism were experienced in such regions as South Africa,

India, and Australia.

The job of justifying this oppressive system of Britain’s and attempting

to show it was in the right, fell to various British sociologists and scientists.

And Charles Darwin was the most important and effective of

these. It was Darwin who claimed that throughout evolution there had

been “superior races,” that these were the “white race,” and showed that

the whites’ oppression of the others was a “natural law.”

Because of the justification which Darwin provided for colonialist

racism, the famous scientist, Kenneth J. Hs., the head of the Geography

department of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and himself of

Chinese descent, describes Darwin as “a gentleman scientist of the Victorian

Era, and an establishment member of a society that sent gunboats to

forcibly import opium into China, all in the name of competition (in free

trade) and survival of the fittest.”22

Darwin’s Enmity Towards the Turks

The most important target British colonialism set itself towards the

end of the 19th century was the Ottoman Empire.

At that period the Ottoman state ruled a huge area from Yemen to

Bosnia-Herzegovina. But by now it was finding it hard to control this area

which it had managed in peace, calm, and stability. Christian minorities

were beginning to rise up in the name of independence, and such great

military powers as Russia were beginning to threaten the Ottomans.

In the last quarter of the century Britain and France joined the powers

which were threatening the Ottomans. Britain particularly set its eyes

on the Ottomans’ southern provinces. The Berlin Agreement, signed in

1878, is an expression of the European colonialists’ decision to divide up

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 39

the Ottoman territories. Five years later, in 1882, Britain occupied Egypt,

which was an Ottoman territory. British colonialism set about its plans to

later take over the Ottoman territories in the Middle East.

As always, Britain based these colonialist policies on racism. The

British government deliberately tried to portray the Turkish nation, the

basic element of the Ottomans, and particularly the Ottoman state, as a

so-called “backward” people.

British Prime Minister William Ewart Gladstone openly said that the

Turks are examples of mankind’s non-humans, and for the sake of their

civilisation, they must be pushed back to the Asian steppes and eliminated

from Anatolia.23

These, and words like them, were for decades used by the British

government as a propaganda tool directed against the Ottomans. Britain

Charles Darwin used his theory with the

aim of adding to Britain’s political plans

against the Ottomans, and attempted to

show that the Turkish nation was a

backward race. In our time the enemies

of the Turks still draw support from this

nonsense of Darwin’s.



T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 40 O H U M A N I T Y



In the Gallipoli campaign

the Turkish Army heroically

fought against the

enemy forces, with the

British at their head, and

lost 250,000 men.

tried to portray the Turkish nation as a backward nation that had to bow

its head to more advanced European races.

The so-called “scientific basis” for this propaganda was Charles Darwin!

Darwin’s comments regarding the Turkish nation appeared in the

book The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, published in 1888. Darwin proposed

that by eliminating the “backward races” natural selection would

play a role in the development of civilisation, and later said these exact

words about the Turkish nation:

I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the

progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what

risk the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed

by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is! The more

civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the

struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an

endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher

civilized races throughout the world.24

This nonsense of Darwin’s was a written propaganda tool to give

support to Britain’s policy of destroying the Ottoman Empire. And in fact

this propaganda tool was an effective one. Darwin’s words to the effect

that “The Turkish nation will soon disappear, this is a law of evolution”

gave a so-called scientific support to Britain’s propaganda directed at creating

enmity towards the Turks.

Britain’s desire to bring about Darwin’s prophecy basically came to

life in the First World War. This giant war, which began in 1914, was born

of conflicts of interest between Germany and Austria-Hungary on the one

side, and the allies Britain, France, and Russia on the other. But one of the

most important calculations within this war was the aim of destroying

and dividing up the Ottoman Empire.

Britain attacked the Ottoman Empire from two separate directions.

The first was the Canal, Palestine, and Iraq fronts, opened with the intention

of taking the Ottoman territories in the Middle East. The second was

the Gallipoli front, scene of one of the bloodiest battles of the First World

War. The Turkish Army at .anakkale fought heroically and lost 250,000

men to resist the enemy forces mustered by the British. As for the British,

they sent more Indian troops and Anzac units recruited from such

colonies as Australia and New Zealand to fight the Turks, whom they saw

as a “backward race,” than their own soldiers.

The echoes of Darwin’s hostility to the Turks continued to ring after

the First World War. The European Neo-Nazi groups who treacherously

attack the Turks in Europe still draw their inspiration from Darwin’s stupid

nonsense about the Turkish nation. Darwin’s words about the Turks are still

to be found on the Internet pages of these racist enemies of the Turks. (See

the chapter on The Bloody Alliance Between Darwin and Hitler.)

Racism and Social Darwinism

in America

Social Darwinism provided support for racists and imperialists in

other countries too, not just Britain. For this reason it spread quickly

through the whole world. At the head of those subscribing to the theory

came U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt was the foremost proponent

and implementer of the programme of ethnic cleansing applied

against the Native Americans under the name of “forced relocation.” In

the book The Winning of the West, he founded the ideology of massacre,

maintaining that a racial war to the finish with the Indians was

inevitable.25 His greatest prop was Darwinism, which gave him the

chance to define the natives as a backward species.

As Roosevelt had foreseen, none of the treaties with the Native

Americans were respected, and this too was provided a false justification

under the “backward race” theory. In 1871, Congress disregarded all the

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 41

treaties made with the Native Americans and decided to exile them to

dead lands where they could await death. If the other side were not perceived

as human beings then how could the treaties made with them have

any validity?

Roosevelt also proposed that the above mentioned racial war represented

the culminating achievement of the spread of the English speaking

peoples (Anglo-Saxons) over the world.26

One of the foremost proponents of Anglo-Saxon racism, the American

evolutionist and Protestant clergyman Josiah Strong, employed the

same logic. He once wrote these words:

Then will the world enter upon a new stage of its history – the final competition

of races for which the Anglo-Saxon is being schooled. If I do not read

amiss, this powerful race will move down upon Mexico, down upon Central

and South America, out upon the islands of the sea, over upon Africa

and beyond. And can anyone doubt that the result of this competition will

be “survival of the fittest”?27

The foremost of the racists who used Social Darwinism to justify

themselves were the enemies of the blacks. Their racist theories, which

divided the races into levels and defined the white race as the most superior

and the black race as the most primitive,

enthusiastically embraced the concept of evolution.


The most prominent of the evolutionary racist

theoreticians, Henry Fairfield Osborn, wrote in an

article headed The Evolution of Human Races that

“The standard of intelligence of the average adult

Negro is similar to that of

the eleven-year-old-youth

of the species Homo Sapiens.”


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 42 O H U M A N I T Y

In his book The Winning of the

West, US President Theodore T.

Roosevelt established the ideology

of massacre, and later

implemented it.

According to this logic blacks were not

human beings at all. Another of the bestknown

proponents of evolutionary racist

thought, Carleton Coon put forward, in his

book The Origins of Race, published in 1962,

that the black and white races were two different

species which had split from each

other back in the Homo Erectus period.

According to Coon, the whites had evolved

further following this separation. The supporters

of discrimination against blacks

employed this so-called scientific explanation

for a long time.

The existence of a scientific theory

which supported it rapidly increased

racism in America. W. E. Dubois, known

for being against racial discrimination, stated

that “the problem of the twentieth century

is the problem of the colour line”.

According to him, that the problem of

racism should have emerged in such a

widespread manner in a country which

wants to become the world’s greatest

democracy, and which from some

points of view has accomplished

this, is not the least important

of paradoxes. The abolition

of slavery has not sufficed

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 43

In late 19th and early 20th century

America, whites treated blacks quite

ruthlessly. Laws and their applications

clearly revealed that blacks

were not regarded as human

beings. While the whites lived in

great wealth, blacks received inhuman


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 44 O H U M A N I T Y

for the establishment of brotherhood between black and white people. He

thought that official discrimination, set up in a short time, has in our day

turned into an ipso facto and legal situation, a way out of which is still

being sought.30

The emergence of the first racial discrimination

laws, known as the “Jim Crow

Laws,” (Jim Crow was one of the derogatory

names for blacks used by the whites)

also happened at this time. Blacks



The Ku Klux Klan was the

group that carried out the most

ruthless attacks against blacks.

The chain in the picture to the

side was used to chain black

slaves to one another.

were definitely not treated like human beings, and were despised and

treated with contempt everywhere: furthermore this was not the attitude

of a few racist individuals but that determined by the American state by

its own laws. Immediately after the first law approving racial segregation

on railways and trams was passed in Tennessee in 1875, all the Southern

states implemented segregation on their railways. “Whites Only” and

“Blacks” signs were hung up everywhere. Actually, all of these just meant

the granting of official status to a situation which already existed. Marriage

between different races was forbidden. Under the law, segregation

was compulsory in hospitals, prisons, and graveyards. In practice, this

included hotels, theatres, libraries, and even lifts and churches. The field

where segregation was most sharply felt was in schools. This was the

practice which had the heaviest effects on the blacks and was the greatest

obstacle in the face of their cultural development.

The practice of racial segregation was accompanied by a wave of violence.

There was a swift rise in the number of black lynchings. Between

1890 and 1901 some 1,300 blacks were lynched. As a result of these

implementations blacks rose up in several states.

Racist thought and theories accompanied this period. Shortly after,

American biological racism would express itself in the results arrived at

by R. B. Bean’s method of skull measurement, and under the pretence of

protecting the people of the new continent from a wave of uncontrolled

migration, a particular kind of American racism arose. Madison Grant,

author of the book The Passing of the Great Race (1916) wrote that the mixing

of the two races will open the way to the emergence of a more primitive

race than the inferior species, and he wanted inter-racial marriages to

be banned.31

He also wanted inter-racial marriages to be banned.

Racism existed in America before Darwin, as it did in the whole

world. But as we have seen, Darwinism gave racist views and policies

apparent support in the second half of the 19th century. For example, as we

have seen in this chapter, when racists put forward their views they used

the claims of Darwinism as slogans. Ideas which before Darwin had been

regarded as cruel, now began to be accepted as natural law.

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 45

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 46 O H U M A N I T Y

Darwinist Racists’

Inhuman Policies

The Extermination of the


The natives of Australia are

known as aborigines. These people

who had lived on the continent for

thousands of years suffered one of the

biggest exterminations in history with

the spreading of European settlers

over the country. The ideological basis

of this extermination was Darwinism.

Darwinist ideologues’ views of the

aborigines formed the theory of the

savagery these people suffered.

In 1870 Max Muller, an evolutionist

anthropologist from the London

Anthropological Review, had divided

human races into seven categories.

Aborigines appeared at the bottom,

and the Aryan race, that of the white

Europeans, at the top. H. K. Rusden, a

famous Social Darwinist,

had this to

say about the aborigines

in 1876:

The survival of the

fittest means that

might is right. And we

thus invoke and

remorselessly fulfil

the inexorable law of

The natives

of Australia,

the aborigines,


seen as an



species by

the evolutionists


were massacred.



natural selection when exterminating the inferior Australian and Maori

racesÉ and we appropriate their patrimony coolly.32

And in 1890 the Vice-President of the Royal Society of Tasmania,

James Barnard, wrote: “the process of extermination is an axiom of the law

of evolution and survival of the fittest.” There was therefore, he concluded,

no reason to suppose that “there had been any culpable neglect” in the

murder and dispossession of the Aboriginal Australian.33

As a result of these racist, ruthless, and savage views nourished by

Darwin, a terrible massacre was begun with the aim of exterminating the

aborigines. Aboriginal heads were nailed over station doors. Poisoned

bread was given to Aboriginal families. In many parts of Australia, aborigine

settlement areas disappeared in a savage manner within 50 years.34

The policies aimed at aborigines did not end with massacres. Many

members of the race were treated like experimental animals. The Smithsonian

Institute in Washington D.C. held the remains of 15,000 people of

various races. 10,000 Australian aborigines were sent by ship to the British

Museum with the aim of seeing whether or not they were the “missing

link” in the transition from animals to human beings.

Museums were not just interested in bones, at the same time they

kept brains belonging to aborigines and sold them at good prices. There

is also proof that Australian aborigines were killed to be used as specimens.

The facts below bear witness to this ruthlessness:

A death-bed memoir from Korah Wills, who became mayor of Bowen,

Queensland in 1866, graphically describes how he killed and dismembered

a local tribesman in 1865 to provide a scientific specimen.

Edward Ramsay, curator of the Australian Museum in Sydney for 20 years

from 1874, was particularly heavily involved. He published a museum

booklet which appeared to include Aborigines under the designation of

“Australian animals”. It also gave instructions not only on how to rob

graves, but also on how to plug up bullet wounds in freshly killed “specimens”.

A German evolutionist, Amalie Dietrich (nicknamed the ‘Angel of Black

Death’) came to Australia asking station owners for Aborigines to be shot for

specimens, particularly skin for stuffing and mounting for her museum

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 47

employers. Although evicted from at least one property, she shortly

returned home with her specimens.

A New South Wales missionary was a horrified witness to the slaughter by

mounted police of a group of dozens of Aboriginal men, women and children.

Forty-five heads were then boiled down and the 10 best skulls were

packed off for overseas.35

The extermination of the aborigines continued in the 20th century.

Among the methods employed in this extermination was the forcible

removal of aborigine children from their families. A news story by Alan

Thornhill, which appeared in the 28 April 1997 edition of the Philadelphia

Daily News, recounted this method used against the aborigines in this



Associated Press – Aborigines living in Australia’s remote northwest deserts

used to smear their light-skinned children with charcoal, hoping to keep

state welfare agents from taking them away. “The welfare just grabbed you

when they found you,” one of the stolen children reported, many years later.

“Our people would hide us, paint us with charcoal.”

“I was taken to Moola Bulla,” said one cattler worker who was stolen as a

child. “We were about 5 or 6 years old.” His tale was one of thousands heard

by Australia’s Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission during

its heart-wrenching inquiry into the “stolen generation.” From 1910 until the

1970s, some 100,000 aboriginal children were taken from their parents…

Light-skinned aboriginal children were seized and handed out to white

families for adoption. Dark-skinned children were put in orphanages.36

Even now, the pain is so great that most stories were printed anonymously

in the commission’s final report, “Bringing Them Home.” The

commission says the actions of the authorities at that time amounted to

genocide as the United Nations defines it. The government has refused to

follow the inquiry’s recommendation that a tribunal be set up to assess

compensation payments for the stolen children.

As we have seen, the inhuman treatment, massacres, cruelty, savagery,

and exterminations carried out were all justified by Darwinism’s

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 48 O H U M A N I T Y

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 49


Ota Benga was a

native of Africa. He

was trapped like an

animal by evolutionary

researchers, put

in a cage, and exhibited

alongside monkeys

in a zoo.

theses of “natural selection,” “the fight for survival,” and “the survival of

the fittest.”

All these terrible things the Australian natives suffered were just one

small part of the catastrophes Darwinism has brought to the world.

Ota Benga

After Darwin claimed in The Origin of Species that human beings had

developed from a common ancestor they shared with monkeys, the

search for fossils to support this scenario began. But some evolutionists

believed that “half-monkey half-man” creatures might

be found not only in the fossil record, but also living in

various parts of the world. At the beginning of the 20th

century the searches for the “missing link” were the

cause of many acts of savagery. One of these was the

story of the pigmy Ota Benga.

Ota Benga was captured in the Congo by an evolutionist

researcher called Samuel Verner in 1904. This

native, whose name meant “friend” in his own language,

was married and the father of two children. But he was

chained like an animal, put in a cage, and

sent to the U.S.A. There, the evolutionary

scientists put him in a cage with various

species of monkey at the St. Louis World

Fair and exhibited him as “the nearest link to man.” Two years later they

took him to Bronx Zoo in New York and displayed him with a few chimpanzees,

a gorilla called Dinah and an orang-utan called Dohung as

“man’s oldest ancestors.” The evolutionist director of the zoo, Dr. William

T. Horniday, gave long talks about the pride it gave him to have the “missing

link,” and visitors treated Ota Benga in his cage just like an animal. An

edition of the New York Times printed at the time described the visitors’


There were 40,000 visitors to the park on Sunday. Nearly every man woman

and child of this crowd made for the monkey house to see the star attraction

in the parkÐthe wild man from Africa. They chased him about the grounds

all day, howling, jeering, and yelling. Some of them poked him in the ribs,

other tripped him up, all laughed at him.37

The 17 September 1906 edition of the New York Journal said that this

was being done to prove evolution, but attacked it as a great injustice and

cruelty in these words:

These men, without thought and intelligence have been exhibiting in a cage

of monkeys, a small human dwarf from Africa. Their idea, probably, was to

inculcate some profound lesson in evolution.

As a matter of fact, the only result achieved has been to hold up to scorn the

African race, which deserves at least sympathy and kindness from the

whites of this country, after all the brutality it has suffered hereÉ

It is shameful and disgusting that the misfortune, the physical deficiency, of

a human being, created by the same Force that puts us all here and endowed

with the same feelings and the same soul, should be locked in a cage with

monkeys and be made a public mockery.38

The New York Daily Tribune also gave space to the subject of Ota

Benga’s being exhibited in the zoo for the purposes of demonstrating evolution.

The Darwinist zoo director’s defence was completely unscrupulous:

The exhibition of an African pygmy in the same cage with an orang outang

at the New York Zoological Park last week stirred up considerable criticism.

Some persons declared it was an attempt on the part of Director Hornaday

to demonstrate a close relationship between Negroes and monkeys. Dr.

Hornaday denied this. “If the little fellow is in a cage,” said Dr. Hornaday, “it

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 50 O H U M A N I T Y

is because he is most comfortable there, and because we are at a loss to know

what else to do with him. He is in no sense a prisoner, except that no one

would say it was wise to allow him to wander around the city without some

one having an eye on him.”39

Ota Benga’s being exhibited in the zoo with gorillas like an animal

led to unease in various circles. A number of foundations applied to the

authorities to have the practice stopped, stating that Ota Benga was a

human being and that his being treated in that way was a great cruelty.

One of these applications appeared in the New York Globe of 12 September

1906 in this way:

Editor of the Globe:

Sir – I lived in the south several years, and consequently am not overfond of

negro, but believe him human. I think it a shame that the authorities of this

great city should allow such a sight as that witnessed at the Bronx Park – a

negro boy, on exhibition in a monkey cage…

This whole pygmy business needs investigation…


New York, Sept. 1240

Another application asking Ota Benga to be treated like a human

was as follows:

Man and Monkey Show Disapproved by Clergy

The Rev. Dr. MacArthur Thinks the Exhibition Degrading

“The person responsible for this exhibition degrades himself as much as he

does the African” said Dr. MacArthur “Instead of making a beast of this little

fellow, he should be put in school for the development of such powers as

God gave to him.”

Dr. Gilbert said he had already decided that the exhibition was an outrage

and that he and other pastors would join with Dr. MacArthur in seeing to it

that the Bushman was released from the monkey cage and put elsewhere.41

The end result of all this inhuman treatment was Ota Benga’s suicide.

But here the problem was greater than that of one human being losing his

life. This event was a clear example of the cruelty and savagery that Darwinist

racism could mean in practice.

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 51

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 52 O H U M A N I T Y

he famous arctic researcher

Robert Peary brought a

group of Pole Eskimos to

New York in 1897. The youngest of this

group was a child called Minik. The

group, which included Minik and his

father, were exhibited for a long time at

the American Museum of Natural History.

During that time, Minik’s father lost

his life through sickness. Minik

remained alone and unprotected in New

York. And one day Minik saw that his

father’s skeleton was being exhibited in

the American Museum of Natural History

as “an example of the species.”

Although he asked for his father’s body,

the museum authorities turned the

request down.

Another point worthy of note regarding

Minik’s life was Robert Peary, the

researcher who brought the Eskimos to

America, held racist views. Although he

lived among the

Eskimos, Peary

openly thought

that these people

were not

equal to him. According to Peary, Eskimos

and Negroes were members of inferior

races. Although they were strong,

intelligent, and trustworthy people who

provided for their families, they were

not as good as the white manÉ One

time he wrote the following piece of

insolence: “I have often been asked: ‘Of

what use are Eskimos to the world?

They are too far removed to be of any

value for commercial enterprises; and,

furthermore, they lack ambition. They

value life only as does a fox, or a bear,

purely by instinct.”1 His purpose in

bringing Eskimos to America was

explained by a researcher on the subject:

“What were Peary’s reasons for bringing

these six Eskimos to New York? ÉPerhaps

these six Eskimos were just specimens,

much like the skulls and skeletons

he had collected earlier, but more interesting

because blood still coursed in

their veins. ÉHe had also felt a morbid

affinity for the bodies of other Eskimos

he knew by name, which he had

exhumed the year before from their

fresh graves and carted off south to

grace the halls of the museum.”2

Minik, Ota Benga, and many other people

whose names are not known, suffered

inhuman treatment, in this and

other ways, at the hands of so-called ‘scientists”

who looked on some races as


1 Ken Harper, Give Me My Father’s Body, Steerforth

Press, South Royalton, Vermont p. 8

2 Ken Harper, Give Me My Father’s Body, Steerforth

Press, South Royalton, Vermont p. 22




D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 53



Muslim News/ November/2000

Superiority Comes From Character, Not Blood

Darwin’s portraying human beings as a developed species of animal

and his presentation of some races as not yet having completed their

development, and as species closer to animals was intensely dangerous

and destructive in human history. Those who took this claim of Darwin’s

as their guide mercilessly oppressed other races, forced them to live under

the harshest conditions, and even exterminated them.

Bryan Appleyard, author of the book Brave New Worlds, explains the

tyrannical mentality underlying racism, and the results of it, in this way:

The point is that once people decide you are a lesser creature for whatever

reason, either superstitious or scientific, there appears to be no limit to what

cruelty they may inflict on you. And they are likely to inflict that cruelty

feeling fully justified, because it is but a small step from believing another

human being is inferior to believing that he is bad, dangerous, or threatening

to ‘superior’ beings. Indeed, some may generalize the point even further

and insist that all ‘inferior’ beings are dangerous because they threaten the

life or health of the entire human race. They may then advocate sterilization,

restrictions on marriage, or even murder to prevent the outcast’s assault on

the integrity of the species.42

All human beings, however, are created the same. Every one was created

by Allah (God). The Qur’an announces human beings’ creation in this


He who has created all things in the best possible way. He commenced the

creation of man from clay; then produced his seed from an extract of base

fluid; then formed him and breathed His Spirit into him and gave you

hearing, sight and hearts. What little thanks you show! (Surat al-Sajda: 7-


As the above verses reveal, human beings carry the soul Allah

breathed into them. Every human being, with no racial difference, thinks,

feels, loves, suffers, feels excitement, and knows love, affection, and compassion.

And every human being also knows tyranny, contempt, and difficulty.

For this reason, all though history, those who believe people of

other races to be semi-developed animals and mistreat them, those who

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 54 O H U M A N I T Y

offend, oppress, exploit even one person, and those who support these

practices with the false evidence and theories they produced, have committed

a great sin in their ignorance.

In our time there exist cultures of relatively undeveloped human

societies. These people have all human characteristics, but they lack those

criteria which, from technical and cultural aspects, generally rule the

world. For reasons of the climate they live in and natural conditions,

many communities have lived isolated from general world society and

have developed very different cultures. But in each one there exist all the

features, customs, and habits common to humanity. Those with hidden

agendas, and those who have seen advantage in racism, enthusiastically

embraced Darwin’s theory and accepted these people, who were no different

from other humans, as members of an inferior race and even animals.

As a result of this view, even in our day people have emerged who

oppress and despise backward people and communities on the grounds

they have not evolved sufficiently.

Allah, however, completely forbids racism. Allah created every

human being, in different colours and speaking different tongues. This is

an indication of the art and variety of Allah’s creation:

Among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and earth and the variety

of your languages and colours. There are certainly Signs in that for every

being. (Surat ar-Rum: 22)

In Allah’s sight the only superiority is a person’s character, his avoiding

all types of sin and rebellion, degeneracy and deviation, and the superior

morality deriving from his piety. Apart from his piety no human can

have any superiority to any other deriving from any of his features. Allah

reveals this in a verse:

Mankind! We created you from a male and female, and made you into

peoples and tribes so that you might come to know each other. The

noblest among you in Allah’s sight is the one with the most piety (who

best performs his duty to Allah). Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware. (Surat

al-Hujurat: 13)

D A R W I N ‘ S R A C I S M A N D C O L O N I A L I S M 55

azism was born in the chaos of the Germany which

emerged defeated from the First World War. The

leader of the party was the angry and aggressive

Adolf Hitler. Racism formed the basis of Hitler’s

world view. Hitler believed that the Aryan race, the fundamental element

of the German nation, was superior to all the other races and had to rule

them. He dreamed that the Aryan race would found a world empire that

would last 1,000 years.

The scientific support Hitler found for these racist theories was Darwin’s

theory of evolution.

Hitler’s most important idea-moulder, the racist German historian

Heinrich von Treitschke, was strongly affected by Darwin’s theory of evolution

and based his racist views on Darwinism. He used to say, “Nations

can only develop by violent competition like Darwin’s survival of the

fittest,” and declared that this meant lasting and inevitable war. His view

was that, “Conquering by the sword is a way of bringing civilisation to

barbarism and knowledge to ignorance.” He thought: “The yellow races

have no understanding of artistic ability and political freedom. It is the

destiny of the black races to serve the whites and to be the target of the

whites’ loathing for all eternityÉ”43

While Hitler was developing his theories he drew inspiration, like

Treitschke, from Darwin and particularly Darwin’s idea of the fight for

survival. The title of his notorious book Mein Kampf (“My Struggle”) was

inspired by the idea of this fight for survival. Just like Darwin, Hitler gave

non-European races the status of monkeys, and said, “Take away the

Nordic Germans and nothing remains but the dance of apes.”44

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 57


The Bloody Alliance Between Darwin and Hitler

In the 1933 Nuremberg party rally, Hitler proclaimed that “a higher

race subjects to itself a lower raceÉ a right

which we see in nature and which can be

regarded as the sole conceivable right,”

because it was founded on science.45

Hitler, who believed in the superiority

of the Aryan race, believed that the

superiority of this race was given to

it by nature. In Mein Kampf he

wrote the following:

The Jews formed a sub-human

counter race, predestined by their biological

heritage to evil, just as the Nordic

race was designated for nobilityÉ History

would culminate in a new millennial

empire of unparalleled splendour, based

on a new racial hierarchy ordained by

nature herself.46

Hitler and his

book Mein

Kampf in

which he set

out his ideology.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 58 O H U M A N I T Y

Hitler, who thought that human beings were highly developed animals,

believed that instead of allowing natural forces and chance, in a

word coincidence, to control evolution, it was necessary to take the management

of it into his own hands to develop the human race. And this was

the ultimate aim of the Nazi movement. In order to realise this aim, the

first step was to separate, to isolate, the inferior races from the Aryan race,

the race they believed to be superior.

At this point the Nazis moved to the implementation of Darwinism,

and took as their example the “theory of eugenics” which itself had its origins

in Darwinism.

The Theory of Eugenics Was Based on

Darwin’s Ideas

The theory of eugenics, which emerged in the first half of the 20th

century, meant the weeding out of sick and handicapped people and the

“improving” of the human race by increasing the number of healthy individuals.

According to the theory of eugenics, in the same way that better

kinds of animals can be produced by mating healthy animals with each

other, so the human race could be improved in the same way.

As might be expected,

those who put forward the

eugenics programme were

Darwinists. At the head of the

eugenics wave in England

came Charles Darwin’s cousin,

Francis Galton, and his son

Leonard Darwin.

It was clear that the idea

of eugenics was a natural

result of Darwinism. In fact,

this truth was awarded special

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 59

Francis Galton (left) and

Leonard Darwin (right).

importance in those publications which supported

eugenics, “Eugenics is man’s taking

charge of his own evolution,” it was said.

Kenneth Ludmerer, a medical historian

at Washington University, noted

that the idea of eugenics is as old as

Plato’s Republic but he also added that

Darwinism was the reason for the rise in

interest in the idea in the 19th century:

É modern eugenics thought arose only

in the nineteenth century. The emergence

of interest in eugenics during that century

had multiple roots. The most important was

the theory of evolution, for Francis Galton’s

ideas on eugenicsÐand it was he who created the

term “eugenics”Ðwere a direct logical outgrowth

of the scientific doctrine elaborated by his cousin, Charles Darwin.47

In Germany the first person to be influenced by and to spread eugenics

was the famous evolutionary biologist Ernst Haeckel. Haeckel was a

close friend and supporter of Darwin. To support the theory of evolution,

he put forward the claim “recapitulation,” which proposed that the

embryos of different living creatures resembled one another. It later

emerged that Haeckel had falsified the data when putting forward this


While Haeckel was on the one hand making scientific forgeries of

this kind, on the other he was putting forward eugenic propaganda. He

suggested that newly-born handicapped children should be killed forthwith

and that this would speed up the evolution of society. He went even

further, claiming that lepers and people with cancer and mental illnesses

should be painlessly killed, or else these people would be a burden on

society and would slow down evolution.

The American researcher George Stein summed up Haeckel’s blind

allegiance to the theory of evolution in an article of his in the magazine

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 60 O H U M A N I T Y

Ernst Haeckel

American Scientist in this way:

É [Haeckel] argued that Darwin was correct É humankind had unquestionably

evolved from the animal kingdom. Thus, and here the fatal step

was taken in Haeckel’s first major exposition of Darwinism in Germany,

humankind’s social and political existence is governed by the laws of evolution,

natural selection, and biology, as clearly shown by Darwin. To argue

otherwise was backward superstition.48

Haeckel died in 1919. But his ideas were inherited by the Nazis.

Shortly after Hitler came to power an official eugenics programme was

initiated. Hitler summed up the new policy in these sentences:

In the popular state, the education of the mind and the body will play an

important role, but human selection is just as important. ÉThe state has the

responsibility of declaring as unfit for reproductive purposes anyone who is

obviously ill or genetically unsound. É and must carry through with this

responsibility ruthlessly without respect to understanding or lack of

understanding on the part of anyone. ÉStopping reproduction of the

bodily degenerate or psychically ill for a period of only 600 years would

lead Éto an improvement in human health which can hardly be envisaged

today. If the fertility of the healthiest members of the race were realized

and planned the result would be a race which É would have lost the

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 61

Elderly and

sick people

killed under


policy of


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 62 O H U M A N I T Y

seeds of bodily and spiritual decay which we now carry. 49

As a necessity of this policy of Hitler’s, the mentally ill, the disabled,

the blind from birth, and those with genetic diseases in German society,

were rounded up in special “sterilisation centres.” These people were

regarded as parasites harmful to the purity and evolutionary progress of

the German race. A while later in fact, these people who were removed

from society began to be killed by secret order of Hitler.

These murders were presented as perfectly reasonable and those

who were accepted as genetically inferior were described as “unprofitable”

and obstacle to the development of the nation. Groups, including

various races and peoples, which were seen as inferior races slowly began

to be included. Later again sick elderly people, those with jaundice, those

with serious mental defects, the deaf and dumb, and even those with fatal

diseases were included.

After the black athlete Jesse

Owens won four gold

medals at the 1936 Berlin

Olympics, Hitler, even

though he congratulated all

the competitors, refused to

congratulate Jesse Owens

and left the stadium. Some

evolutionists even advocated

the view that women

were evolutionarily inferior

!936 Berlin Olympic

Games gold medallist

Jesse Owens, who was

not congratulated by

Hitler because he was


to men. Dr Robert Wartenberg, later a prominent neurology professor in

California, tried to prove women’s inferiority by arguing that they could

not survive unless they were Ôprotected by men’. He concluded

that because the weaker women were not eliminated

as rapidly due to this protection, a slower rate of

evolution resulted and for this reason natural selection

was less operative on women than men. Based on these

thoughts, women in Nazi Germany were openly prohibited

from entering certain professions.50

Following the development of Darwinism and the

idea of eugenics, In Germany, “racial scientists” openly

advocated the killing of unwanted members and segments

of the population. One of these scientists,

Adolf Jost, “issued an early call for direct medical

killing in a book published in 1895, Das Recht auf

den Tod (The Right to Death). Jost argued that “for

the sake of the health of the social organism,

the state must take responsibility for the death

of individuals.” Adolf Jost was a mentor to

Adolf Hitler, who showed himself on the political

stage nearly 30 years later. “The state must

see to it that only the healthy beget

children,” Hitler said. “It must

declare unfit for propagation all who

are in any way visibly sick or who

have inherited a disease and can

therefore pass it on.”51

Under a law passed in 1933,

350,000 mentally ill people,

30,000 gypsies, and hundreds

Hitler gathered blonde, blue-eyed German girls in a

camp and ensured they would be together with SS

officers. In this way he dreamed of building a superior


T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 63

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 64 O H U M A N I T Y

of black children were sterilised by such methods

as castration, x-rays, injection, and electric

shocks to the genital area. One Nazi officer

said, “National Socialism is nothing but

applied biology.”52

As well as attempting to hasten the

development of the German race by the murder

of and ruthless policies directed at innocent

people, Hitler was also implementing

another condition of eugenics. Blond, blueeyed

men and women, accepted as representative

of the German race, were encouraged to

form relationships and have children. In 1935

special reproduction farms were established

for this purpose. These farms, where young

girls conforming to racist criteria were

installed, were frequently visited by SS units.

The illegitimate children born on these farms

were to be raised as the soldiers of the intended

1,000-year German kingdom.

The Nazis’ Aryan Racial


The Nazis again used Darwinist concepts

to allegedly prove the superiority of the Aryan

race. Darwin had proposed that as people

evolved so their skulls grew larger. The Nazis

embraced this idea fiercely and set about tak-


Nazi officers, trained according to evolutionary

ideas, sought the master race by measuring

skulls, noses, and foreheads.

ing skull measurements to show that the German race was superior. In all

corners of Nazi Germany comparisons were made showing that German

skulls were larger than those of other races. Teeth, eyes, hair and other

features were evaluated with evolutionary measurements. Individuals

found not to match up to German race measurements were to be exterminated

in the name of the principles of eugenics.

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 65

Just like Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, the

head of the Gestapo, and other Nazi

officers held Darwinist views and possessed

the racist and ruthless ideas

this led to.

Whenever he holds the upper hand (or

he turns his back), he rushes around

the earth making mischief therein. He

destroys (people’s) crops and breeding

stock. Allah does not love mischief.

(Surat al-Baqara: 205)

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 66 O H U M A N I T Y

All this madness was carried out in the name of implementing Darwinist

principles on society. The American historian Michael Grodin,

author of the book The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code, reveals the

reality in this way:

I think what happened was that there was a perfect match of Nazi ideology

and Social Darwinism and racial hygiene as it developed in the turn of the

20th Century.53

George Stein explains the subject

National socialism, whatever else it may have been was ultimately the first

fully self-conscious attempt to organize a political community on a basis of

an explicit biopolicy: a biopolicy fully congruent with the scientific facts

of the Darwinian revolution.54

The famous evolutionist Sir Arthur Keith comments on Hitler as follows:

The German F.hrer is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make

the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.55

The author of the book Darwin: Before and After, Robert Clarke, concluded,

Adolf Hitler: “Éwas captivated by evolutionary teaching Ð probably

since the time he was a boy. Hitler reasoned É that a higher race

would always conquer a lower.”53 The political philosophy of Nazi Germany

took shape under the influence of these ideas of Hitler’s.

The author of the book Race and Reich, Joseph Tenenbaum noted that

the political philosophy of Germany was built on the belief that critical for

evolutionary progress were:

É struggle, selection, and survival of the fittest, all notions and observations

arrived at É by Darwin É but already in luxuriant bud in the German social

philosophy of the nineteenth century. É Thus developed the doctrine of

Germany’s inherent right to rule the world on the basis of superior strength

É [of a] “hammer and anvil” relationship between the Reich and the weaker


Adolf Hitler was not alone among Nazi leaders in his “war of ideological

evolution.” Heinrich Himmler, head of the Gestapo, “stated that

the law of nature must take its course in the survival of the fittest.” In fact,

all of the Nazi leaders were committed both to evolution and Germanic

racism, as were most German scientists and industrialists during those

dark years.58

Hitler’s Hatred of Religion

Another reason for the great importance Hitler attached to the theory

of evolution was his seeing the theory as a weapon against religious

belief. Hitler had a great hatred of divine religions. Moral virtues such as

compassion, mercy, and humility, ordered by divine religions, represented

a great obstacle to the ruthless and warrior Aryan type the Nazis wanted

to create. For this reason, once the Nazis came to power in 1933 they

tried to turn German society back to its old pagan beliefs. The swastika, a

symbol from the old pagan cultures, was a sign of this return. The Nazi

ceremonies held in every corner of Germany were a return to the ancient

pagan rites. The idea of evolution, an inheritance from pagan cultures, fitted

in exceedingly well with the ideology of Nazism for this reason. Hitler

once revealed his attitude toward Christianity when he bluntly stated that

religion is an:

Éorganized lie [that] must be smashed. The State must remain the absolute

master. When I was younger, I thought it was necessary to set about

[destroying religion] Éwith dynamite. I’ve since realized there’s room for a

little subtlety É. The final state must be É in St. Peter’s Chair, a senile officiant;

facing him a few sinister old womenÉ The young and healthy are on

our side É Our peoples had previously succeeded in living all right without

this religion. I have six divisions of SS men absolutely indifferent in matters

of religion.59

Daniel Gasman revealed the reasons for Hitler’s hatred of religion in

his book The Scientific Origins of National Socialism:

Hitler stressed and singled out the idea of biological evolution as the most

foremost weapon against traditional religion and he repeatedly condemned

Christianity for its opposition to the teaching of evolutionÉ For Hitler, evolution

was the hallmark of modern science and culture.60

Actually, the fundamental cause of the countless catastrophes visited

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 67

upon the world in the 20th century was the character of such people as

Hitler and the Nazis who had no religion. These people who denied the

existence of God and believed that human beings had evolved to become

developed animals, saw themselves as unchecked, with no responsibility

to answer to anyone. Because they had no fear of God and the hereafter

they knew no limit to their immorality and tyranny, and for that reason

they mercilessly killed millions of people. The difficulties and pains there

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 68 O H U M A N I T Y

The swastika Hitler used was a symbol belonging

to old pagan cultures.

will be in a society without religion are clearly to be

seen in the example of Hitler. And not just Hitler: as

we shall see later Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Franco, Mussolini

and the others who drowned the 20th century

in blood were known for being completely devoid

of religion. A lesson must of course be drawn from

the nightmare which comes from lack of religion.

Whereas those who fear Allah and live by

Qur’anic morality always bring peace, calm, security,

plenty, and enlightened times to a society.

People faithful to the religion of Allah never

disturb the peace anywhere in the world, on

the contrary they always encourage compassion,

pity, friendship, faithfulness, and cooperation.

Top. Nazi gatherings resembled ancient pagan ceremonies.

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 69

Posters from Hitler’s time symbolised

the killings carried out in his


Photographs showing the state of the people during

the Second World War.

Hitler was the cause of the killing of millions

of people, and for millions being left

homeless and alone. His inhuman ideology

was based on Darwin’s theses of superior

and inferior races. And he did not hesitate

to kill those he saw as inferior races.

These pictures sum up the suffering, fear, terror, and anguish that Hitler and those who

shared his views inflicted on humanity. Darwinism, which was the ultimate source of this

nightmare, still continues to inflict suffering on mankind all over the world.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 74 O H U M A N I T Y

The Catastrophes Brought About by

the Darwinist-Fascist Mussolini

In the same way that Hitler determined his policy by

employing Darwinism, so his contemporary and ally Benito

Mussolini made use of Darwinist claims and concepts to set

Italy on imperialist and Fascist foundations.

Mussolini was a thorough Darwinist, who believed that

violence had been a propelling force in history and that war led

to revolution. For him, “the reluctance of England to engage in

war only proved the evolutionary decadence of the British


At the head of the magazine The People of Italy (Il Popolo d’Italia),

which he founded with financial assistance from the French

government, he put the phrase, “He who has iron will also have

bread.” In other words he was telling the people that in order to be

able to fill their stomachs they needed the power to wage war.

Mussolini chose the axe as the symbol of Fascism and the

Fascist Party. Because the axe was the symbol of war, violence, death, and


Mussolini’s conduct, aggressive and prone to violence like every Fascist,

is described in Denis Mack Smith’s book. In his book, Smith stated

that one of Mussolini’s unchanging beliefs was aggression and his fundamental

instinct was to resort to violence.62

Like the other Darwinist-Fascists, Mussolini’s warlike, aggressive

and oppressive policies led to many people being massacred, being left

without home and family, and to the country’s being left in ruins. Violence

and oppression were practised, by means of the Blackshirts, not only in

his own country, but in others too. In 1935 he occupied Ethiopia, and by

1941 had had 15,000 people wiped out. He did not delay in backing and

justifying his occupation of Ethiopia with Darwinism’s racialist views.

According to Mussolini the Ethiopians were inferior because they were of

the black race, and being governed by a superior race like the Italians

should have been an honour for them.

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 75

Mussolini’s murder squads, the Blackshirts.

On the other hand he continued the oppression of the Muslims

which had begun with Italy’s occupation of Libya on Oct. 3, 1911, and

actually increased the attacks aimed against Muslims. The occupation

only came to an end with Mussolini’s death in an agreement made on

Feb. 10, 1947. During that period 1.5 million Muslims were martyred

and hundreds of thousands wounded.

Mussolini, who has gone down in history for his ruthlessness

and oppression, described the Fascism which he supported and put

into practice in a speech:

Fascism is no longer liberation but tyranny, no longer the safeguard of

the nation but the defense of private interests.63

As we have seen in the examples

from Hitler and Mussolini, Fascism,

where the strong and cruel were right

and superior and where the only way

to success and development was brute

force, aggression, violence, and war,

was an implementation of Darwin’s

claims that “The strong live, the weak

die,” and led to suffering for millions.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 76 O H U M A N I T Y

Pictures of

the Ethiopian


oppressed by


The Fascist Franco and the Oppression

He Gave Rise to in Spain

Another of the Fascist oppressors who turned the 20th century into a

lake of blood was Franco. He organised the “Falange” movement in Spain

with the support of the Darwinist Fascists Hitler and Mussolini, and

brought great suffering and oppression to the people of Spain. Franco

dragged his people into civil war, turning brother against brother, father

against son.

During the Spanish Civil War an average of 250 people a day were

killed in Madrid, 150 in Barcelona, and 80 in Seville. Some executions

were carried out by driving nails into peoples’ heads. Pitiless massacres

took place all over the country. In a little mountain village to the north of

Madrid, for example, 31 villagers were arrested because they had not

voted for Franco, and of these 13 were

taken out of the village by lorry and killed

by the side of the road. The Fascists

entered a town with a population of 11,000

near Seville and killed more than 300 people.

As a result of the violent events which

went on in this way some 800,000 people

were killed in the civil war, and 200,000

more executed by order of Franco. Millions

were injured or crippled.

A member of Parliament who spoke against Mussolini was kidnapped and murdered in

broad daylight. The picture shows the removal of the MP’s body from the forest where

it was later found.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 78 O H U M A N I T Y

Franco Gave Hitler the Population of An Entire

Village to Test His Weapons On!

The greatest supporters of the Fascist Franco in the Civil War were

Hitler and Mussolini. Franco did not leave his allies’ support unrewarded:

he made one of the cruellest and most ruthless agreements in history, giving

small towns such as Guernica to the Nazis as a gift for them to test

their new weapons on.

On the morning of May 5, 1937, the people of the small town of Guernica

awoke to the death brought by giant bomber planes and tons of bombs, the

new miracles of Nazi technology. The little town had been abandoned by

Franco to the Nazi plane tests.64

This event was only one of the products of this twisted philosophy

which regarded human beings as laboratory animals. This philosophy,

which left thousands of people to die just in order to test the power of its

weapons and which crippled, injured, and tortured thousands of others,

still lives today under different guises. This will continue for as long as

Darwinist philosophy and similar oppressions which see human beings

as a species of animal and war as the most effective means of

progress are kept alive.

There was no mercy

even for children in the

Spanish Civil War, of

which Franco was the

cause. People were

taken out of their houses

for no reason and

shot. Innocent people

were killed, crippled,

and lost their families

and loved ones. These

were all reflections of

Fascist ruthlessness in

daily life.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 80 O H U M A N I T Y

Darwinism’s Preparatory Role in the First and

Second World Wars

In his book Europe Since 1870 the famous British

professor of history James Joll explains one of the

factors leading to the outbreak of the First World

War as being the belief of the leaders of Europe of the

time in Darwinist ideas:

We have seen how Darwinian ideas had a great influence on the ideology

of imperialism at the end of the nineteenth century, but it is important

to realise how literally the doctrine of the struggle for existence and of the

survival of the fittest was taken by the majority of the leaders of Europe in

the years preceding the First World War. The Austro-Hungarian chief of staff

for example, Franz Baron Conrad von Hoetzendorff, wrote in his memoirs

after the war:

Philanthropic religions, moral teachings and philosophical doctrines may

certainly sometimes serve to weaken mankind’s struggle for existence in its

Left page. The situation in London,

bombed by German planes in the

Second World War.

crudest form, but they will never succeed in removing it as

a driving motive of the worldÉ It is in accordance with

this great principle that the catastrophe of the world war

came about as the result of the motive forces in the lives of

states and peoples, like a thunderstorm which must by its

nature discharge itself.”

Seen against this sort of ideological background, Conrad’s insistence on the

need for a preventive war in order to preserve the Austro-Hungarian

monarchy becomes comprehensible.

We have seen too how these views were not limited to military figures, and

that Max Weber for example was deeply concerned with the international

struggle for survival. Again Kurt Riezler, the personal assistant and confidant

of the German chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, wrote in

1914: “Eternal and absolute enmity is fundamentally inherent in relations

between peoples; and the hostility which we observe everywhereÉ is not

the result of a perversion of human nature but is the essence of the world

and the source of life itself.”65

Friedrich von Bernhardi, a First World War general and German

Social Darwinist, was also one of these leaders. “War” declared Bernhardi

“is a biological necessity”; it “is as necessary as the struggle of the elements

of nature”; it “gives a biologically just decision, since its decisions rest on

the very nature of things.”66

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 81

As we have seen, the First World War

emerged because of the European thinkers,

generals, and leaders who saw waging war,

spilling blood, suffering, and inflicting suffering

as a kind of “development” and an

immutable law of nature. The ideological

inspiration which dragged this whole generation

to ruin with these completely false ideas

was none other than Darwin’s concepts of

“struggle for life” and “favoured races.” Two

years after Bernardi said those words, the First

World War, which was to bring about biological

development (!) began, leaving behind it 8

million dead, hundreds of cities in ruins, and

millions of wounded, crippled, homeless and

unemployed. The roots of the Nazi war, which

started 21 years later and left some 50 million

dead, also lie in Darwinism.

Hitler often used to link his policies of

war and genocide to Darwinism. He saw war

as not only for eliminating weaker races, but

also as a force for disposing of weaker mem-

The wars of the 20th

century visited great

destruction on people.


bers of the master race. Nazi Germany praised war partly for this reason,

because in their twisted thinking war was an essential step for the

progress of the race.

The evolutionist A. E. Wiggam explained “the belief that war develops

men,” on which Hitler based his policy, in a book published in 1922:

É at one time man had scarcely more brains than his anthropoid cousins,

the apes. But, by kicking, biting, fighting É and outwitting his enemies

and by the fact that the ones who had not sense and strength enough to do

this were killed off, man’s brain became enormous and he waxed both in

wisdom and agility if not in size É.67

Hitler drew support from evolutionists such as Wiggam and saw

war as an obligation for those who wished to survive. He stated this openly

in Mein Kampf:

The whole world of Nature is a mighty struggle between strength and

weaknessÐan eternal victory of the strong over the weak. There would be

nothing but decay in the whole of nature if this were not so. He who would

live must fight. He who does not wish to fight in this world where permanent

struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist. To think otherwise

is to “insult” nature. Distress, misery and disease are her rejoinders.68

With the Darwinists’ claims that the strong remained after the fight

for survival and that species developed by this means being adapted to

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 83

Darwinist dictators and despots, who believed that war

would lead to progress for mankind, turned the 20th century

into a lake of blood. They spread oppression to all

corners of the world.

human societies, wars also began to be viewed as a necessity for the

development of mankind. For example, Hitler ascribed Germany’s greatness

to the elimination by war of its weaker members over the centuries.

Although the Germans were no strangers to war this new “scientific” justification

was a force to back up their warlike policies.

Elsewhere, Hitler had claimed, “human civilization as we know it

would not exist if it were not for constant war”69

Haeckel proposed, on the subject of war, that the savage methods of

the Spartans, one of the city states that made up

Ancient Greece, should be implemented. He wrote

that “by killing all but the Ôperfectly healthy and

strong children’ the Spartans were Ôcontinually in

excellent strength and vigor’.”70

War was viewed as “an indispensable regulator”

of populations all over Europe, and not just in

Germany. “If it were not for war,” German Social

Darwinist Friedrich Von Bernhardi writes, “we

should probably find that inferior and degenerate

races would overcome healthy and youthful

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 84 O H U M A N I T Y

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 85

ones by their wealth and their numbers. The generative importance of

war lies in this, that it causes selection, and thus war becomes a biological


As we have seen from our account so far, Hitler and the Nazi ideologues

who supported him saw war as a necessity with the inspiration

they drew from Darwinism. And by implementing this necessity they visited

various miseries on their own people, and on the other peoples of the

world. From this point of view it will therefore be absolutely correct to

identify Charles Darwin as one of those primarily responsible for the sufferings

experienced in World War II.

Professor Dr. Jerry Bergman demonstrates the effect of Darwinism

on the Second World War:

The evidence is very clear that Darwinian ideas had a tremendous impact

on German thought and practiceÉ In fact, Darwinian ideas had a tremendous

influence on causing WWII, the loss of 40 million lives, and the waste

of about 6 trillion dollars. Firmly convinced that evolution was true, Hitler

saw himself as the modern savior of humankindÉ By breeding a superior

race, the world would look upon him as the man who pulled humanity up

to a higher level of evolution.72

Of course there had been countless wars in the world before Darwin

put his theory forward. But due to the effects of his theory, war was for the

first time given a false approval by science. Max Nordau drew attention to

Darwin’s negative role in the subject of wars in an article called The Philosophy

and Morals of War, which made waves in America:

The greatest authority of all the advocates of war is Darwin. Since the theory

of evolution has been promulgated, they can cover their natural barbarism

with the name of Darwin and proclaim the sanguinary instincts of

their inmost hearts as the last word of science.73

It was no coincidence that the 20th century should see the bloodiest

wars the world has known, coming as it did after the 19th century, which

was formed by the ideas of such materialist ideologues as Darwin, Marx,

and Freud. Darwinism had prepared the theoretical and so-called scientific

ground which would end in war, and the despots who saw war as

indispensable for the growth of humanity killed a total of 60 million people

in both world wars.


The Vietnam War, in which

more than a million people

were killed or wounded on

both sides, left many suffering

people in its wake. Furthermore,

many of these

people were made to wage

war thousands of miles

away from their homes.

Wars All Over the World

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 86 O H U M A N I T Y

A father showing South Vietnamese

troops his child, who was killed as

government forces pursued Viet

Cong guerrillas.

There are only grounds against those

who wrong people and act as tyrants

in the earth without any right to do

so. Such people will have a painful

punishment. (Surat ash-Shura: 42)

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 87

The recent experiences in Bosnia and Kosovo must

never be forgotten. The lack of sympathy for innocent

people killed because they were Muslims or

from a different culture or race, the failure to

extend a helping or compassionate hand, and the

oppression of innocent people in the middle of

Europe for years openly reveal the dominant

immorality and lack of compassion in the 20th century.


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 88 O H U M A N I T Y

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 89


The Korean War, fought

between 1950 and 1953,

brought great harm to

innocent people, the

elderly, and children.

Human beings grew

cruel enough to rain

bombs down on innocent

people without batting

an eye.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 90 O H U M A N I T Y


During the May uprising

in Jakarta the city

morgue was full of dead.

In the fighting which

went on in the country

cities were ruined and

cars set on fire.

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 91


Broken people living in

fear and poverty, and

streets ruined as a

result of terrorist

attacks in the decadeslong

clashes between

Great Britain and the

Irish Republican Army.

The top picture

shows the situation

in 1972;

the picture to

the side that in


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 92 O H U M A N I T Y


Frequently witnessed scenes of violence

in the domestic clashes.

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 93

Fascism still survives today.

Attacks and breaches of the

peace by Neo-Nazi groups,

particularly in Germany, frequently

appear on the agenda.

The Neo-Nazis, who

praise Darwin on their web

pages, are enemies of the


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 94 O H U M A N I T Y

The Neo-Nazis

Even though Fascist leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini, and the

Nazi organisations linked to them (the SA, the SS, the Gestapo) or Mussolini’s

“Blackshirts” today seem like a thing of the past, Neo-Nazi organisations

which follow their ideas are still active. In recent years in particular,

racist and Fascist movements have re-awoken in many European

countries. At the forefront of these movements come the Neo-Nazis in


T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 95

The Neo-Nazis consist of unemployed hooligans, drug addicts, and

bloodthirsty types, and possess all features of the Fascist mentality. One

news article about the Neo-Nazis shows how attracted they are to blood

and violence:

Blood, honour, and fanaticismÉ It is possible to sum up the values of the

members of the Fascist Olympia Group in just these three words. Today the

organisation has 35,000 members. And in all their eyes can be seen the inordinate

desire to rise.74

The Neo-Nazis have been influenced by the same Darwinist understanding

as their “greats,” Hitler and the other Nazi leaders. On the Internet

pages which they set up for Nazi and racist propaganda it is possible

to come across Darwin’s words and praise for Darwin, because Darwin

gives support to all the Neo-Nazis’ movements and ideas. In their pages,

therefore, they put Darwinism forward as a theory which must be accepted,

without feeling the need for any evidence.

The attacks and murders the Neo-Nazis carry out are completely

ruthless. Neo-Nazis take pleasure in burning people to death, frightening

them, and torturing little children, and Turks are one of their main targets.

Neo-Nazis reveal their hatred and enmity of Turks in every corner of their

Internet sites, and show this hatred in action. This statement about Turks

appeared in one Neo-Nazi site:

For instance, if it were in my power today, I would like to see a large part of

the Turks in gas chambers.75

The name the Neo-Nazis base their enmity of the Turks on is once

again Charles Darwin. The Neo-Nazis think they are providing a socalled

scientific explanation for their hatred of Turks by making extracts

from Darwin’s false and unintelligent claims regarding them. On the last

page of this chapter you can see some Neo-Nazi Internet sites which

praise Darwin and show the kind of things they have to say about the

Turkish nation.

Neo-Nazi violence against Turks and other peoples has recently been

on the rise. The Turkish daily Sabah dated August 12, 2000 gave a list of

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 96 O H U M A N I T Y

Neo-Nazis carried

out an attack

aimed at Turks in

the town of M.ln

in 1992.

Neo-Nazi attacks during the summer of 2000:

– In June, the windows of the El Rahman Mosque in the town of Gera in the

state of Th.ringen were broken.

– Two molotov cocktails were thrown at a Turkish mosque in the small town

of Eppingen in the state of Baden-W.rttemberg.

– Amolotov cocktail was thrown at the Green Mosque in the Utersen quarter

of Pinneberg.

– A building lived in by Turks was set fire to in Memingen.

– In Bocholt a Turkish caf. and a building lived in by Lebanese were set on

fire. Fourteen people were wounded, one seriously.

– In the East German town of Chemnitz the seven-month-old baby of an

Iraqi family was thrown to the ground. The baby’s face was injured when it

hit the concrete.76

There were much nastier incidents in the recent past. Taking Darwin’s

enmity of the Turks as their guide, the Neo-Nazis organised an

attack on Turks in M.ln in November 1992. Later, in 1993, five Turks were

burned by Neo-Nazis in Solingen.77 The press described this attack as,

“The bloodiest racist attack in German history since the Nazi era.” Attacks

of this kind were often seen in the years that followed. Fires were started

in Turks’ homes, Turks were beaten and injured. As well as in Germany,

similar attacks took place in Holland. In one attack directed at Turks a

Neo-Nazi Internet pages. In these

pages Neo-Nazis, who praise Darwin,

aim insults and threats at


woman and her five children were killed. People who took part in the

mourning march that was held received threatening letters with

swastikas on.

These incidents are just a few of the racist attacks against Turks.

Attacks and murders by these Fascist groups, the inheritors of Darwin

and Fascists such as Hitler, still continue. Legal measures will not be

enough to stop these inhuman groups’ attacks. The sure way to put an

end to them is to wage a serious

ideological war alongside

the legal measures. The

outrages perpetrated by

these people who see racism

as a law of nature will not

come to an end so long as

Darwinist ideas are not

knocked down as science.

T H E T E R R I B L E A L L I A N C E B E T W E E N D A R W I N A N D F A S C I S M 97

Stern, No:40/1992

Stern, No:37/1992

Stern (No:40/1992) reads:


Every day sees attacks on refugee

camps with stones and fire-bombs.

Popular hatred of foreigners is

growing and fear for the future

rules. Politicians are helpless. The

right-wing movement in Germany is

observed with anxiety from abroad.

Where is the country headed?

Time, 27 April 1998

Stern, No:40/1992

Stern, No:30/1999

Stern (No: 40/1992) reads:

The songs of the radical right form the marching music for violent actions aimed at foreigners.

Young people, whose numbers are rising every day, especially in the new German

states, are being spurred on by these aggressive rhythms.

he ideology which brought the greatest harm to mankind

in the violence and savagery-filled century we

have just left behind, and the most widespread in the

world, was without doubt Communism. Communism,

which reached its historical peak with the two German philosophers

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the 19th century, spilt so much blood

in the world that it left even the Nazis and the imperialists behind. It

led to the deaths of innocent people and spread violence, fear, and hopelessness

among mankind. Even today when someone speaks of The Iron

Curtain countries and Russia, images rise up of communities ruled by

darkness, fog, and hopelessness, lifeless streets, trouble and fear. No matter

how much Communism is thought of as having been torn down in

1991, the debris it left behind it still exists. No matter how “liberalised”

one part of the “unrepentant” Communists and Marxists may be, materialist

philosophy, the dark side of Communism and Marxism and which

turned people away from religion and morality, still continues to influence

these people.

This ideology which spread terror to every corner of the world actually

represented an idea which goes back to ancient times. Dialectics was

a belief that all development in the universe arose as the result of conflict.

Based on this belief Marx and Engels set about analysing the history of the

world. Marx claimed that the history of man was one of conflict, that the

current conflict was one between workers and capitalists, and that the

workers would soon rise up and build a Communist revolution.

The most striking feature of the two founders of Communism was

that, like all materialists, they nurtured a great hatred of religion. Marx

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 101


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 102 O H U M A N I T Y

and Engels were both confirmed atheists and saw the doing away with religious

beliefs as essential from the point of view of Communism.

But Marx and Engels lacked one important thing: in order to attract a

wider public they needed to give their ideology a scientific appearance.

And the dangerous alliance which gave rise to the pain, chaos, mass murders,

turning of brother against brother, and separatism of the 20th century

emerged at this point. Darwin proposed his theory of evolution in his book

The Origin of Species. And how interesting it is that the basic claims he

put forward were just the explanations Marx and Engels were looking for.

Darwin claimed that living things emerged as a result of the “struggle for

survival” or “dialectical conflict.” Furthermore he denied creation and rejected

religious beliefs. For Marx and Engels this was an opportunity not

to be missed.

Marx and Engels’ Admiration

of Darwin

Darwinism was of such great importance

to Communism that only months after

Darwin’s book was published, Engels wrote

to Marx, “Darwin, whom I am

just now reading, is


The founders of Communism,

Karl Marx and

Friedrich Engels.

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 103

arl Marx, the founder of

Communism, adapted

Darwin’s ideas, which

deeply influenced him, to the dialectic

process of history. According to Marx,

society went through different phases

in history, and the factor which determined

these phases was the change in

the means of production and production

relations. According to this view,

the economy determined everything

else. History went through evolutionary

stages: Primitive society, slave

society, feudal society, capitalist society,

and the last stage, Communist


Yet history itself showed that Marx’s

proposed evolutionary period possessed

no validity. At no time in history

has any society been seen which

has gone through Marx’s proposed

evolutionary stages. On the contrary,

it is possible to see systems which

Marx identified as coming before or

after each other at the same time in the

same society. While one part of a

country is experiencing systems similar

to the feudal system, capitalist

rules may apply in another region. For

which reason there is absolutely no

proof that the passage from one system

to another follows the evolutionary

pattern claimed by Marx and the

theory of evolution.

On the other hand, none of Marx’s

prophecies regarding the future came

true. It was realised that Marx’s theories

were not applicable within 10

years of Marx’s death. Marx claimed

that one after the other the most

developed capitalist nations would

undergo Communist revolutions,

whereas no such period happened.

Lenin, one of Marx’s greatest followers,

tried to explain why these revolutions

had not taken place, and then

put forward other prophecies that

Communist revolutions would be

experienced in Third World countries.

Yet all of Lenin’s claims were proven

untrue by history. In our time the

number of countries run under Communism

can be counted on the fingers

of one hand. Furthermore, Marxism

used force in the regions where it

came to power, and it came to power

not by popular movements, as it

claimed, but by dictatorial pressure.

In short, recent history has completely

disproved Marxist philosophy’s predicted

period of historical evolution.

Theories such as “the dialectic of history”

and “historical evolution” in the

many volumes written by materialist

ideologues such as Marx and Engels,

are just products of fantasy.



Marx wrote back to Engels on December 19, 1860, saying, “This is

the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view.”79

In a letter Marx wrote to Lassalle, another socialist friend of his, on

January 16, 1861, he said: “Darwin’s book is very important and serves

me as a basis in natural science for the class struggle in history.”80 thus

revealing the importance of the theory of evolution for Communism.

Marx revealed his sympathy for Darwin by dedicating his most important

work, Das Kapital, to him. Darwin’s copy of Marx’s first volume

was inscribed by Marx, describing himself as a “sincere admirer” of the

English naturalist.81

Engels too admitted his admiration for Darwin elsewhere:

Nature is the test of dialectics, and it must be said… that in the last resort

nature works dialectically and not metaphysically… In this connection, Darwin

must be named before all others.82

Engels praised Darwin and Marx as being the same, “Just as Darwin

discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the

law of evolution in human history” he said.83

In another of his works,Engels stressed the importance of Darwin’s

having developed a theory opposed to religion:

He (Darwin) dealt the metaphysical conception of nature the heaviest blow

by his proof that the organic world of today Ñ plants, animals, and consequently

man too Ñ is the product of a process of evolution going on through

millions of years.84

As well as this, Engels at once showed how he had accepted Darwin’s

theory by writing an article titled “The Part Played by Labour in the

Transition from Ape to Man.”

The American researcher Conway Zirckle explains why the founders

of Communism immediately accepted Darwin’s theory”

Marx and Engels accepted evolution almost immediately after Darwin

published The Origin of Species. Evolution, of course, was just what the founders

of communism needed to explain how mankind could have come into

being without the intervention of any supernatural force, and consequently

it could be used to bolster the foundations of their materialistic philo-

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 104 O H U M A N I T Y

sophy. In addition, Darwin’s interpretation of evolutionÐthat evolution had

come about through the operation of natural selectionÐgave them an alternative

hypothesis to the prevailing teleological explanation of the observed

fact that all forms of life are adapted to their conditions.85

Tom Bethell, of Harper’s Magazine, explains the fundamental link between

Marx and Darwin in the following manner:

Marx admired Darwin’s book not for economic reasons but for the more fundamental

one that Darwin’s universe was purely materialistic, and the explication

of it no longer involved any reference to unobservable, nonmaterial

causes outside or ‘beyond’ it. In that important respect, Darwin and Marx

were truly comrades.86

Today the link between Darwinism and Marxism is an obvious truth

accepted by everyone. Biographies of Marx always make this plain. For

example, a biography of Karl Marx describes the link in this way:

“Darwinism presented a whole string of truth supporting Marxism and proving

and developing the truth of it. The spread of Darwinist evolutionary

ideas created a fertile ground for Marxist ideas as a whole to be taken on board

by the working classÉ Marx, Engels, and Lenin attached great value to

the ideas of Darwin and pointed to their scientific importance, and in this

way the spread of these ideas was accelerated.”87

As we have seen, Marx and Engels were delighted to believe that

Darwin’s concept of evolution formed a scientific support for their own

atheist world view. But this delight proved to be premature. The theory of

evolution saw wide acceptance because it was proposed in a primitive

19th century scientific environment and was full of errors lacking any sort

of scientific proof. Science, which developed in the second half of the 20th

century, revealed the invalidity of the theory of evolution. This meant the

collapse of Communist and materialist thinking as much as it did of Darwinism.

(For further details see The Evolution Deceit by Harun Yahya). But

because scientists with materialist views knew that the collapse of Darwinism

also meant the collapse of their own ideologies they tried all possible

methods to conceal Darwinism’s collapse from people.

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 105

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 106 O H U M A N I T Y

The Admiration of the Followers of

Marx and Engels for Darwin

Marx and Engels’ followers, who brought about the deaths of millions

of people and were the reason for hundreds of millions of others living

in pain, fear, and violence, accepted the theory of evolution with great

joy and interest.

John N. Moore speaks of the links between evolution and the Soviet

leaders who implemented Marx and Engels’ ideas in Russia:

The thinking of the leaders of the USSR is rooted deeply in an evolutionary


It was Lenin who made Marx’s project of Communist revolution come

true. Lenin, the leader of the Communist Bolshevik movement in Russia,

aimed to bring down the Tsarist regime in Russia by force of arms.

The chaos after World War I gave the Bolsheviks the opportunity they had

been seeking. With Lenin at their head, the Communists seized power by

the use of arms in October 1917. After the revolution Russia was the scene

of a bloody three-year civil war between Communists and supporters

of the tsar.

Like the other Communist leaders, Lenin

often stressed that Darwin’s theory was

the fundamental basis of dialectical materialist


One of his statements reveals his view

of Darwinism:

Darwin put an end to the belief that the animal

and vegetable species bear no relation to one

another, except by chance, and that they were

created by God, and hence immutable.89

Trotsky, counted the most important

architect of the Bolshevik revolution after

Lenin, again attached great importance to

Darwinism. He declared his admiration for

Darwin in the following way,

Darwin’s discovery is the highest triumph of the dialectic in the

whole field of organic matter.90

Following Lenin’s death in 1924, Stalin, widely regarded

as the bloodiest dictator in the history of the world, passed

to the leadership of the Communist Party. Throughout

his 30 years in power, Stalin would try to prove just what a ruthless system

Communism was.

Stalin’s first important move was to take over the fields of the peasants

who made up 80 percent of the population of Russia in the name of

the state. In the name of this policy of collectivisation which was intended

to do away with private property, all the Russian villagers’ crops were collected

by armed officials. As a result these was a terrible famine. Millions

of women, children, and the elderly who could find nothing to eat ended

their lives writhing in hunger. The death toll in the Caucasus alone was 1


Stalin sent hundreds of thousands of people who tried to resist this

policy to Siberia’s dreadful labour camps. These camps, where the prisoners

were worked to death, became the grave of most of these people. On

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 107

Lenin and Trotsky

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 108 O H U M A N I T Y

the other hand tens of thousands of people were executed by Stalin’s secret

police. Millions of people were forced to migrate to the furthest corners

of Russia, including the Crimean and Turkestan Turks.

By these bloody policies Stalin killed some 20 million people. Historians

have revealed that this savagery gave him enormous personal pleasure.

It gave him great pleasure to sit at his desk in the Kremlin and examine

the lists of those who had died in the concentration camps or who

had been executed.

Apart from his personal psychological state, the main influence

which lead him to become such a ruthless killer was the materialist philosophy

he believed in. In Stalin’s own words, the fundamental basis of this

philosophy was Darwin’s theory

of evolution. He explained the

importance he attached to Darwin’s


There are three things that we do to

disabuse the minds of our seminary

students. We had to teach them the

age of the earth, the geologic origin,

and Darwin’s teachings.91

While Stalin was still alive a

close childhood friend of his recounted

how Stalin had become

an atheist in the book Landmarks

in the Life of Stalin:

At a very early age, while still a pupil

in the ecclesiastical school, Comrade

Stalin developed a critical mind

and revolutionary sentiments. He

began to read Darwin and became

an atheist.92

Stalin, one of the bloodiest names in history,

the cause of the killing of tens of millions of

people, death from starvation and poverty,

and of millions of people being left without

homes and jobs.

In the same book, G. Glurdjidze, a boyhood friend of Stalin’s relates

how Stalin had stopped believing in God and had told him that the reason

for this was Darwin’s book, pressurising him into reading it too.93

One important indication of Stalin’s blind faith in the theory of evolution

was the Soviet education system’s rejection of Mendel’s genetic

laws in the period when he came to power. These laws, which had been

accepted by the whole world of science since the start of the 20th century,

denied Lamarck’s claim that “acquired traits can be passed on to later generations.”

The Russian scientist Lysenko saw this as a heavy blow to the

theory of evolution and at the same time a great danger, and told Stalin

his ideas. Stalin was impressed by Lysenko’s ideas and made him head of

the official scientific associations. Thus genetic science, which had dealt a

heavy blow to evolution, was not accepted in any Soviet Union scientific

association or school until Stalin’s death.

In Stalin’s period the Soviet Union had turned into an environment

of chaos where for millions of people life was permanently under threat,

and where they could be taken away, though innocent of any crime, at any

moment, to suffer unimagined torments. Not just Communism, but the

history of Fascism, too, is full of such attitudes.

Some commentators on history fall into the error, when evaluating

these events, of trying to show that the basic cause of all this savagery and

mercilessness was that as people, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Mussolini

had unbalanced and psychopathic natures. What kind of coincidence is

it, that the whole world should have fallen into the hands of psychologically

unbalanced people at the same time?

It is an obvious and definite truth that these people and ideologies all

drank from the same well and that they were all portrayed as justified and

the only way by the same source. In short there was another guilty party

behind these people. The cause of these inhuman and unbalanced leaders

dragging millions along behind them, and which allowed them to commit

crimes, was the apparent scientific force and support given to them by

materialist philosophy and Darwinism.

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 109

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 110 O H U M A N I T Y

Mao Tse Tung: Darwin and Marx’s

Ambassador to China

While Stalin was running his totalitarian regime, another Communist

regime which saw Darwinism as its scientific support was founded in

China. The Communists under the leadership of Mao Tse Tung came to

power in 1949 after a long civil war. Mao set up an oppressive and bloody

regime, just like his ally Stalin, who gave him great support. China became

the scene of numberless political executions. In the years ahead, Mao’s

young militants, known as “Red Guards,” would drag the country into an

atmosphere of utter terror.

Mao openly announced the philosophical foundation of the system

he established by saying, “Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin

and the theory of evolution.”94

Being a Marxist and an atheist and a firm believer in evolutionism

himself, Mao mandated that the reading material used in this early day

“Great Leap Forward” in literacy would be the writings of Charles Darwin

and other materials supportive of the evolution paradigm.95

When the Chinese Communists came to power in 1950 they took the

theory of evolution as the basis

of their ideology. Actually,

Chinese intellectuals had accepted

the theory of evolution

long before:

During the 19th century, the

West regarded China as a

sleeping giant, isolated and

mired in ancient traditions.

Mao Tse Tung

Few Europeans realized how avidly Chinese intellectuals seized on Darwinian

evolutionary ideas and saw in them a hopeful impetus for

progress and change. According to the Chinese writer Hu Shih (Living

Philosophies, 1931), when Thomas Huxley’s book Evolution and Ethics

was published in 1898, it was immediately acclaimed and accepted by

Chinese intellectuals. Rich men sponsored cheap Chinese editions so

they could be widely distributed to the masses.96

So, the people who turned to Communism and lead the Communist

revolution were these intellectuals who had been “eagerly influenced” by

Darwinist ideas.

It was not hard for China, even with its many deep pantheistic beliefs

and history, to enter the pincers of Darwinism and Communism. In an

article in the New Scientist magazine the Canadian Darwinist philosopher

Michael Ruse says, concerning early-twentieth-century China:

These ideas took root at once, for China did not have the innate intellectual

and religious barriers to evolution that often existed in the West. Indeed, in

some respects, Darwin seemed almost Chinese! É Taoist and Neo-Confucian

thought had always stressed the “thingness” of humans. Our being at one

with the animals was no great shockÉ Today, the official philosophy is Marxist-

Leninism (of a kind). But without the secular materialist approach of

Darwinism (meaning now the broad social philosophy), the ground would

not have been tilled for Mao and his revolutionaries to sow their seed

and reap their crop.97

As Michael Ruse stated above, with the firm settling of Darwinist

ideas, China easily took up Communism. The Chinese people, deluded by

Darwinist ideas, stood by and watched all the massacres of Mao Tse Tung,

one of the most unrestrained killers in history.

Yet Communism was the cause of guerrilla conflicts, bloody acts of

terrorism, and civil war in very many countries, not just in China. Turkey

was one of these. In the 1960s and 1970s, groups which took up arms against

the state dragged Turkey into a dark atmosphere of terrorism with the

dream of making a Communist revolution in the country. After 1980,

Communist terrorism joined with the current of separatism and was the

cause of the deaths of tens of thousands of Turks and of police and soldi-

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 111

ers in the course of their duties.

Communist ideology, which brought bloodshed to the world in this

way for 150 years was always side by side with Darwinism. Even today,

Communists are the foremost supporters of Darwinism. Whenever one

looks at those circles which stubbornly support the theory of evolution, in

just about every country, one sees the Marxists in the front ranks. Because

as Karl Marx said, the theory of evolution forms the basis of Communist

ideology from the natural science aspect and gives Communist lack of

religion its most important false scientific backing.

The Basis of the Alliance Between Darwinism and

Communism: Hatred of Religion

As explained earlier, the most important reason for the materialists’

and Communists’ clinging to Darwinism is the apparent support Darwinism

gives to atheism. Materialist philosophy had existed throughout history,

but until the 19th century most philosophers had been restricted to

books of theory. The most important reason for this was that until that time

most men of science believed in God and were people who believed in

the reality of creation. But in the 19th century materialist philosophy and

Darwin’s theory began to be implemented in the natural sciences. Darwinism

was the greatest basis for the irreligious materialist culture which

stamped its mark on the 19th century and which most revealed its effects

in the 20th century.

The ideologies born of this materialist culture, as we have been examining,

lit the fires of two great world wars, countless civil wars and acts

of terrorism, genocide, extermination, and savagery. On account of these

catastrophes tens of millions of people lost their lives, and hundreds of

millions were shamefully oppressed and had to suffer the worst treatment.

Terrorists influenced by the Darwinist-materialist view, like the animals

they claimed to be descended from, went off to the mountains and lived

in caves in appalling conditions. They could kill men without a second

thought and murder babies, the elderly, and the innocent. Seeing ne-

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 112 O H U M A N I T Y

ither themselves nor other people as living things created by God with soul,

mind, conscience, and understanding, they did to each other what animals

do to animals. Stalin’s demolition of dozens of churches and mosques

is just one indication of Communism’s hatred of religion.

In his book The Long War Against God, Henry Morris describes the

link in this way:

In spite of its scientific deficiencies, evolution’s alleged scientific character

has been used to justify all kinds of ungodly systems and practices. The

most successful of these, thus far, seems to be communism, and its adherents

all over the world have been deluded into thinking that communism

must be true because it is based on the science of evolution. 98

The enmity Communism and materialism had for religion showed

itself in all its violence during the Bolshevik uprising. Churches and mosques

were razed, and among the categories of those pushed outside the

“new socialist society,” men of religion had an important place. Despite

the fact that most of society was religious people, they were obstructed

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 113

from carrying out their religious duties. In order to take Sundays, when

Christians went to church, out of the equation, the concept of a common

day of rest was removed. Everyone

would work five days, but the day of

rest could be any day. This measure

was deliberately introduced by the

communists “to facilitate the struggle

to eliminate religion”.99 Following

that, in 1928 and 1930 the taxes paid

by men of religion were raised by 10

times, their food coupons were taken

from them, and they could no longer

use the health services, which meant

they no longer enjoyed any civil

rights, they were often arrested, moved

from their posts and sent into exile.

By 1936 some 65 percent of mosques

and 70 percent of churches had been


Some of the most violent measures

against religion were taken in Albania.

The Communist leader of Albania,

known for having no religion,

was Enver Hodja, who in 1967 proclaimed

Albania the first “religionless”

country. Men of religion would be taken

into custody for no reason, and

some of them were killed while in

custody. In 1948 two bishops and

5,000 men of religion were shot. Muslims

were killed in the same way. The

literary monthly Nendori announced

that 2,169 mosques and churches had

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 114 O H U M A N I T Y

During and after the Bolshevik revolution there

were many attacks on religion. Churches and

mosques were pulled down. Works of art in

churches were plundered, as can be seen in the

above pictures.

been closed down, of which 327 were Catholic places of worship.

The reason for all these practices was, without the shadow of a doubt,

Communism’s aim of forming societies which would blindly deny

the existence of God, had nothing to do with religion, and which only believed

in and valued material things. Actually, that was one of Communism’s

main targets, because the Communist leaders knew that they could

only govern as they wished people who had become like machines, and

insensitive, unfeeling, and most important of all, non-god-fearing societies,

and that they could make them carry out as many killings and as much

oppression as they wanted. The claims of Darwinism,

which gave support to atheism and

which justified all kinds of oppression, cruelty,

conflict, and killing, forbidden in religi-

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 115

Who could do greater wrong than someone who

bars access to the mosques of Allah, preventing His

name from being remembered in them, and goes

about destroying them? Such people will never be

able to enter them Ð except in fear. They will have

disgrace in this world and in the hereafter they will

have a terrible punishment. (Surat al-Baqara: 114)

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 116 O H U M A N I T Y

on, encouraged in this way all the ideologies which spilt blood and counted

human life as valueless in the 20th century. That is why the last century

was full of ceaseless wars, massacres, rebellions, acts of violence, fighting,

and enmity.

The Oppression and Violence Inflicted On

the World by Darwinist Communists

Anarchy and terror are two of Marxism and Communism’s indispensable

tools. Marxism’s tendency towards terrorism and violence appeared

in the experiment of the Paris Commune while Marx was still alive. In

particular, terrorism became an indispensable part of Communist ideology

with Lenin, while he was making Marx’s theory a practicality. Communists

spilt the blood of millions of people in every part of the world,

and made people undergo pain, fear, and violence by establishing terrorist

organisations. As will be seen in the pages that follow, today all the

Communist leaders are remembered for the oppression and killings they

carried out. Yet despite this some circles still cover their walls with pictures

of these pitiless, bloody-handed assassins, and still accept these sadistic

people as their teachers.

No matter how much some Communists claim that violence and terrorism

are not Communist practices and that they only took place in some

individuals’ applications of Communism, and no matter how much they

try to whitewash Communism, there is an undeniable truth: The founders

of Communism personally defended violence and terrorism and

saw them as essential to their ideology. The American political scientist

Samuel Francis has this to say on the subject:

Marx and Engels were generally specific in insisting that revolution will always

be violent and that revolutionaries must use violence against the rulers,

and in some instances they did express support of terrorism.100

Karl Marx said “insurrection is an art quite as much as war” and took

these words of Danton, one of the foremost names in “revolutionary politics”

as a principle, “de l’audace, de l’audace, encore de l’audace” (Attack, attack,

and attack again!)101 There are clear statements by Lenin regarding the

The Communist revolution

was very

bloody. Tens of millions

of people were

massacred and ruthlessly

killed. The

Communist leaders

ordered that everyone

who opposed

them should be


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 118 O H U M A N I T Y

necessity of systematically using terrorism. Here are a few of them:

In reality the state is nothing but a machine for the suppression of one class

by another. Dictatorship is rule based directly on force and unrestricted by

laws… The revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat is rule won and

maintained through the use of violence by the proleteriat against the bourgeoisie,

rule that is unrestricted by any laws.102

We are not at all opposed to political killingÉ Only in direct, immediate

connection with the mass movement can and must individual terrorist acts

be of value.103

To become a power the class-conscious workers must win the majority to

their side. As long as no violence is used against the people there is no other

road to power.104

Speaking at a workers’ meeting, Lenin gave a terrifying statement of

how indispensable terrorism was to them:

If the masses do not rise up spontaneously, none of this will lead to anything

É For as long as we fail to treat speculators the way they deserve Ð with

a bullet in the head Ð we will not get anywhere at all.105

One of the most important leaders of the October Revolution in Russia,

Trotsky, says this to confirm Lenin’s words:

But the revolution does require of the revolutionary class that it should atta-


The oppression

experienced in the

Russian revolution

was reflected in


in its end by all methods

at its disposalÑif necessary,

by an armed rising:

if required, by terrorism.


Trotsky went even further

in another speech,

Our only choice now is civil

war. Civil war is the

struggle for breadÉ Long

live civil war!107

These principles of such Communist theoreticians

as Lenin and Trotsky were put into

practice in the Bolshevik revolution in Russia.

During the revolutionary period of autumn

1917 there began wide-ranging massacres, looting,

and unbelievable violence. Those people

who were against the revolution, or who

were suspected of being against the revolution,

were rounded up for no reason, arrested, and

shot: houses were looted and wrecked. Terrorism,

which began with Lenin and Trotsky continued

and grew worse in the Stalin years.

Harrison E. Salisbury of The New York Times

described the Soviet system’s prison camps


Éa whole continent of terrorÉ Compared with those

who brought about the hundreds of thousands of executions

and the millions of deaths in the Soviet terror system,

the Czars seem almost benignÉ Our minds boggle at the

thought of a systematized, routine evil, under which

three or four or more million men and women were sentenced

each year to forced labour and eternal exileÐand in

a manner so casual that the prisoners often were not even

told what their sentences were…108

The results of the

1921-1922 famine,

brought about by the

Communist regime,

were most painful.

The pictures show

people who died of


D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 119

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 120 O H U M A N I T Y

Non-Russian peoples, and particularly the Crimean Turks, the Central

Asian Turks, and the Kazakhs, were exposed to the terrorism of the Soviet

system. Special courts, troiki, were established to cleanse Russian society

of the Kazakhs. In October 1920 alone these troiki sentenced more than

6,000 people to death, and these orders were immediately carried out. The

families, and sometimes even the neighbours, of those who opposed the

regime and were not apprehended, were systematically taken hostage

and sent to concentration camps. Martin Latsis, the head of one of these

camps in the Ukraine admitted that these were death camps in one of his


The Russian government’s taking villagers’ produce in the Ukraine

led to people dying of starvation.

What reason could you have for not fighting in the Way of Allah for

those men, women, and children who are oppressed and say, ‘Our Lord,

take us out of this city whose inhabitants are wrongdoers! Give us a

protector from You! Give us a helper from You!’?

(Surat an-Nisa: 75)

Gathered together in a camp near Maikop, the hostages, women, children,

and old men survive in the most appalling conditions, in the cold and mud

of OctoberÉ They are dying like flies. The women will do anything to escape

death. The soldiers guarding the camp take advantage of this and treat

them as prostitutes.109

Under the influence of Darwin, the Communist revolutionaries were

killing people in a crazed manner. It appears from documents of the time

that the sole aim was total extermination. It was as if they believed that

the more people they killed, the greater success they would have. That

they planned to wipe out everybody they suspected of being against the

revolution is revealed in one of their decisions:

The Pyatigorsk Cheka (Extraordinary Committee for War Against the Counter-

Revolution) decided straight out to execute 300 people a day. They divided

up the town into various boroughs and took a quota of people from

each, and ordered the Party to draw up execution listsÉIn Kislovodsk, for

lack of a better idea, it was decided to kill people who were in the hospital.


As was announced in the lead article of the newspaper Krasnyi Mech

(The Red Sword), which was Communist supporting, the Communists

saw everything as permissible and believed that blood had to be spilt for

the colour of the Red flag to come about.

To us, everything is permitted, for we are the first to raise the sword not to

oppress races and reduce them to slavery, but to liberate humanity from its

shacklesÉ Blood? Let blood flow like water! Let blood stain forever the

black pirate’s flag flown by the bourgeoisie, and let our flag be blood-red

forever! For only through the death of the old world can we liberate ourselves

forever from the return of those jackals!111

As well as all this torture, Stalin set up “requisitioning detachments”

to take the peasants” produce by force. These units were responsible for

all kinds of oppression. On 14 February 1922 one inspector wrote:

Abuses of position by the requisitioning detachments, frankly speaking, have

now reached unbelievable levels. Systematically, the peasants who are arrested

are all locked up in big unheated barns; they are then whipped and

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 121

“Requisioning Detachments”

were set up by

Stalin, and as well as

torturing, they seized

villagers’ produce.

These units oppressed

the people in various

ways. Those who could

not find enough produce

to give to the

state officials were tortured

to death in a

number of ways.

Page across: the dreadful

state of people

under Communist rule.

threatened with execution. Those who have not filled the whole of their quota

are bound and forced to run naked all along the main street of the village

and then locked up in another unheated hangar. A great number of women

have been beaten until they are unconscious and then thrown naked into

holes dug in the snowÉ112

Stalin believed that Spain represented opportunities for the USSR

and that meddling in that country would bear fruit. For that reason he took

sides and supported the Communists in the Spanish Civil War. But

with that the terrorism in the USSR overflowed into Spain. One example

of the oppression and torture there was the concentration camp that 200

anti-Stalinists were held in at the beginning of 1938. “When the Stalinists

decided to open a cheka,” one victim recalled;

There was a small cemetery being cleaned out nearby. The Chekists had a diabolical

idea: they would leave the cemetery’s tombs open, with the skeletons

and the decomposing bodies in full view. That’s where they locked up

the most difficult cases. They had some particularly brutal methods of torture.

Many prisoners were hung up by their feet, upside down, for whole

days. Others they locked in tiny cupboards with just a tiny air hole near the

face to breathe throughÉ One of the worst methods was known as “the drawer”;

prisoners were forced to squat in tiny square boxes for several days.

Some were kept there unable to move for eight to ten days.113

In 1931 Pope Pius XI had this to say about the violence Communism

had inflicted on the world in the encyclical Quadragesimo Anno:

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 123

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 124 O H U M A N I T Y

Communism teaches and seeks two objectives: unrelenting class warfare

and the complete eradication of private ownership. Not secretly or by hidden

methods does it do this, but publicly, openly, and by employing any means

possible, even the most violent. To achieve these objectives there is nothing

it is afraid to do, nothing for which it has respect or reverence. When

comes to power, it is ferocious in its cruelty and inhumanity. The horrible

slaughter and destruction through which it has laid waste vast regions of

Eastern Europe and Asia give evidence of this.114

As the above extract says, Communism’s principle aims were a merciless

class war and the complete doing away with private property. In other

words the aim was to apply the theory of evolution, which Darwin

had applied in the biological field, to human societies, and for human beings

to be, like wild animals in nature, in conflict, at war.

The disasters brought about by Communism did not stop in Russia.

One of the countries worst affected among those to which it spread was


The Darwinist Mao Tse-Tung and His Massacres

China’s Communist leader Mao had two important guides: one of

these, as we touched on earlier, was Darwin, and the other was Stalin.

These two lethal names, which met together in Mao’s personality, led to

great tragedies and left their mark on a long, dark period in Chinese history.

Between 6 to 10 million people were directly killed under Mao Tse-

Tung’s directives, tens of millions of counter-revolutionaries spent great

parts of their lives in prison, where 20 million of them died. Between 20

and 40 million people died of starvation in the years 1959-1961, in the period

called “The Great Leap Forward,” as the dreadful result of Mao’s extremist

policies. The June 1989 Tienanmen Square massacre (about 1,000

dead) is one example of what China has gone through in its recent history.

The killings and genocide directed against the Muslim Turks in Eastern

Turkestan are still going on.

Great savagery and unbelievable things took place when the Communist

revolution happened in China. The people, who were under the

effects of a kind of mass hypnotism, supported

all kinds of savagery and showed that support

by shouting as they watched the killings.

The book Le Livre Noir du Communisme (“The

Black Book of Communism”), prepared by a group

of historians and teachers, described Communism’s

savage practices in this way:

The whole people were invited to public trials of “counterrevolutionaries,”

who almost invariably were condemned to

death. Everyone participated in the executions, shouting out

“kill, kill” to the Red Guards whose task it was to cut victims

into pieces. Sometimes the pieces were cooked and eaten, or

force-fed to members of the victim’s family who were still

alive and looking on. Everyone was then invited to a banquet,

where the liver and heart of the former landowner were

shared out, and to meetings where the speaker would address

rows of severed heads freshly skewered on stakes.

This fascination for vengeful cannibalism, which later became

common under the

Pol Pot regime, echoes a

very ancient East Asian archetype

that appears often at

cataclysmic moments of

Chinese history.115

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 125

Communist supporters of

Mao punished those who

opposed them in the civil

war in ruthless ways, humiliating

them in front of the

people and then executing


Chinese party leaders accused of being capitalists first had their heads shaved in

front of the people and were then executed.

The execution of a Chinese

woman, Wang

Souxin. The money for

the bullets used in executions

in Red China

was extracted from the

relatives of the victims.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 128 O H U M A N I T Y

Between 1975 and 1979, during

the rule of Pol Pot, two million of

Cambodia’s population of seven

million were killed. When one

looks at the killings by Pol Pot,

who dreamed of establishing a

perfect Communist state, as a percentage

of the population, then his

killings were much greater than

those by Hitler and

Stalin. Pol Pot’s


target were

the sections

of society

such as doctors,



in short

the country’s

intellectuals, whom

he had killed. The order was

even given that “everyone wearing

glasses” should be killed. As a

result of these inhuman murders,

the “killing fields,” which lasted

for years, emerged.

The logic employed by the

Khmer Rouge officers to justify

their massacres was summed up

in these words: “Keeping you is no

gain. Losing you is no loss” They

killed everyone whom they considered

to be, or even suspected of

being, useless or harmful. At least

one member of every family lost

his life in these massacres.

Pol Pot, who counted human

life as nothing, believed that the

family stood in the way of his radical

vision of socialism. He tried to

do away with the idea of the family

by splitting families up and

obliging human beings to live in

communal places. The same policy

had been implemented by Stalin

in Russia. First the peasants’

lands were taken from them, then

small parcels of land given back,

in areas deliberately scattered and

far removed from one another. The

result of this was that in order for a

family to work their fields which

consisted of tiny parcels of land

they would have to live separate

from one another.

Robert Templer, Pol Pot’s Legacy of

Horror, The Age, April 18, 1998,




D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 129

Pol Pot and the

Khmer Rouge

turned the country

into “Killing


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 130 O H U M A N I T Y

The Bitter Toll of Communist Savagery

Similar examples of savagery were experienced in every country

Communism took over, Cambodia, North Korea, Laos, Vietnam and Eastern

European and African countries. This bloody toll is set out in The

Black Book of Communism as follows:

These crimes tend to fit a recognizable pattern even if the practices vary to

some extent by regime. The pattern includes execution by various means,

such as firing squads, hanging, drowning, battering, and, in certain cases,

gassing, poisoning, or “car accidents”; destruction of the population by starvation,

through man-made famine, the withholding of food, or both; deportation,

through which death can occur in transit (either through physical exhaustion

or through confinement in an enclosed space), at one’s place of residence,

or through forced labour (exhaustion, illness, hunger, cold). Periods

described as times of “civil war” are more complex Ð it is not always easy to

distinguish between events caused by fighting between rulers and rebels

and events that can properly be described only as a massacre of the civilian


Noneless, we have to start somewhere. The following rough approximation,

based on unofficial estimates, gives some sense of the scale and gravity of

these crimes:

U.S.S.R.: 20 million deaths

China: 65 million deaths

Vietnam: 1 million deaths

North Korea: 2 million deaths

Cambodia: 2 million deaths

Eastern Europe: 1 million deaths

Latin America: 150,000 deaths

Africa: 1.7 million deaths

Afghanistan: 1.5 million deaths

The international Communist movement and Communist parties

not in power: about 10,000 deaths

The total approaches 100 million people killed.116

All these different Communist regimes and organisations shared one

common psychology: all human feelings such as pity, justice, and compassion

had been completely lost. All of a sudden human societies had become

fields of war and massacre wild animals tried to live and find food. In

the same way as a wild animal fights with other members of its own species

over food and territory, so these people behaved like “animals” in the

same way. Because the birth of Darwin had taught them that they were

basically animals, and as animals fight for survival, so they would have to

behave in the same way.

These inhuman movements thought that they had won respectability

by wearing a false scientific mask. The only reason the Bolshevik leaders

were able to talk so boldly and openly of aggression, terrorism, and

massacre was the approval they got from Darwin’s theory of evolution. In

his book Evolution for Naturalists, P. J. Darlington admits, as an evolutionist,

that savagery is a natural result of the theory of evolution and that

this behaviour is even justified:

The first point is that selfishness and violent are inherent in us, inherited

from our remotest animal ancestors… Violence is, then, natural to man, a

product of evolution.117

As is clear from this evolutionist’s admission, it was perfectly natural

for Communist ideology, which accepted Darwin’s theory of evolution as

its guide, to perceive other human beings as animals, treat them in a manner

befitting animals, and oppress them. Because he who accepts Communist-

Darwinist ideology forgets that he has a Creator, the reason for his

being in the world, and that he will have to give an account of what he has

done to Him on the Day of Judgement. And as a result of this, like every

human being who has no fear of Allah, he comes to be a selfish thing who

thinks only of his own interests, a pitiless tyrant, even a wild-eyed killer.

Allah reveals these peoples’ situation and what will happen to them in

this way:

There are only grounds against those who wrong people and act as tyrants

in the earth without any right to do so. Such people will have a painful

punishment. (Surat ash-Shura: 42)

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 131

In 1968 left-wing ideology affected all parts of the world, particularly young people in

universities. Meetings were held, and young people were incited against their own

compatriots, the police, and the military. By virtue of these events, where brother

attacked brother, cities were devastated, and the whole world fell into chaos.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 134 O H U M A N I T Y

o matter how much it is

accepted that the dissolution

of the Soviet

Union spelt the end of Communism

as a political regime, Communist ideology

and practice still continue. The

practices of Russia, where the Red

Army mentality still dominates, in

Chechnya, and of China in Eastern

Turkestan, are the most important indications

of this. The Muslim Turks

who live today in Eastern Turkestan,

are going through a repetition of the

experiences of Mao’s Red China. Young

people are arrested for no reason,

sentenced to death on the grounds

they are opponents of the regime,

and shot, Muslims are prevented

from carrying out their group religious

duties, their earnings are taken

from them by means of ruthless taxes,

the people live on the edge of death

through the threat of starvation,

and the nuclear tests carried out

right next to them cause them to

catch fatal diseases.

The Muslim Turks of Eastern Turkestan

have been living under Chinese

hegemony for 250 years. The

Chinese gave the name “Sinkiang” or

“conquered lands” to Eastern Turkestan,

a Muslim land, and defined it as

their own territory. After the Communists

led by Mao took it over in

1949, the pressure on Eastern Turkestan

increased to even higher levels

than before. The policy of the Communist

regime aimed at the physical

destruction of the Muslims, who rejected

assimilation. The number of

Muslims killed reached terrifying

proportions. Between 1949 and 1952,

2,800,000; between 1952 and 1957,

3,509,000; between 1958 and 1960,

6,700,000; between 1961 and 1965,

13,300,000 people were either killed

by the Chinese Army or died as a result

of the shortages brought about

by the regime. Together with the

massacres after 1965, the number of

Eastern Turkestan people killed reached

the unbelievable figure of 35 million.

As well as wiping out the Muslims

since 1949, the regime also

systematically moved Chinese settlers

in. The effects of this campaign,

which the Chinese government began

in 1953, are most thought-provoking.

While in 1953, 75% of the population

was Muslim and 6% Chinese,

by 1982 the figures were 43% Muslim

and 40% Chinese. The 1990 census,

which revealed that the population

figures were now 40% Muslim and

53% Chinese, is most important from

the point of view of revealing the scale

of the ethnic cleansing.




D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 135

Meanwhile, the Chinese administration

used the Eastern Turkestan

Muslims as experimental animals in

their nuclear tests. As a result of the

nuclear tests, which first started in

the region in 1964, local people have

been infected by deadly diseases,

and 20,000 handicapped children have

been born. It is known that the

number of Muslims who have died

because of the tests is 210,000. Thousands

of people have been crippled,

and thousands have fallen prey to

such diseases as jaundice and cancer.

Between 1964 and the present,

China has exploded some 50 atomic

and hydrogen bombs. Swedish experts

established that an underground

nuclear test in 1984 of a bomb

with a force of 150 tons had resulted

in earth tremors of a magnitude of

8.8 on the Richter scale.

China’s oppression of the Uighur

Turks does not stop there. The experiences

of February, 1997, during a time

when incidents were increasingly

flaring up, will serve to sum up the

Chinese oppression. According to

news reported to the public, on Sept.

4, which happened to be a feast day,

Chinese militia forces beat more than

30 women, who had gathered in a

mosque and were reading out from

the Qur’an, with iron bars and dragged

them to security headquarters.

The local residents went to the headquarters

and asked for the women to

be released. At that point the bodies

of three women who had been tortured

to death were thrown in front of

them. Then clashes began between

the people, who rose to the provocation,

and the Chinese. Between Sept.

4 and 7, 200 Eastern Turkestan people

lost their lives and more than 3,500

Uighur Turks were locked up in

camps. On the morning of Sept. 8,

people were prevented by the security

forces from offering holiday prayers

in the mosques where they had

gathered. Following this the clashes

flared up again, and as a result the

number of detained, which had been

58,000 between April and December

1996, went past 70,000. As many as

100 young people were shot in public

squares, and 5,000 Uighur Turks

were stripped naked and publicly exhibited

in groups of 50.

The example of Eastern Turkestan

is just one of the sufferings in the 20th

century. In every corner of the world

in the 20th century people of different

religions, races, or ideologies killed

and exterminated each other. It is no

coincidence that behind all the ideologies

which did these killings Darwin’s

world view should emerge.

Because with his theory Darwin

made it easy for people to kill each

other and justify their actions.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 136 O H U M A N I T Y

When those who did wrong see the punishment, it will

not be lightened for them. They will be granted no

reprieve. (Surat an-Naml: 85)

However, those who do wrong pursue their whims and

desires without any knowledge. Who can guide those

whom Allah has led astray? They will have no helpers.

(Surat ar-Rum: 29)


Those to whom people said,

“The people have gathered against

you, so fear them.” But that merely

increased their faith and they said,

“Allah is enough for us. He is the Best

of Guardians.” (Surah Al ‘Imran: 173)

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 138 O H U M A N I T Y

he Russian occupation

of Chechnya in

1991, despite being

thrown back by the late Dzhokar

Dudayev, turned into a genuine

war on Dec. 11, 1994, following

serious trouble in November that

same year. While more than

100,000 Chechens lost their lives

in that war, tens of thousands

were forced to migrate. Chechnya

lost hundreds of historical and

economic resources in the war.

When Russia announced that

Chechnya was an “internal matter,”

no protest came from the

outside world. Tons

of bombs fell on

every square

metre in Chechnya. A genocide

was carried out, the like of which

has never been seen in the history

of the world, with chemical

weapons, the use of which was

forbidden ant it still continues

today. But despite all the difficulties,

in August 1996 the Russians

had to admit defeat at the hands

of the Chechens, who were completely

undaunted and fought for

their own land with all the means

at their disposal.

Russia, which had to accept

Chechnya as a separate state in

agreements signed at the highest

levels in August 1996 and May

1997, seemed to have accepted

this situation. Whereas in October




D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 139

1997 the Russians entered

Chechen territory and began to

kill, not sparing women, children,

and the elderly. Civilian targets

came under non-stop bombardment

for months. In order to break

the popular resistance, hospitals,

maternity wards, markets, and

refugee convoys were especially

chosen as targets. At the last it was

established that the Russians used

chemical bombs and scud and

napalm missiles against the

Chechens. Alongside this, the Russians

put poison into the River

Argun, used by many Chechen

villages. While the great majority

of the women and children who

drank the poisoned water died,

hundreds waited for death at the

doors of the hospitals. Because the

river water had been poisoned the

civilian population who were

unable to find water for drinking

and other purposes went through

very difficult times.

The situation of the refugees was

also worrying. Studies carried out

in refugee areas showed that

human rights infringements

reached enormous proportions.

Some 250,000 Chechen refugees

who fled from the war are under

protection in Ingushetya, the rest

in neighbouring regions. It has

been announced that Russia spent

385 million dollars on the operation.

The Chechens revealed that

between September 1999 and July

25, 2000, 1,460 Chechen soldiers

and 45,000 civilians had died. Russia’s

plan was to wipe out all the

Chechen soldiers who had been

fighting them by November 2000.

Newsweek 13 February1995

Newsweek 1 November1999

Newsweek 6 December 1999

Time 5 February 1996

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 142 O H U M A N I T Y

ommunism is an ideology

which was

brought into being by

people who lived in the 1800s, and

who can be described as “ignorant”

from the scientific point of

view. One of the most important

reasons for the rapid winning of

influence over wide sections of the

peoples of many country’s by this

ideology, whose analysis and

claims have been proven false

many times and which furthermore

has clearly brought harm to

mankind and not good, is the

ignorance of those human beings

who accepted this ideology.

After the Industrial Revolution,

one part of society’s being in terrible

poverty, and alongside this,

another part’s rising to an incomparable

level of well being,

brought out a tension open to agitation

in social groups in most

countries. This tension developed

in countries such as Russia, still

living on the level of an agricultural

society, and China. Social

groups looking for right and justice

followed along behind. But

the end result worked against

them. They lived under far worse

economic conditions than before,

on the one hand struggling to

avoid dying of hunger, on the

other living with the fear and terror

of being killed at any moment,

torture, exile, and robbery.

It was evident that that an ideology

based on lack of religion,

which believed that the sole basis

for development was conflict,

fighting, and war, that human

beings are basically animals, based

on the deviation that moral values

such as family, faithfulness, and

closeness are unnecessary and

irrelevant, would not bring people

peace, security, happiness, and

justice. But these social groups

lacked the vision and understanding

to evaluate and analyse these.

They looked at photographs of

Marx and Engels and thought

them to be most “deep,” “incomprehensible,”

and “knowledgeable”

thinkers. They looked at the

illusory scientific and deep exteri-




D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 143

or and the syrupy manners of

those who supported them and

fell under the spell of Communism

and materialism. Whereas

today, had they been alive, they

would have understood that every

Communist leader had a very

coarse and primitive understanding

and were ignorant people.

None of the people they accepted

as leaders behaved in a forward-

looking manner, they were

only able to bind social groups to

them by insults and fear: they

were people who adopted violence,

savagery, ruthlessness, and

murder as methods, and thought

in a coarse and primitive way.

Today many an “old time” Communist

has realised what a great

mistake he made in the past and

regretted it. Each one has understood

that he had blindly followed

an unproductive ideal, or rather

an empty, loud noise. Others try to

show that they have still not given

their ideology up in order not to

accept the defeat and the truth that

the years were wasted and say,

“We shall overcome.”

A period has begun when science

and free knowledge can

reach anywhere at any time, when

any human being can realise

truths and realities much easier

than before, and to a greater

degree. In such an environment

the methods of suggestion, reminiscent

of a magic spell, of the

Communists, materialists, and

Darwinists, their talismanic words

and calls to war have now lost

their power. Hollow ideologies

such as Communism, materialism,

and Darwinism, whose spellbinding

power can be lifted with a little

science and a little thought, are

rapidly losing their influence on

human beings. As a result of this,

lighter, more peaceful and comfortable

days await mankind.

Most important, the realisation of

the deception of Darwinism, with

full proof, will bring about the end

of these ideologies.

Conclusion: Communism is a Terror Brought

About by Lack of Religion

Anyone who considers the massacres, murders, and the suffering deliberately

inflicted on human beings by the Communists, Nazis, or colonialists,

will wonder how the supporters of these ideas could have distanced

themselves so far from common humanity. The sole reason for the savagery

and oppression inflicted by these leaders is lack of religion and the

fact these people had no fear of God. A human being who fears God and

who has firm faith in the hereafter, will definitely be incapable of carrying

out any of the oppression, wrongs, injustice, and murders that we have

described. Furthermore, no matter how much he may be encouraged, someone

who believes in God and the hereafter will never be pulled into

following such a deviant ideology.

But people who have no religion and no fear of God know no limits.

With a bit of encouragement a person who believes that he and other living

creatures evolved by coincidence out of non-living matter, who believes

that his ancestors were animals, and who accepts that nothing exists

apart from the material, can easily carry out any kind of cruelty. At first

sight perhaps these people might seem as if they do not hurt anybody: but

given the right circumstances they can turn into a killer who carries out

massacres, assassins who beat people or starve them just because they do

not accept their ideas, people filled with hatred, loathing, and violence.

Because the world view and values they believe in necessitate this.

In 1983, Alexander I. Solzhenitsyn, winner of the 1970 Nobel-prize

for literature, gave an address in London in which he attempted to explain

why so much evil had befallen his people:

Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of

old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had

befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.”

Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution;

in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 144 O H U M A N I T Y

of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my

own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But

if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of

the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I

could not put it more accurately than to repeat: “Men have forgotten God;

that’s why all this has happened.”118

This identification of Solzhenitsyn’s was utterly accurate. Really, the

only thing that could drag a society into that much terror, to turn a blind

eye to all kinds of oppression, to watch from the sidelines, is the forgetting

of God. Whereas God never forgets and is never mistaken. The ruthless

Communist leaders thought that they had set up their own system to rule

societies on earth and thought that they possessed a great power and

strength. They even held secret meetings, where they whispered to each

other of the further oppression they would inflict on people to increase

their power and strength. But while they were doing all this, God knew of

it, and He will answer what they have done. He announces it in the


On the Day Allah raises up all of them together, He will inform them of

what they did. Allah has recorded it while they have forgotten it. Allah is

a Witness of all things. Do you not see that Allah knows what is in the heavens

and on the earth? Three men cannot confer together secretly without

Him being the fourth of them, or five without Him being the sixth of

them, or fewer than that or more without Him being with them wherever

they are. Then He will inform them on the Day of Rising of what they did.

Allah has knowledge of all things. (Surat al-Mujadila: 6-7)

Then there are the groups who followed these ruthless leaders, who

crawled along behind them. Their situation has been revealed in the

Qur’an. It was announced in the verse “Allah does not wrong people in

any way; rather it is people who wrong themselves.” (Surah Yunus: 44)

In other words these people oppressed themselves by forgetting the religion

of Allah and following Darwinist leaders. Another holy verse announces

that people bring about the evil that happens in the world themselves:

D A R W I N I S M : T H E S O U R C E O F C O M M U N I S T S A V A G E R Y 145

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 146 O H U M A N I T Y


These pictures sum up a part of the nightmare

which Communist ideology inflicted

on mankind. People weakened by hunger,

thirst, and hopelessness, living in poverty

and needÉ

Corruption has appeared in both land and sea because of what people’s

own hands have brought about so that they may taste something of what

they have done so that hopefully they will turn back. (Surat ar-Rum: 41)

The only way to prevent these disasters from bringing harm to mankind

again is for people to live with faith in Allah and the hereafter and

without forgetting that they will have to account for everything they do.

And, in the light of the Qur’an, which Allah sent down for all people, for

them to possess the good moral features, such as love, compassion, mercy,

and devotion, which are commanded in it.

Anyone who acts rightly, male or female, being a believer, We will give

them a good life and We will recompense them according to the best of

what they did. (Surat an-Nahl: 97)

A regime with Darwinist-Communist

views holds its people of no value. It

abandons them to death and poverty

with open eyes. Russia is an obvious

example of this.

he term capitalism means the sovereignty of capital, a

free and unrestricted economic system totally based on

profit and where society is in competition within these

criteria. There are three important elements in capitalism:

individualism, competition, and profit-making. Individualism is important

in capitalism, because people see themselves not as a part of society,

but as “individuals” standing alone on their own two feet who have to

get by with their own efforts. “Capitalist society” is an arena where individuals

compete with one another under very harsh and ruthless conditions.

This is an arena just like that described by Darwin, where only the

strong survive, where the weak and powerless are crushed and eliminated,

and where ruthless competition holds sway.

According to the logic capitalism is based on, every individualÐand

this can be a person, a company, or a nationÐmust only fight for its own

development and advantage. The most important criterion in this war is

production. The best producers survive, the weak and incompetent are

eliminated and vanish. This being the shape of the system, it is forgotten

that those who are eliminated in the bitter struggle, those who are crushed

and fall into poverty, are “people.” What is seen as worthy of attention is

not human beings, but economic development, and goods, the product of

this development. For which reason the capitalist mentality feels no ethical

responsibility or conscience for the person whom it crushes underfoot

and climbs on top of and who has to live in great difficulty. This is Darwinism

put into total practice in society in an economic way.

By proposing that it was necessary to encourage competition in all

areas of society, and announcing that it was necessary to provide no op-

C A P I T A L I S M A N D T H E F I G H T F O R S U R V I V A L I N T H E E C O N O M Y 149


portunities or support for the weak in any field, from health to the economy,

the foremost theoreticians of Social Darwinism prepared a “philosophical”

and “scientific” support for capitalism. For example, according

to Tille, a foremost representative of the Darwinist-capitalist mentality, it

was a great error to try to prevent poverty by helping the “defeated classes,”

because that meant interfering with natural selection which

brought about evolution.119

In the view of Herbert Spencer, the main theorist of Social

Darwinism, who introduced the principles of Darwinism

to the life of society, if someone is poor then that is

his mistake; nobody must help this person to rise. If someone

is rich, even if he has acquired his wealth by immoral

means, that is his competence. For this reason, the rich man

survives, while the poor man disappears. This is the view

which has come to prevail almost completely in today’s societies

and is a summary of Darwinist-capitalist morality.

Spencer, who defended this morality, finished his work Social Statistics

in 1850, and opposed all systems of help offered by the state, precautions

for the protection of health, state schools, and compulsory inoculation.

Because according to Social Darwinism, social order arose from the

principle of the survival of the strong. Supporting the weak and allowing

them to survive was a breach of this principle. The rich are rich because

they are better fitted; some nations rule others, because they are superior

to them, some races fall under the yoke of others, because these others are

more intelligent than them. Spencer applied the doctrine to human societies

with a vengeance: “If they are sufficiently complete to live, they do live,

and it is well they should live. If they are not sufficiently complete to

live, they die, and it is best they should die.”120

Graham Sumner, Professor of Political and Social Sciences at Yale

University, was Social Darwinism’s spokesman in America. In one of his

writings he summed up his thoughts on human societies in these words:

Éif we lift any man up we must have a fulcrum, a point of reaction. In society

that means that to lift one man up we push another down.121

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 150 O H U M A N I T Y

Herbert Spencer

Richard Milner, senior editor of New York’s American Museum of

Natural History’s Natural History Magazine writes:

One of Social Darwinism’s leading spokesmen, William Graham Sumner of

Princeton, thought millionaires were the ‘fittest’ individuals in society and

deserved their privileges. They were “naturally selected in the crucible of


As has been seen from these announcements, Social Darwinists used

Darwin’s theory of evolution as a “scientific” comment on capitalist societies.

As a result of this, human beings began to lose such concepts, which religion

had brought with it, as mutual assistance, philanthropy, and co-operation,

and instead of these virtues to give pride of place to selfishness,

cunning, and opportunism. According to one of Social Darwinism’s most

important theorists, the American Professor E. A. Ross, “The Christian cult

of charity as a means of grace has formed a shelter under which idiots and

cretins have crept and bred.”. Again in Ross’ view, “The state gathers the

deaf mutes into its sheltering arm, and a race of deaf mutes is in process of

formation.” Rejecting all these because they prevent natural evolutionary

progress, Ross declared that “The shortest way to make this world a heaven

is to let those so inclined hurry hell-ward at their own pace.”123

As we have seen, Darwinism forms the philosophical basis of all the

capitalist economic systems in the world and the political systems which

take their shape from them.

It is for this reason that the greatest supporters of Social Darwinism

were owners of capital. The rise of the strong by treading on the weak and

the following of economic policies far removed from feelings of pity, help,

and compassion were no longer to be condemned, because behaviour like

this was accepted as in accordance with “scientific explanations” and “the

laws of nature.”

According to Richard Hofstadter, the author of the book Social Darwinism

in American Thought, the nineteenth-century railroad magnate Chauncey

Depew asserted that the men who attained fame, fortune, and power

in New York City represented the survival of the fittest, through “superior

ability, foresight and adaptability.”124 Another railroad baron, James

C A P I T A L I S M A N D T H E F I G H T F O R S U R V I V A L I N T H E E C O N O M Y 151

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 152 O H U M A N I T Y

J. Hill, alleged that “the fortunes of railroad companies are determined by

the law of the survival of the fittest.”125

In his biography Andrew Carnegie, another major owner of capital

in America, states his belief in evolution with the words, “I had found the

truth of evolution.”126 Elsewhere he wrote these words:

It (the law of competition) is here; we cannot evade it; no substitutes for it

have been found; and while the law may sometimes be hard for the individual,

it is best for the race, because it insures the survival of the fittest in

every department.127

In his article Darwin’s Three Mistakes, the evolutionary scientist Kenneth

J. Hs., reveals the Darwinist thoughts of America’s foremost capitalists:

Darwinism was also used in a defense of competitive individualism and its

economic corollary of laissez-faire capitalism in England and in America.

Andrew Carnegie wrote that the “law of competition, be it benign or not, is

here; we cannot evade it.” Rockefeller went a step further when he claimed

that “the growth of a large business is merely a survival of the fittest; it is

merely the working out of a law of nature.”128


Poor people left on the streets in a

wealthy and comfortable countryÉ

It is exceedingly interesting that in America foundations such as the

Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Institution, founded by great capitalist

dynasties such as Rockefeller and Carnegie, should give important

financial support to research into evolution.

As has been seen from what has been explained so far, capitalism has

dragged human beings to worship only money and the power that comes

from money. By counting all kinds of religious and ethical values as nothing,

societies influenced by evolutionary suggestions began to give importance

to material power, and moved away from such feelings as compassion,

mercy, and sacrifice.

This capitalist morality holds sway in almost all societies in our day.

For this reason the poor, the helpless, and the crippled are denied charity,

and are not looked out for or protected. Even if they fall victim to the most

serious and lethal disease they are unable to find any body or humane aid

to protect and help them recover. The poor man is left to his sickness and

to death. In many countries such unjust and inhumane practices as little

children ruthlessly being made to work and being left without any social

rights are frequently encountered.

Today the reason for countries such as Ethiopia falling victim to drought

and starvation is the dominance of this capitalist morality. While aid

and support from many countries could save these hungry people, they

are abandoned to starvation and poverty.

C A P I T A L I S M A N D T H E F I G H T F O R S U R V I V A L I N T H E E C O N O M Y 153

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 154 O H U M A N I T Y

Another feature of capitalist society is the way it gives room to inequality

within itself. In societies of this kind the divide between rich and

poor grows ever wider, as the poor grow poorer, the wealth of the rich

grows greater. The existence of millions of homeless people and these people

being left to live in the most inhumane conditions, even in America,

the most highly developed country in the world, is a result of capitalist

morality. Of course American society is wealthy enough to protect all these

people and find them jobs. But because the prevailing mentality is not

to let the poor rise, but to rise by treading on the poor, no solution is offered

to these people. This is the result of the putting into practice of the Social

Darwinists’ claims that “In order to rise there has to be a stepping stone

for one to tread on.”

At this juncture, attention has to be drawn to an important point:

Throughout history there have always been societies where the poor and

weak were trodden down, where only material things were important,

and where selfishness, self-interest, and cheating were seen as the only

way to become rich: in the past too there lived people who thought only

C A P I T A L I S M A N D T H E F I G H T F O R S U R V I V A L I N T H E E C O N O M Y 155

material things were of any worth and who were far removed from the features

of any pleasing morality. But from the second half of the 19th century

people with such views entered a very different period. For the last

150 years people and societies which possess this ruthless make-up have

begun not to be condemned or criticised like the others. Behaviour of this

sort began at last to be accepted as a law of nature. And at this point Darwinism

had become a false religion justifying immorality and pitilessness.

Robert E. D. Clark explains the situation this way:

Evolution, in short, gave the doer of evil a respite from his conscience. The

most unscrupulous behaviour towards a competitor could not be rationalized;

evil could be called good.129

And H. Enoch wrote in his book Evolution or Creation:

Prof J. Holmes says, “Darwinism consistently applied would measure goodness

in terms of survival value”… This is the law of the jungle where “might

is right”, and the fittest survive. Whether cunning and cruelty, cowardice or

deceit, whatever will enable the individual to survive is good and right for

that individual or that society. 130


Although today there are considerable resources

in the world, millions of children are abandoned

to starve because of the capitalist mentality.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 156 O H U M A N I T Y

The beggar and the destitute had

some right to their wealth.

(Surat adh-Dhariyat: 19)

Newsweek, 28 September 1992

Newsweek, 7 September 1992

Time, 29 May 2000

Those among you possessing

resources and

other means should

not fail to give (something

to) near relatives,

paupers and

those who are refugees

for Allah’s sake; let

them act forgivingly

and show indulgence.

Do you not like Allah

to pardon you? Allah

is Forgiving, Merciful.

(Surat an-Nur: 22)

As we have seen, lack of religion and the Darwinism which inspired

it lay behind all the people, systems, and ideologies which have brought

worry, difficulty, pain, and hopelessness to the world, particularly in the

last 150 years. Those who thought that they could protect their own interests

in the selfish and ruthless environment brought about by lack of religion

saw Darwinism as a saviour for themselves. They adopted Darwinism’s

thesis of “the weak disappear as the strong live” as a philosophy of

life for themselves.

They were not aware of it, but these people who thought they were

preparing a great trap for all of mankind, actually prepared it for themselves.

Because no matter how much they struggle to survive and stay alive,

there is actually one judge, one lord, and one Master, whether of themselves,

of the whole world, of everything they try to possess, the leaders they

bind themselves to, or the ideologies and “isms” they believe in. Allah is

the one judge and power. And not the temporary power and opportunities

given to human beings, the things they gain so ruthlessly by struggle

and oppressing other people, by the sweat of their own brows. The wealth,

strength, and power which a human being thinks he gains by himself

are actually given to him by Allah to try him. No matter how much he

may believe that he is in an arena of struggle where the weak are eliminated

and the strong conquer, in actual fact every human being is living a

test set by Allah for himself. Allah reveals in a holy verse that he tries human

beings by means of the opportunities he gives them:

We made everything on the earth adornment for it so that We could test

them to see whose actions are the best. (Surat al-Kahf: 7)

Those who think that they have won what they possess as the result

of a “fight for survival” will feel a heart-rending pain for which there is no

compensation, and great sorrow when they come face to face to face with

reality in the hereafter and see what an empty idea they followed:

The Companions of the Garden will call out to the Companions of the Fire,

‘We have found that what our Lord promised us is true. Have you found

that what your Lord promised you is true?’ They will say, ‘Yes, we have!’

Between them a herald will proclaim: ‘May the curse of Allah be on

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 158 O H U M A N I T Y

the wrongdoers those who bar access to the Way of Allah, desiring to make

it crooked, and reject the hereafter.’ …. The Companions of the Ramparts

will call out to men they recognise by their mark, saying, ‘What you

amassed was of no use to you, nor was your arrogance. (Surat al-A’raf: 44-

5, 48)

As for those who have not been influenced by Darwinist-capitalist

thinking and who have not forgotten the reason for their being in the

world and the existence of Allah, they see other human beings as living

things created by Allah. As Allah has ordered them, they always treat other

human beings pleasantly, feel affection and compassion, and do

everything that they possibly can to take away their difficulties and worries.

They always speak the pleasantest words, look after the orphaned,

help the sick and crippled, and protect and watch after them. People like

this avoid sin and keep their duties to Allah as it is revealed in the Qur’an

and are the most superior in Allah’s sight: they pay no attention to wealth,

race, colour, class, ideology, or philosophy.

C A P I T A L I S M A N D T H E F I G H T F O R S U R V I V A L I N T H E E C O N O M Y 159

he greatest catastrophe visited by Darwinism upon

mankind was without doubt to turn people away from

religion. A violent moral and spiritual collapse swiftly

comes to societies which turn away from religion. There

are many examples of this in societies in our day.

At this point some people will say that Darwinism cannot be held

responsible for peoples’ lack of religion because a large number of those

people who live a life without religion have never heard of the claims of

Darwinism. The second part of this objection is true. These days the number

of people who defend Darwinism in a knowledgeable way is limited.

But this restricted minority are people who direct society’s ideas in most

fields. The influence they have developed on society reaches countless people.

They have the possibility of imposing their world view on a large

section of society. For instance, the best-known university professors, a

large part of famous cinema directors, and editors of world-famous publishing

houses, newspapers, and magazines are for the most part evolutionists,

and therefore naturally atheists. For which reason, the parts of society

they address are affected by them and influenced by their evolutionary

and anti-religious thinking. As a result, societies emerge where these

perverse ideas are widely accepted.

Ernst Mayr, a Harvard University biologist and one of the world’s foremost

evolutionists, describes the place of the theory of evolution in the

life of society in these words:

Since Darwin, every knowing person agrees that man is descended from the

apesÉ Evolution has an impact on every aspect of man’s thinking: his philosophy,

his metaphysics, his ethicsÉ131

T H E M O R A L C O L L A P S E B R O U G H T A B O U T B Y D A R W I N I S M 161


Darwinists’ wide-ranging dominance over the life of society acts like

a powerful form of “hypnosis” on people. A large part of the younger generation

in particular, with not enough experience of life to form any

world view, even a very superficial one, can easily be taken in by suggestions

of this type. It is exceedingly easy to bring these people to have the

desired thought processes through the magazines they read, the films,

plays or music clips they watch, and, most important of all, the education

they receive in schools. For this influence is the reason that people have

believed the theory of evolution to be true for 150 years, despite its deceptions

and unscientific nature.

If you notice, anti-religious propaganda is seldom carried out openly

these days, nobody openly suggests that anyone should have no religion.

But for this reason covert methods are employed, imperceptible at first

sight. Mockery of religion, religious subjects, or people known for their religious

faith, and the use of words which mean the rejection of God, destiny,

and religion in song lyrics, novels, films, newspaper headlines, and

jokes, are just a few of these covert methods.

The subjects of Darwinism, on the other hand, are the most common

tools of anti-religious propaganda. In even the most unconnected subjects

the lie that our ancestors were monkeys is stressed. The claims of the theory

of evolution are even written between the lines in human psychological

analysis. In this way, human societies emerge which treat religion, the

afterlife, and moral responsibilities lightly, which do not think, which do

not fear God, and which do not really believe in Him, even if, when asked,

they say that they do believe in God and religion. People who have no faith

or fear of Allah, know no limits in any matter, and begin to live like the

animals they think their ancestors were.

For example, one cannot expect people who are incautious and who

do not fear Allah to protect their chastity because they think there is no limit

they have to observe. They become willing to perform any kind of immorality

as long as they can do it out of other people’s sight. Just as in our

day, especially among the young and definite sections of society, the everfurther

pushing of limits, the spreading of an understanding which co-

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 162 O H U M A N I T Y

unts moral values and God’s edicts as nothing, and people’s turning away

from religion as a result of the suggestions of Darwinism, are one outcome

of this. People who see themselves as left completely unrestricted and

who believe that they will not have to account to anyone, demonstrate an

ever-increasing profligacy with every passing day. Young men or women

can make statements to newspapers describing their sex lives in the tiniest

detail, and the newspapers publish them, and the readers do not mind.

Adultery, which the media praise and describe with great care, and even

call everybody to commit, has come to be a deed that nobody finds the least

out of the ordinary. Under careful examination, behind murder, prostitution,

cheating, and swindling of all kinds, giving and taking bribes, and

telling lies: in short at the base of all immoral behaviour the lack of religion

is to be seen. The most effective way this lack of religion is spread is the

violent influence of Darwin’s lie that “the human being emerged as a result

of sheer coincidence.”

Ken Ham, the author of the book The Lie: Evolution, takes the lack of

religion which Darwinism gave rise to as a subject and says:

If you reject God and replace Him with another belief that puts chance, random

processes in the place of God, there is no basis for right or wrong. Rules

become whatever you want to make them. There are no absolutesÐno

principles that must be adhered to. People will write their own rules.132

The well-known evolutionist Theodious Dobzhansky agrees that the

idea of “natural selection,” the foundation of Darwinism, gives rise to a

morally degenerate society:

Natural selection can favor egotism, hedonism, cowardice instead of bravery,

cheating and exploitation, while group ethics in virtually all societies

tend to counteract or forbid such ‘natural’ behavior, and to glorify their opposites:

kindness, generosity, and even self-sacrifice for the good of others of

one’s tribe or nation and finally of mankind.133

If we look around us today, we can immediately see the traces of the

deep and most important devastation wrought by Darwinist morality.

The idea that progress, development, and civilisation are the result of people

living separate from one another and with no ties of mutual assistan-

T H E M O R A L C O L L A P S E B R O U G H T A B O U T B Y D A R W I N I S M 163

ce, devotion, respect, and affection, is imposed upon societies. The suggestion

that such a result has to be accepted for greater production and

development is frequently made. Whereas this is a result of human beings

bringing themselves to the “status of animals,” not of development and civilisation.

The truth is that man is not a species of animal and did not come into

existence from any animal. Man, whom God created with the possession

of reason, intelligence, conscience, and a soul, is a completely different

creature from other living things by virtue of these qualities. But under

the influence of the spell of Darwinist-materialist morality, human beings

forget these qualities and stoop to pettiness, immorality and a lack of

conscience and consciousness not even seen in animals. Then they say,

“We are in any case descended from animals, these are also a genetic inheritance

from them,” and prepare a so-called scientific basis for their own

lack of willpower and consciousness.

Many Darwinist behavioural scientists take this logic as a starting point,

and claim that human beings’ demonstrating a tendency to crime is an

inheritance from their animal forefathers. The famous evolutionist Stephen

Jay Gould puts this claim, first suggested by the Italian physicist Lombroso,

forward in the following manner in his book Ever Since Darwin.

Biological theories of criminality were scarcely new, but Lombroso gave the

argument a novel, evolutionary twist. Born criminals are not simply deranged

or diseased; they are, literally, throwbacks to a previous evolutionary

stage. The hereditary characters of our primitive and apish ancestors remain

in our genetic repertoire. Some unfortunate men are born with an unusually

large number of these ancestral characters. Their behavior may have been

appropriate in savage societies of the past; today, we brand it as criminal.

We may pity the born criminal, for he cannot help himself; but we cannot tolerate

his actions.134

According to the claims of the Darwinists, in other words, a human

being’s killing another, his causing him pain, stealing, and starting fights,

are a genetically transferred inheritance from his apish ancestors. For

which reason, according to this claim, these crimes do not belong to that

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 164 O H U M A N I T Y

person and are seen as excusable.

As can be seen from these claims, Darwinist thinking counts human

beings’ conscience and willpower, and such skills as reason and judgement,

as nothing, and accepts that man is an unintelligent creature, who

behaves according to instinct, just like animals. According to this view,

just as a wild lion cannot prevent the aggression within him and cannot

exhibit virtuous behaviour such as overcoming his anger, or showing forgiveness

and patience, so man behaves in the same manner. It is evident

that there will be a lack of peace and security, disorder, conflict, and fighting

in a society which shelters such people.

The Ruthless and Pessimistic Living Model

Proposed to Mankind by Darwinism

According to the Darwinists and materialists, the whole universe,

human beings included, is the work of chaos and coincidences. As the influence

of this view grows in society, there emerge irresponsible people

who believe themselves to be totally unrestricted.

A person who has no purpose does not think, cannot form the aim of

developing himself, is uncaring, mocking, is unfeeling, affected by nothing,

cannot use his conscience, and recognises no rules or limits. He can

possess no virtue or finer quality. In his own perverse view, as a developed

animal himself, in this world he must look for food and reproduce, in the

same way as other living creatures, and after meeting certain needs must

find as much entertainment and enjoyment as possible and wait for death.

And it can be seen that, even though most people are unaware of the details

of Darwinism, they live the life that Darwinism foresaw for mankind.

Because they live a life which is ruthless and which will eventually

come to an end, these people are carried away by great depression, pessimism,

and hopelessness. The thought that everything will end with death

and become as nothing causes these people to be unhappy and shut up

within themselves. One of the reasons behind suicides, psychological

problems, and depressions is the negatives effects of the Darwinist spell

T H E M O R A L C O L L A P S E B R O U G H T A B O U T B Y D A R W I N I S M 165

on human psychology.

Richard Dawkins, one of the fiercest defenders of evolution of our times,

reveals one example of this. Dawkins claims that human beings are

gene machines and that the only reason for their existence is to pass these

genes on to subsequent generations. In Dawkins’ view there is no other

purpose to either the universe’s or man’s existence. All the universe and

human beings are the products of chaos and coincidence. People who are

deceived by such a claim easily fall prey to depression and hopelessness.

He who believes that the only point to life is to pass on his genes, and that

everything ends with death, that nothing he does in the world has any

meaning, who thinks that friendship, love, goodness, and beauty have no

value, will think that life is pitiless and unnecessary and will be able to take

no pleasure from anything. In the foreword to his book Unweaving the

Rainbow, Dawkins admits the negative and pessimistic effect his claim regarding

the point of human life has on people:

A foreign publisher of my first book confessed that he could not sleep for

three nights after reading it, so troubled was he by what he saw as its cold,

bleak message. Others have asked me how I can bear to get up in the mornings.

Ateacher from a distant country wrote to me reproachfully that a pupil

had come to him in tears after reading the same book, because it had persuaded

her that life was empty and purposeless. He advised her not to show

the book to any of her friends, for fear of contaminating them with the same

nihilistic pessimism. Similar accusations of barren desolation, of promoting

an arid and joyless message, are frequently flung at science in general, and it

is easy for scientists to play up to them. My colleague Peter Atkins begins his

book The Second Law (1984) in this vein:

We are the children of chaos, and the deep structure of change is decay. At

root, there is only corruption, and the unstemmable tide of chaos. Gone is

purpose; all that is left is direction. This is the bleakness we have to accept

as we peer deeply and dispassionately into the heart of the Universe.135

Another Darwinist who proposed that life is nothing and caused life

to be looked at pessimistically, was the German philosopher Nietzsche,

whose theses of racial superiority provided a philosophical support for

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 166 O H U M A N I T Y

Hitler. The thought Nietzsche put forward, known as “nihilism” or “nothingism”

is basically this: Man must have a reason for living. But this purpose,

according to Nietzsche who denied the existence of God, has nothing

to do with God’s having created man. For this reason, in Nietzsche’s

philosophy, man constantly seeks a purpose but is unable to find one and

experiences the pessimism and hopelessness born of this. The right thing

is to seek the purpose behind man’s existence. But if, like Nietzsche, a person

absolutely rejects the fundamental purpose and starts to look for a

purpose outside the scope of this truth, then of course he is not going to be

able to find it. And let us add here that Nietzsche died mad.

Societies which forget that they were created by God for a purpose

are inevitably condemned to undergo a moral and spiritual collapse. Wealth,

welfare, and economic development in no way bring these people

peace and security. Many things push people who fail to comply with the

commands of reason and conscience, and who see themselves as unrestricted

and purposeless creatures, to unhappiness, hopelessness, and pessimism.

The most important thing is the sorrow, unhappiness and pessimism

that these people, who think that they will cease to exist with death,

will feel when they see the true life that they will meet after death.

Whereas a person who believes in God and the hereafter is aware of

what an important outcome he is living for. He always bears the joy and

hope of winning the mercy of God and paradise. Whatever happens he gives

thanks to God: for which reason he never falls prey to hopelessness

and pessimism.

T H E M O R A L C O L L A P S E B R O U G H T A B O U T B Y D A R W I N I S M 167

ll through history there have been wars, oppression,

killings, and conflict. But the reason for the number

and range of these disasters being so great in the last

century is the false veil of scientific justification that

Darwinism lent to this killing, oppression and conflict. Because Darwinism’s

totally erroneous claims about nature ran parallel to the pronunciations

of these ideologies, assassins, dictators, and sadistic ideologues were

able to try to demonstrate that they were right and justified by saying

“the law of nature also applies to society” regarding their policies.

In our day the theory of evolution is still defended for philosophical

and ideological reasons. The colonialism which exploded with the theory

of evolution in the 19th century, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union are

now things of the past. But the Darwinist-materialist philosophy which

was their ultimate foundation is still vigorously defended by certain circles,

and the destructive effects of this philosophy still continue to be felt

all over the world.

Despite the fact that he is an evolutionist, Kenneth J. Hs. has written

in this way about the disasters that Darwinism has led to for mankind:

We were victims of a cruel social ideology that assumes that competition

among individuals, classes, nations or races is the natural condition of life,

and that it is also natural for the superior to dispossess the inferiorÉ The

law of natural selection is not, I will maintain, science. It is an ideology, and

a wicked one…136

Of course judicial and physical precautions must be taken. But these

precautions can only cover up the wounds brought about by those ideologies.

The permanent solution lies in a cultural and scientific treatment.

C O N C L U S I O N : T H E S W A M P O F D A R W I N I S M M U S T B E D R A I N E D 169


With the collapse of Darwinism from the cultural and scientific point of

view, those philosophies which draw strength from it will also disappear,

and this will mean the lifting of oppression from the world.

For this reason a heavy responsibility falls to those who possess

conscience and faith, who have knowledge of spiritual values. It is not

right to ignore or underestimate the disasters which Darwinism visited

upon the world, particularly in the last century, and the suffering that people

and societies underwent. Everyone who grasps the urgency of the

matter must do what he can for a cultural attack to bring an end to this deception,

which has lasted for 150 years.

The only thing that can bring an end to this deception in the true sense,

which can bring a solution to the fundamental question which mankind

lives, is the life of the morality of the Qur’an. These disasters will come

to an end as people turn to the true religion, when the beauty, love, affection,

compassion, justice, devotion, co-operation, and tolerance which

the Qur’an brings to peoples’ lives are widely lived. As one of Allah’s holy

verses has revealed, “truth will come” and “falsehood will vanish:”

Say: ‘Truth has come and falsehood has vanished. Falsehood is always bound

to vanish.’ (Surat al-Isra: 81)

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 170 O H U M A N I T Y


T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 172 O H U M A N I T Y

arwinism, or rather the theory of evolution, is nothing

but an unscientific fallacy, proposed with the purpose

of denying the truth of creation, in which it has not

succeeded. This theory, which claims that life came

about non-organic matter by a series of coincidences, has basically been

discredited with the emergence of the fact that the universe was created

by God. It is God Who created the universe and ordered it, down to the tiniest

detail. In this case it is not possible for the theory of evolution, which

claims that living things were not created by God, but that they were the

result of coincidences, to be true.

In fact, when we study the theory of evolution, we see that really it is

denied by scientific discoveries. The structure that exists in life is much

more complex and striking than that in the non-living world. For example

we can examine by what sensitive balances atoms are ordered in the

non-living world, and furthermore in what complicated structures these

atoms are brought together in the living world, and we can study what

extraordinary mechanisms are formed by using them, such as proteins,

enzymes, and cells.

So this extraordinary structure in life has invalidated the theory of

evolution at the end of the 20th century.

We have considered this subject in great detail in others of our studies

and are still continuing to so do. But because of its importance it will be

useful to recapitulate it here.

The Difficulties that Demolish Darwin’s Theory

The theory of evolution, a teaching whose history goes back to Anci-


ent Greece, was fully set out in the middle of the 19th century. The most

important development which placed the theory on the agenda of the

world of science was the book The Origin of Species, published by Charles

Darwin in 1859. In this book Darwin came out against different species of

living creature in the world being individually created by God. According

to Darwin all species came from a common ancestor and had grown different

from each other by small changes over time.

Darwin’s theory was based on no solid scientific discovery: as he accepted

himself, it was just a “progression of logic.” In fact, as Darwin admitted

in a long section in his book under the heading, “The Difficulties

On Theory,” the theory had no answer to a number of important questions.

Darwin hoped that the difficulties facing his theory would be overcome

as science developed in time and that new scientific discoveries would

reinforce it. But, in total contrast to Darwin’s hopes, the development of

science left the fundamental claims of the theory, one by one, unfounded.

Darwinism’s defeat in the face of science can be studied under three

basic headings:

1. The theory is quite unable to explain how life emerged in the

world for the first time.

2. There is no scientific evidence to show that the “evolutionary mechanisms”

proposed by the theory really possess any evolutionary effects.

3. The fossil record presents a picture in total opposition to the theory’s


In this section we shall examine the main lines of each heading.

The First Insurmountable Obstacle:

The Origin of Life

The theory of evolution claims that all living species came from one

living cell, which emerged in the primitive world some 3.8 billion years

ago. How it was that one single cell formed millions of complex living

species, and if such a form of evolution did happen, why not traces of it

T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 173

have been found in the fossil record, are questions that the theory has been

unable to explain. But before all that, we must stop at the first step of

this alleged period of evolution. How did this alleged “first cell” come


Because the theory of evolution rejects creation and accepts no supernatural

intervention, it claims that that “first cell” came about, with no

structure, plan, or order, by coincidence within the laws of nature. In other

words, according to the theory, non-living matter must have produced a

living cell as a result of coincidences. Yet this is a claim which flies in the

face of the most basic known biological laws.

“Life Comes From Life”

Darwin did not mention the subject of the origin of life in his book.

Because of the primitive scientific understanding of his day, he assumed

that living things possessed a very simple structure. According to the theory

called “spontaneous generation,” which had been believed in since the

Middle Ages, it was believed that non-living substances could come together

by chance and form a living creature. At that time it was a common

belief that insects were formed by leftover food and mice from wheat. Interesting

experiments were done to try and prove it. A little wheat was

spread over a dirty rag, and it was thought that after waiting for a bit mice

would emerge from the combination.

Meat becoming maggot-ridden was counted as proof that life could

emerge from non-living substances. Whereas it was later understood that

maggots did not emerge by themselves from the surface of meat, but that

they emerged from larva, smaller than the eye can see, which flies brought

and left there.

At the time when Darwin wrote The Origin of Species, the belief that

bacteria could emerge from inorganic matter saw wide acceptance in the

world of science.

Whereas five years after the publication of Darwin’s book, the famous

French biologist Louis Pasteur definitively destroyed this belief, which

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 174 O H U M A N I T Y

was the basis of evolution. As a result of his long research and studies Pasteur

summed up the results he had arrived at by saying, “The claim that

inanimate matter can originate life is buried in history for good.”137

The defenders of the theory of evolution resisted Pasteur’s findings

for a long time. Yet as science developed and revealed the complicated

structure of the living cell, the invalidity of the claim that life could come

about by itself became even more obvious.

The Unproductive Struggles of the 20th Century

In the 20th century the first evolutionist to take in hand the subject of

the origin of life was the well-known Russian biologist Alexander Oparin.

In a number of theses he put forward in the 1930s, Oparin attempted to

prove that the living cell could come about by coincidence. But these efforts

were to end in failure, and Oparin would have to make this confession,

“Unfortunately, the origin of the cell remains a question which is actually

the darkest point of the entire evolution theory.”138

Evolutionists who followed Oparin’s path tried to carry out experiments

that would lead to a solution to the origin of life. The best-known of

these experiments was carried out in 1953 by the famous American chemist

Stanley Miller. Miller brought together the gasses, which he claimed

were in the earth’s primitive atmosphere in experimental conditions, added

energy to the mixture, and synthesised a few organic molecules (amino-

acids) used in the production of proteins.

The invalidity of that experiment, which in those years was regarded

as an important step in the name of evolution, and that the atmosphere

used in the experiment was very different from the conditions of the real

world, emerged in the years that followed.139

After a long silence, Miller himself admitted that the atmospheric environment

employed was not realistic.140

All the evolutionary efforts throughout the 20th century to explain the

question of the origin of life ended in failure. The well-known geochemist

Jeffrey Bada, from the Scripps Institute in San Diego, accepts this truth in

T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 175

an article published in 1998 in the evolutionist magazine Earth:

Today as we leave the twentieth century, we still face the biggest unsolved

problem that we had when we entered the twentieth century: How did life

originate on Earth?141

Life’s Complex Structure

The principle reason for the theory of evolution’s being in such a great

difficulty as regards the origin of life, is the fact that even those living

things which are thought of as having the very simplest structures actually

have unbelievably complicated structures. The living cell is more

complicated than all of the technological products made by mankind. To

such an extent that not even the most highly developed laboratories in the

world can bring inorganic substances together and produce a living cell.

The conditions necessary for a cell to appear are many more than can

be explained by coincidences. The probability of proteins, the building

blocks of cell, being synthesized coincidenctally, is 1 in 10950 for an average

protein made up of 500 amino acids. In mathematics, a probability

smaller than 1 over 10 50 is practically considered to be impossible.

As for the DNA molecule, which lies in the nucleus of the cell and

contains genetic information, that is an unbelievable data bank. If a human

being’s genetic code were to be set down on paper it would fill a library

of 900 volumes of 500 pages each.

And here there is another most interesting point to add: DNA can

only replicate with the help of some specialized proteins (enzymes). However,

the synthesis of these enzymes can only be realised by the information

coded in DNA. As they depend on each other, they have to exist at

the same time for replication. This brings the scenario that life originated

by itself to a deadlock. The well-known evolutionist professor Leslie Orgel,

from San Diego California University, admits this truth in the October

1994 edition of Scientific American magazine:

It is extremely improbable that proteins and nucleic acids, both of which are

structurally complex, arose spontaneously in the same place at the same ti-

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 176 O H U M A N I T Y

me. Yet it also seems impossible to have one without the other. And so, at

first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have

originated by chemical means.142

There is no doubt that if it is impossible for life to come about through

natural effects, then one must accept that life was “created” in a supernatural

way. This truth openly invalidates the theory of evolution, the

basic aim of which is to deny creation.

The Imaginary Mechanisms of Evolution

The second major point which invalidates Darwin’s theory is the fact

that it has been realised that the two concepts put forward by the theory

as “evolutionary mechanisms” actually possess no evolutionary force.

Darwin had totally linked the claim of evolution which he put forward

to “natural selection.” The importance he attached to this mechanism

can be clearly seen from the title of his book: The Origin of Species, By

Means of Natural SelectionÉ

It is based on the idea that in the struggle for survival in nature living

creatures which are strong and adapted to the natural conditions will survive.

For example, when a herd of deer is threatened by beasts of prey,

those deer which can run the fastest will survive. In this way the herd will

consist of fast and powerful individuals. But of course this mechanism

does not make deer evolve, it cannot turn them into another species, for

example horses.

For this reason the mechanism of natural selection possesses no evolutionary

force. Darwin was aware of this fact, and in The Origin of Species

he was forced to say:

Natural selection can do nothing until favourable variations chance to occur.


The Influence of Lamarck

So, how did these “favourable variations” come about? Within the

primitive scientific understanding of his time, Darwin tried to base the

T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 177

answer to this question on Lamarck. According to the French biologist Lamarck,

who lived before Darwin, living things pass on physical changes

which they undergo during the course of their lives to subsequent generations,

and new species emerge as a result of these properties which are

amassed from generation to generation. For example, in Lamarck’s view,

giraffes developed from antelopes, whose necks had grown longer from

generation to generation as they struggled to eat the leaves on tall trees.

Darwin gave similar examples, for instance he claimed in The Origin

of Species that some bears which entered the water to find food turned in

time into whales.144

But the laws of inheritance, which Mendel discovered and which

was proven with the development of genetic science in the 20th century,

destroyed the myth that acquired traits can be passed on to later generations.

In this way, natural selection was a “one off,” and for that reason a

completely ineffective mechanism.

Neo-Darwinism and Mutations

In order to find a solution in this situation the Darwinists put forward

the “Modern Synthetic Theory,” or Neo-Darwinism, as it is more widely

known, at the end of the 1930s. Alongside natural selection, Neo-

Darwinism added as a “reason for favourable variations,” mutations, or

defects in the genes of living creatures as a result of external influences

such as radiation of duplication errors.

And still today in the world the model which defends its validity in

the name of evolution is Neo-Darwinism. The theory maintains that the

millions of living species in the world emerged as a result of mutations, or

genetic defects over time, in these living creatures’ countless complex organs,

such as ears, eyes, lungs, and wings. But there is a scientific fact

which disarms the theory: Mutations do not develop living creatures, on

the contrary, they always damage them.

The reason for this is very simple. DNA has a very complex structure.

Any chance alteration in the molecule only leads to damage. The Ame-

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 178 O H U M A N I T Y

rican geneticist B. G. Ranganathan explains it this way:

Mutations are small, random, and harmful. They rarely occur and the best

possibility is that they will be ineffectual. These four characteristics of mutations

imply that mutations cannot lead to an evolutionary development. A

random change in a highly specialised organism is either ineffectual or

harmful. A random change in a watch cannot improve the watch. It will

most probably harm it or at best be ineffectual. An earthquake does not improve

the city, it brings destruction.145

As a matter of fact no example of a useful mutation, in other words

one which developed genetic science, has so far been observed. It has been

seen that all mutations are harmful. It has been realised that the theory

of evolution’s mutations, which it suggested as “evolutionary mechanisms,”

are actually a genetic event which only destroy and cripple living

creatures. (The commonest mutation seen in human beings is cancer). Of

course a destructive mechanism cannot be an “evolutionary mechanism.”

Natural selection, as Darwin had accepted, “can do nothing by itself.” This

truth shows us that there is no “evolutionary mechanism” in nature. And

since there is no evolutionary mechanism, the imaginary period called

evolution cannot have existed.

The Fossil Record: No Sign of Intermediate Forms

The clearest proof that the scenario of the theory of evolution did not

happen is the fossil record.

According to the theory of evolution, living creatures arose from

each other. A previously existing species turned into another over time

and all species emerged in this way. According to the theory, this change

covered a period of millions of years and moved forward step by step.

This being the case, countless “intermediate species” should have

emerged and lived over this alleged period of change.

For example, in the past, although fish still bore their own features,

they must also have gained some features of reptiles, and half-fish halfreptile

creatures must have lived. Or, while still possessing the features of

reptiles, they must also have taken on some of the features of birds, and

T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 179

reptile-birds must have emerged. These, because they were in a period of

transformation, must have been sickly, incomplete, and faulty creatures.

Evolutionists call these creatures which they believe must have lived in

the past “intermediate forms.”

If creatures of this type really did live in the past, their numbers and

varieties must have been in the millions. And the remains of these highly

peculiar creatures should be met in the fossil record. In The Origin of Species,

Darwin explained it this way:

If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely

all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed…

Consequently, evidence of their former existence could be found only

amongst fossil remains.146

Darwin’s Vanishing Hopes

However, despite fossil research being feverishly carried out in all

parts of the from the middle of the 19th century to the present, intermediate

forms have not so far been found. All the discoveries found in the excavations

and research, far from showing what the evolutionists were expecting,

have revealed that living creatures emerged suddenly, all intact,

and complete.

The famous British palaeontologist (fossil expert) Derek W. Ager, admits

this, despite being an evolutionist:

The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at

the level of orders or of species, we find Ñ over and over again Ñ not gradual

evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of


In other words, in the fossil record, all species of living creature

emerged suddenly and in their finished form, with no intermediate form

between them. This is the exact opposite of what Darwin foresaw. Furthermore,

this is a very strong proof that living species were created. Because

the only explanation for a living species’ emerging flawless and suddenly,

with no ancestor for it to have evolved from, must be that that spe-

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 180 O H U M A N I T Y

cies was created. This truth is accepted by the well-known evolutionist biologist

Douglas Futuyma:

Creation and evolution, between them, exhaust the possible explanations

for the origin of living things. Organisms either appeared on the earth fully

developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from

pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a

fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent


Fossils reveal that living creatures emerged in the world fully and

perfectly formed. In other words the “origin of species,” contrary to what

Darwin thought, is creation, and not evolution.

The Myth of the Evolution of Man

The subject most frequently brought up by defenders of the theory of

evolution is the origin of man. The Darwinist claim on this subject considers

that the modern human being living today descended from a number

of ape-like creatures. In this period, estimated to have begun some 4-5

million years ago, it is claimed that there lived “intermediate forms” between

modern man and his ancestors. In fact there are four basic “categories”

in this entirely illusory scenario:

1. Australopithecus

2. Homo habilis

3. Homo erectus

4. Homo sapiens

Evolutionists give the name “Australopithecus,” which means “southern

ape,” to man’s so-called first ape-like ancestor. These living creatures

were actually nothing but an extinct species of ape. Wide-ranging research

by Lord Solly Zuckerman and Professor Charles Oxnard, two worldfamous

anatomists from Britain and the USA on Australopithecus remains

shows that these living creatures belonged to an extinct species of ape

and that they had no similarities to human beings.149

Evolutionists divide the next phase of human evolution into “homo”

or human classes. According to the claim, living creatures of the “homo”

T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 181

series were more developed than Australopithecus. Evolutionists lay the

fossils of these different living creatures back to back and make up an

imaginary plan of evolution. This plan is imaginary, because in actual fact

no evolutionary link between these different classes has been proven.

Ernst Mayr, one of the most important defenders of the theory of evolution

in the 20th century accepts this, saying “the chain reaching as far as Homo

sapiens is actually lost.”150

While writing out the plan Australopithecus>Homo habilis>Homo

erectus>Homo sapiens, evolutionists say that each species was the ancestor

of the one that followed. Whereas the latest discoveries by palaeontologists

reveal that Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and Homo erectus lived

in the same periods in different regions of the world.151

Furthermore, beings from the Homo erectus class survived until very

recent times: Homo sapiens neandertalensis and Homo sapiens sapiens

(modern man) have been found side by side in the same period.152

This, of course, definitely demonstrates the invalidity that these classes

were one another’s’ ancestors. Stephen Jay Gould, one of Harvard University’s

palaeontologists, although himself an evolutionist, explains the

dilemma in which the Darwinist theory finds itself in this way:

What has become of our ladder if there are three coexisting lineages of hominids

(A. africanus, the robust australopithecines, and H. habilis), none clearly

derived from another? Moreover, none of the three display any evolutionary

trends during their tenure on earth.153

In short, the drawings which appear in the media or in school books

of imaginary “half-monkey half-man” creatures, in other words the scenario

of human evolution which they are trying to keep alive just by propaganda

methods, is a myth with no scientific basis.

Despite being an evolutionist, Lord Solly Zuckerman, one of Britain’s

most respected and well-known scientists, studied this matter for many

long years, and carried out a 15-year research into Australopithecus fossils,

and reached the conclusion that there was no real family tree stretching

from those monkey-like creatures to man.

Zuckerman also made an interesting “spectrum of science.” He drew

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 182 O H U M A N I T Y

up a “spectrum,” from branches of knowledge he accepted as scientific to

those he did not accept as scientific. Under Zuckerman’s table the most

“scientific,” or in other words those based on concrete results, are chemistry

and physics. After that come biological sciences, and then social

sciences. At the far end of the “spectrum,” that part considered most “unscientific”

are, according to Zuckerman, “extrasensory perception,”Ñ concepts

such as telepathy and sixth sense andÑfinally “human evolution”!

Zuckerman describes this end of the spectrum in this way:

We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed

biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation

of man’s fossil history, where to the faithful (evolutionist) anything is possible

– and where the ardent believer (in evolution) is sometimes able to believe

several contradictory things at the same time.154

Thus the myth of human evolution consists of prejudiced comments

by a few people who blindly believe in the theories based on a few fossils

they found.

Technology In The Eye and The Ear

Another subject that remains unanswered by evolutionary theory is

the excellent quality of perception in the eye and the ear.

Before passing on to the subject of the eye, let us briefly answer the

question of “how we see”. Light rays coming from an object fall oppositely

on the retina of the eye. Here, these light rays are transmitted into electric

signals by cells and they reach a tiny spot at the back of the brain called

the centre of vision. These electric signals are perceived in this centre of

the brain as an image after a series of processes. With this technical background,

let us do some thinking.

The brain is insulated from light. That means that the inside of the

brain is solid dark, and light does not reach the location where the brain is

situated. The place called the centre of vision is a solid dark place where

no light ever reaches; it may even be the darkest place you have ever

known. However, you observe a luminous, bright world in this pitch


T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 183

The image formed in the eye is so sharp and distinct that even the

technology of the 20th century has not been able to attain it. For instance,

look at the book you read, your hands with which you hold it, then lift your

head and look around you. Have you ever seen such a sharp and distinct

image as this one at any other place? Even the most developed television

screen produced by the greatest television producer in the world

cannot provide such a sharp image for you. This is a three-dimensional,

coloured, and extremely sharp image. For more than 100 years, thousands

of engineers have been trying to achieve this sharpness. Factories, huge

premises were established, much research has been done, plans and designs

have been made for this purpose. Again, look at a TV screen and the

book you hold in your hands. You will see that there is a big difference in

sharpness and distinction. Moreover, the TV screen shows you a two-dimensional

image, whereas with your eyes, you watch a three-dimensional

perspective having depth.

For many years, ten of thousands of engineers have tried to make a

three-dimensional TV, and reach the vision quality of the eye. Yes, they

have made a three-dimensional television system but it is not possible to

watch it without putting on glasses; moreover, it is only an artificial threedimension.

The background is more blurred, the foreground appears like

a paper setting. Never has it been possible to produce a sharp and distinct

vision like that of the eye. In both the camera and the television, there is a

loss of image quality.

Evolutionists claim that the mechanism producing this sharp and

distinct image has been formed by chance. Now, if somebody told you

that the television in your room was formed as a result of chance, that all

its atoms just happened to come together and make up this device that

produces an image, what would you think? How can atoms do what

thousands of people cannot?

If a device producing a more primitive image than the eye could not

have been formed by chance, then it is very evident that the eye and the

image seen by the eye could not have been formed by chance. The same

situation applies to the ear. The outer ear picks up the available sounds by

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 184 O H U M A N I T Y

the auricle and directs them to the middle ear; the middle ear transmits

the sound vibrations by intensifying them; the inner ear sends these vibrations

to the brain by translating them into electric signals. Just as with

the eye, the act of hearing finalises in the centre of hearing in the brain.

The situation in the eye is also true for the ear. That is, the brain is insulated

from sound just like it is from light: it does not let any sound in.

Therefore, no matter how noisy is the outside, the inside of the brain is

completely silent. Nevertheless, the sharpest sounds are perceived in the

brain. In your brain, which is insulated from sound, you listen to the symphonies

of an orchestra, and hear all the noises in a crowded place. However,

if the sound level in your brain was measured by a precise device at

that moment, it would be seen that a complete silence is prevailing there.

As is the case with imagery, decades of effort have been spent in trying

to generate and reproduce sound that is faithful to the original. The results

of these efforts are sound recorders, high-fidelity systems, and systems for

sensing sound. Despite all this technology and the thousands of engineers

and experts who have been working on this endeavour, no sound has yet

been obtained that has the same sharpness and clarity as the sound perceived

by the ear. Think of the highest-quality HI-FI systems produced by

the biggest company in the music industry. Even in these devices, when

sound is recorded some of it is lost; or when you turn on a HI-FI you always

hear a hissing sound before the music starts. However, the sounds that are

the products of the technology of the human body are extremely sharp and

clear. A human ear never perceives a sound accompanied by a hissing

sound or with atmospherics as does HI-FI; it perceives sound exactly as it is,

sharp and clear. This is the way it has been since the creation of man.

So far, no visual or recording apparatus produced by man has been

as sensitive and successful in perceiving sensory data as are the eye and

the ear.

However, as far as seeing and hearing are concerned, a far greater

fact lies beyond all this.

T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 185

To Whom Does the Consciousness that Sees and

Hears Within the Brain Belong?

Who is it that watches an alluring world in its brain, listens to symphonies

and the twittering of birds, and smells the rose?

The stimulations coming from the eyes, ears, and nose of a human

being travel to the brain as electro-chemical nervous impulses. In biology,

physiology, and biochemistry books, you can find many details about

how this image forms in the brain. However, you will never come across

the most important fact about this subject: Who is it that perceives these

electro-chemical nervous impulses as images, sounds, odours and sensory

events in the brain? There is a consciousness in the brain that perceives

all this without feeling any need for eye, ear, and nose. To whom

does this consciousness belong? There is no doubt that this consciousness

does not belong to the nerves, the fat layer and neurons comprising the

brain. This is why Darwinist-materialists, who believe that everything is

comprised of matter, cannot give any answer to these questions.

For this consciousness is the spirit created by Allah. The spirit needs

neither the eye to watch the images, nor the ear to hear the sounds. Furthermore,

nor does it need the brain to think.

Everyone who reads this explicit and scientific fact should ponder on

Almighty Allah, should fear Him and seek refuge in Him, He Who

squeezes the entire universe in a pitch-dark place of a few cubic centimeters

in a three-dimensional, coloured, shadowy, and luminous form.

A Materialist Belief

What we have studied so far shows that the theory of evolution is a

claim openly at odds with scientific facts. The theory’s claim regarding the

origin life flies in the face of science, the evolutionary mechanism it proposes

has no evolutionary effect, and fossils show that the necessary intermediate

forms have not lived. In this case, the theory of evolution has to

be jettisoned as an idea contrary to science. As a matter of fact, throughout

history many ideas centred on the world, such as the evolution model,

have been removed from the scientific agenda.

T H E D I S A S T E R S D A R W I N I S M B R O U G H T T 186 O H U M A N I T Y

But the theory of evolution is being determinedly kept on the scientific

agenda. Some people even try to portray criticism of the theory as “an

attack on science.” But why?É

The reason for this situation is that for some people the theory of

evolution has become an indispensable dogmatic belief. These circles are

stubbornly attached to materialist philosophy and are influenced by Darwinism

as the only materialist explanation of nature.

They sometimes openly admit this. Richard Lewontin, a famous

geneticist from Harvard University and at the same time a foremost evolutionist

admits that he is “first a materialist, then a scientist” in these


It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us accept

a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary,

that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an

apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations,

no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to

the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, so we cannot allow

a Divine Foot in the door.155

These words are a clear statement that Darwinism is a dogma kept

alive for the sake of attachment to materialist philosophy. This dogma

considers that nothing exists but matter. For this reason it believes that

non-living, unconscious matter created life. It accepts that millions of living

species, for example birds, fish, giraffes, tigers, insects, trees, flowers,

whales, and human beings emerged from effects which went on within

innate matter, in other words rain and lightning. This is really a belief

contrary to both intelligence and science. But Darwinists continue to

defend this belief in order “not to allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

Everyone who does not look at the origin of living things with a

materialist prejudice will perceive this clear truth: All living things are the

work of a Creator which possesses a superior power, knowledge, and intelligence.

The Creator is God, Who created the whole universe out of nothing,

who designed it in the most perfect manner and created and gave

form to all living things.

T H E M I S C O N C E P T I O N O F E V O L U T I O N 187


1 Robert Wright, The Moral Animal, Vintage Books, New

York: 1994, p.7

2 Anton Pannekoek, Marxism and Darwinism, Translated

by Nathan Weiser, Chicago, Charles H. Kerr &Company,

1912, http://csf.colorado.edu/psn/ marx/Other/


3 Theodore D. Hall, The Scientific Background of the Nazi

“Race Purification” Program, http://www.trufax.org/


4 Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, D.

Appleton and Co., 1896, vol. 2, p.294

5 Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, W.W. Norton

and Company, New York, 1981, p. 72

6 Jacques Barzun, Darwin, Marx, Wagner, Garden City,

N.Y.: Doubleday, 1958, pp.94-95, cited in Henry M.

Morris, The Long war Against God, Baker Book House,

1989, p. 70

7 A.E. Wilder-Smith, Man’s Origin Man’s Destiny, The

Word for Today Publishing, 1993, p.166

8 Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 2nd edition, New

York, A L. Burt Co., 1874, p. 178

9 Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 2nd edition, New

York, A L. Burt Co., 1874, p. 171

10 Godfrey Lienhardt, Social Anthropology, Oxford University

Press, p. 11

11 Benjamin Farrington, What Darwin Really Said, London:

Sphere Books, 1971, pp. 54-56

12 James Ferguson, “The Laboratory of Racism”, New Scientist,

vol. 103, (September 1984, p. 18)

13 Lalita Prasad Vidyarthi, Racism, Science and Pseudo-Science,

Unesco, France, Vend.me, 1983. p. 54

14 David N. Menton, Ph.D., The Religion of Nature: Social

Darwinism, St. Louis MetroVoice, September 1994, Vol. 4,

No. 9

15 Stephen Jay Gould, Ever Since Darwin, W. W. Norton &

Company, New York 1992, p. 217

16 Stephen Jay Gould, Ever Since Darwin, W. W. Norton &

Company, New York 1992, p. 220

17 Alaeddin Þenel, Irk ve IrkÝlÝk D.ß.ncesi (The Idea of

Race and Racism), Ankara: Bilim ve Sanat YayÝnlarÝ,

1993, p. 67-68

18 Thomas Gossett, Race: The History of an Idea in America,

Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p.81

cited in Alaeddin Þenel, Irk ve IrkÝlÝk D.ß.ncesi (The

Idea of Race and Racism), Ankara:Bilim ve Sanat

YayÝnlarÝ, 1993, p. 68

19 Jacques Attali, 1492, Librairie Arthme Fayard, 1991,


20 Franois de Fontette, Le Racisme (Racism), 6th ed. Presses

Universitaires de France, 1988, p. 40-41

21 James Joll, Europe Since 1870: An International History,

Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1990, p. 102-103

22 Kenneth J. Hs.., reply to comment on “Darwin’s Three

Mistakes”, Geology, vol. 15, April 1987, p. 377

23 S.leyman Kocabaß, Hindistan Yolu ve Petrol UÛruna

YapÝlanlar: T.rkiye ve Üngiltere (The Road to India and

What Has Been Done for the Sake of Oil: Turkey and

Britain), 1.baskÝ, Üstanbul: Vatan YayÝnlarÝ, 1985, p. 231

24 Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin,

Vol.I, 1888. New York D. Appleton and Company,


25 Henry M. Morris, The Long War Against God, Baker

Book House, 1989, p. 70

26 Henry M. Morris, The Long War Against God, Baker

Book House, 1989, p. 71

27 Thomas Gossett, Race: The History of an Idea in America,

Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963,


28 Alaeddin Þenel, Irk ve IrkÝlÝk D.ß.ncesi (The Idea of

Race and Racism), Ankara:Bilim ve Sanat YayÝnlarÝ,

1993, p. 85-90

29 Henry Fairfield Osborn, “The Evolution of Human

Races”, Natural History, April 1980, p. 129 Ð reprinted

from January/February 1926 issue

30- Franois de Fontette, Le Racisme (Racism), 6th ed. Presses

Universitaires de France, 1988, p. 101

31 Franois de Fontette, Le Racisme (Racism), 6th ed. Presses

Universitaires de France, 1988, p. 105

32 Jani Roberts, How New-Darwinism Justified Taking Land

From Aborigines and Murdering Them in Australia,


33 Jani Roberts, How New-Darwinism Justified Taking Land

From Aborigines and Murdering Them in Australia,


34 Jani Robert, How New-Darwinism Justified Taking Land

From Aborigines and Murdering Them in Australia,


35 Creation Ex Nihilo, Vol 14, No. 2, March-May 1992, p. 17

36 Philadelphia Daily News, 28 April 1997

37 Philips Verner Bradford, Harvey Blume, Ota Benga, The

Pygmy in the Zoo, Canada, October 1993 p. 269

38 Philips Verner Bradford, Harvey Blume, Ota Benga, The

Pygmy in the Zoo, Canada, October 1993, p. 267

39 Philips Verner Bradford, Harvey Blume, Ota Benga, The

Pygmy in the Zoo, Canada, October 1993, p. 266

40 Philips Verner Bradford, Harvey Blume, Ota Benga, The

Pygmy in the Zoo, Canada, October 1993, p.264

41 Philips Verner Bradford, Harvey Blume, Ota Benga, The

Pygmy in the Zoo, Canada, October 1993, p. 259

42 Bryan Appleyard, Brave New Worlds, Harper Collins

Publishers, London 1999, p. 49-50

43 Alaeddin Þenel, Irk ve IrkÝlÝk D.ß.ncesi (The Idea of

Race and Racism), Ankara:Bilim ve Sanat YayÝnlarÝ,

1993, pp.62-6

44 War Against Religion http://www.geocities.com/


45 J. Tenenbaum., Race and Reich, Twayne Pub., New York,

p. 211, 1956; cited by Jerry Bergman, Darwinism and the

Nazi Race Holocaust,


46 L.H. Gann, “Adolf Hitler, The Complete Totalitarian”,

The Intercollegiate Review, Fall 1985, p. 24; cited in Henry

M. Morris, The Long war Against God, Baker Book

House, 1989, p. 78

47 K. Ludmerer., Eugenics, In: Encyclopedia of Bioethics,

Edited by Mark Lappe, The Free Press, New York, p.

457, 1978; cited by Jerry Bergman, Darwinism and the

Nazi Race Holocaust, http://www.trueorigin.org/ holocaust.


48 G. Stein., Biological science and the roots of Nazism,

American Scientist 76(1):p. 54, 1988; cited by Jerry

Bergman, Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust,


49 Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, M.nchen: Verlag Franz Eher

Nachfolger, 1993, p. 44, 447-448; cited by A.E. Wilder

Smith, Man’s Origin Man’s Destiny, The Word For

Today Publishing 1993, p. 163, 164

50 P. Weindling, Health, Race and German Policies Between

National Unification and Nazism 1870-1945, Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1989, cited by Jerry

Bergman, Darwinism and The Nazi Race Holocaust,


51 Theodore D. Hall, The Scientific Background of the Nazi

“Race Purification” Program, http://www.trufax.org/


52 Theodore D. Hall, The Scientific Background of the Nazi

“Race Purification” Program, http://www.trufax.org/


53 John J. Michalczyk (editor), Nazi Medicine: In The Shadow

of The Reich (documentary film), First Run Features,

New York, 1997

54 George J. Stein, “Biological Science and the Roots of

Nazism”, American Scientist, vol. 76, (January/February

1988), p. 52

55 Sir Arthur Keith, Evolution and Ethics, New York: G.P.

Putnam’s Sons, 1947, p. 14

56 Robert Clark, Darwin: Before and After, Grand Rapids

International Press, Grand Rapids, MI, 1958. p.115

57 A. Keith, Evolution and Ethics, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New

York, p. 230, 1946, cited by Jerry Bergman, Darwinism

and the Nazi Race Holocaust, http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.


58 Francis Schaeffer, How Shall We Then Live?, Old Tappan,

N.J.: Revell, 1976, p. 151; cited in Henry M. Morris, The

Long war Against God, Baker Book House, 1989, p. 78

59 A. Hitler, Hitler’s Secret Conversations 1941Ð1944,

With an introductory essay on The Mind of Adolf

Hitler by H.R. Trevor-Roper, Farrar, Straus and Young,

New York, p. 117, 1953; cited by Jerry Bergman, Darwinism

and the Nazi Race Holocaust, http://www.trueorigin.


60 Daniel Gasman, The Scientific Origins of National Socialism:

Social Darwinism in Earnest Haeckel and the German

Monist League, New York: American Elsevier Press,

1971, p. 168

61 Robert E.D. Clark, Darwin: Before and After, London:

Paternoster Press, 1948, p. 115, cited in Henry M. Morris,

The Long War Against God, Baker Book House, 1989,

p. 81

62 Denis Mack Smith, Mussolini, p. 14

63 John P. Diggins, Mussolini and Fascism, Princeton University

Press, 1972, p. 15

64 .aÛdaß Liderler Ansiklopedisi (The Encyclopaedia of

Contemporary Leaders), Vol. 2, p. 669

65 James Joll, Europe Since 1870: An International History,

Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1990, p. 164

66 M.F. Ashley-Montagu, Man in Process (New York:

World. Pub. Co. 1961) pp. 76, 77 cited in Bolton Davidheiser,

W E Lammers (ed) Scientific Studies in Special

Creationism, 1971, p. 338-339

67 A.E. Wiggam, The New Dialogue of Science, Garden Publishing

Co., Garden City, NY, p. 102, 1922; cited by Jerry

Bergman, Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust,


68 Robert Clark, Darwin: Before and After, Grand Rapids

International Press, Grand Rapids, MI, 1958., s. 115-116;

cited by Jerry Bergman, Darwinism and the Nazi Race

Holocaust, http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.htm

69 Jerry Bergman, Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust,


70 Earnest Haeckel, The History of Creation: Or the Development

of the Earth and Its Inhabitants by the Action of Natural

Causes, Appleton, New York, 1876, p. 170; cited by

Jerry Bergman, Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust,

http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust. htm

71 Theodore D. Hall, The Scientific Background of the Nazi

“Race Purification” Program, http://www.trufax.org/


72 Marshall Hall, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao et al: The Role of

Darwinian Evolutionism in Their Lives, http://


73 Max Nordau, The Philosophy and Morals of War, North

American Review 169 (1889):794 cited in Richard Hofstadter,

Social Darwinism in American Thought, Boston:

Beacon Press, 1955, p.171)

74 Tempo Magazine, 14 July 1991

75 http://chefsseite.tsx.org/

76 Sabah Daily, 12 August 2000

77 San Francisco Examiner, 1 April1997

78 Conway Zirkle, Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social

Scene, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,

1959, pp. 85-87

79 Conway Zirkle, Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social

Scene, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,

1959, pp. 85-87

80 Conway Zirkle, Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social

Scene, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,

1959, pp. 85-87

81 Stephen Jay Gould, Ever Since Darwin, W. W. Norton &

Company, New York 1992, p. 26

82 Friedrich Engels, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Foreign

Languages Press, Peking 1975, p. 67

83 Gertrude Himmelfarb, Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution,

London: Chatto & Windus, 1959, pp. 348-9

84 Friedrich Engels, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Foreign

Languages Press, Peking 1975, p. 67

85 Conway Zirkle, Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social

Scene, (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959), pp.85-


86 Tom Bethell, “Burning Darwin to Save Marx”, Harper’s

Magazine, (December 1978), p.37

87 Karl Marx Biyografi (The Biography of Karl Marx),

.nc. YayÝnevi, p. 368

88 John N. Moore, The Impact of Evolution on the Social Sciences,

Impact No. 52, http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-


89 Marshall Hall, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao et al: The Role of

Darwinian Evolutionism in Their Lives, http://


90- Alan Woods and Ted Grant, Reason in Revolt: Marxism

and Modern Science, London:1993

91- Kent Hovind, The False Religion of Evolution,


92- E. Yaroslavsky, Landmarks in the Life of Stalin, Moscow:

Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1940, pp. 8.;

cited by Paul G. Humber, Stalin’s Brutal Faith, Vital articles

on Science/Creation October 1987, Impact No. 172

93 E. Yaroslavsky, Landmarks in the Life of Stalin, Moscow:

Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1940, pp. 8.;

cited by Paul G. Humber, Stalin’s Brutal Faith, Vital articles

on Science/Creation October 1987, Impact No. 172

94 K. Mehnert, Kampf um Mao’s Erbe, Deutsche Verlags-

Anstalt, 1977

95 Marshall Hall, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao et al: The Role of

Darwinian Evolutionism in Their Lives, http://www.


96 Robert Milner, Encyclopaedia of Evolution 1990 p.81

97 Michael Ruse: The Long March of Darwin, New Scientist

103, August 16, 1984: 35; cited in Henry M. Morris,

The Long war Against God, Baker Book House, 1989,


98 David Jorafsky, Soviet Marxism and Natural Science,

New York: Columbia University Press, 1961, p.4

99 Nicolas Werth, “Le Pouvoir sovi.tique et l’Eglise orthodoxe

de la collectivisation . la Constitution de 1936″,

Revue d’.tudes comparatives Est-Quest nos. 3-4, 1993,

pp.41-49 cited by St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth,

Jean-Louis Pann., Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek,

Jean-Louis Margolin, The Black Book of Communism,

Harvard University Press, 1999, p. 172

100 Samuel T. Francis, The Soviet Strategy of Terror, The Heritage

Foundation, 1981, p. 46

101 V. I. Lenin; Collected Works, 4th English Edition,

Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1964, p. 180

102 V. I. Lenin, The Proletarian Revolution and The Renegade

Kautsky (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing

House, 1952, pp. 32-33, 20)

103 V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Moscow, Volume 35, p. 238

104 V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 24, pp. 38-41, Progress

Publishers, Moscow, 1964.

105 V.I. Lenin, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, (Complete Collected

Works), Moscow, Gos.-izd-vo polit. Lit-ry, 1958-1966,

35: 311, cited by St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-

Louis Pann., Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-

Louis Margolin, The Black Book of Communism, Harvard

University Press, 1999, p. 59

106 Ann Arbor, Leon Troki, Terrorism or Communism, University

of Michigan Press, 1961, p. 58

107 Protokoly zasedanii VSIK 4-sozyva, Stenograficheskii

otchet (Protocols of the sessions of the CEC in the fourth

phase: Stenographic account) (Moscow, 1918), p. 250

108 Harrison E. Salisbury, “Reading The Gulag Archipelago is

like no other reading experience of our day,” Book-of-the-

Month Club NEWS, Midsummer, 1974, pp. 4,5.

109 Russian Center for the Conservation and Study of Historic

Documents, Moscow, 17/84/75/59, cited by

St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Pann.,

Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin,

The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 100

110 Quoted in V.I. Brovkin, Behind the Front Lines of the Civil

War: Political Parties and Social Movements in Russia, 1918-

1922, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 353,

cited by St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis

Pann., Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis

Margolin, The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 101

111 Krasnyi Mech, no.1 (18 August 1919), p.1 cited by

St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Pann.,

Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin,

The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 102

112 St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Pann.,

Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin,

The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 119

113 Quoted in Julian Gorkin, Les Communistes contre la r.volution

espagnole, Paris: Belfond, 1978, p.181, cited by

St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Pann.,

Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin,

The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 342

114 St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Pann.,

Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin,

The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 29

115 St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Pann.,

Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin,

The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 470-471

116 St.phane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Pann.,

Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin,

The Black Book of Communism, Harvard University

Press, 1999, p. 4

117 P.J. Darlington, Evolution for Naturalists, 1980, s. 243-244

118 Edward E. Ericson, Jr., “Solzhenitsyn – Voice from the

Gulag”, Eternity, October 1985, pp. 23, 24.

119 Alaeddin Þenel, Irk ve IrkÝlÝk D.ß.ncesi (The Idea of Race

and Racism), Ankara: Belem ve Sanat YayÝnlarÝ, 1993, p.


120 Herbert Spencer, Social Status, 1850, p. 414-415

121 The Challenge of Facts and Other Essays, as quoted in

Mason Drukman, Community and Purpose in America: An

Analysis of American Political Theory, New York: McGraw-

Hill, 1971, p. 202.

122 R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution 1990 p. 412

123 Thomas F. Gossett, Race: The History of an Idea in America,

Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p. 170

124 Chauncey Depew, My Memories of Eighty Years, New York,

1922, pp.383-384

125 James J. Hill, Highways of Progress, New York, 1910, pp.

126, 137

126 Andrew Carnegie, Autobiography, Boston 1920, p. 327,

cited in Richard Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American

Thought, Boston: Beacon Press, 1955, p. 45

127 Andrew Carnegie, Wealth, North American Review 148,

1889, s. 655-657, cited in Richard Hofstadter, Social Darwinism

in American Thought, Boston: Beacon Press, 1955,

pp. 45-46

128 Kenneth J. Hs., “Darwin’s Three Mistakes”, Geology,

vol.14, June 1986, p. 534

129 Bolton Davidheiser, W E Lemmerts (ed) Scientific Studies

in Special Creationism, 1971 p. 338-339.

130 H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation, 1966 p.145

131 Ernst Mayr, “Interview”, Omni, March/April 1988, p. 46;

cited in Henry M. Morris, John D. Morris, The Modern Creation

Triology, Vol. 3, p. 12

132 Kenneth A. Ham, The Lie Evolution, Master Books, April

1997, p. 84

133 Theodosius Dobzhansky, “Ethics and Values in Biological

and Cultural Evolution”, Zygon, the Journal of Religion and

Science, as reported in Los Angeles Times, part IV (June

16, 1974), p. 6

134 Stephen Jay Gould, Ever Since Darwin, W. W. Norton &

Company, New York 1992, p. 223

135 Richard Dawkins, Unweaving The Rainbow, Houghton

Mifflin Company, Newyork, 1998, p. ix)

136 Earthwatch, March 1989, p. 17; cited in Henry M. Morris,

The Long War Against God, Baker Book House, 1989, p. 57

137 Sidney Fox, Klaus Dose, Molecular Evolution and The Origin

of Life, New York: Marcel Dekker, 1977. p. 2

138 Alexander I. Oparin, Origin of Life, (1936) New York,

Dover Publications, 1953 (Reprint), p.196

139 “New Evidence on Evolution of Early Atmosphere and

Life”, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol 63,

November 1982, p. 1328-1330.

140 Stanley Miller, Molecular Evolution of Life: Current Status of

the Prebiotic Synthesis of Small Molecules, 1986, p. 7

141 Jeffrey Bada, Earth, February 1998, v. 40

142 Leslie E. Orgel, The Origin of Life on Earth, Scientific

American, vol 271, October 1994, p. 78

143 Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the

First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 189

144 Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the

First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 184.

145 B. G. Ranganathan, Origins?, Pennsylvania: The Banner

Of Truth Trust, 1988.

146 Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the

First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 179

147 Derek A. Ager, “The Nature of the Fossil Record”, Proceedings

of the British Geological Association, vol 87, 1976, p. 133

148 Douglas J. Futuyma, Science on Trial, New York: Pantheon

Books, 1983. p. 197

149 Solly Zuckerman, Beyond The Ivory Tower, New York:

Toplinger Publications, 1970, ss. 75-94; Charles E. Oxnard,

“The Place of Australopithecines in Human Evolution:

Grounds for Doubt”, Nature, vol 258, p. 389

150 J. Rennie, “Darwin’s Current Bulldog: Ernst Mayr”, Scientific

American, December 1992

151 Alan Walker, Science, vol. 207, 1980, p. 1103; A. J. Kelso,

Physical Antropology, 1st ed., New York: J. B. Lipincott

Co., 1970, s. 221; M. D. Leakey, Olduvai Gorge, vol. 3,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971, p. 272

152 Time, November 1996

153 S. J. Gould, Natural History, vol. 85, 1976, p. 30

154 Solly Zuckerman, Beyond The Ivory Tower, New York:

Toplinger Publications, 1970, p. 19

155 Richard Lewontin, “The Demon-Haunted World”, The

New York Review of Books, 9 January, 1997, p. 28.

Many people think that Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a

proven fact. Contrary to this conventional wisdom, recent

developments in science completely disprove the theory.

The only reason Darwinism is still foisted on people by

means of a worldwide propaganda campaign lies in the ideological

aspects of the theory. All secular ideologies and

philosophies try to provide a basis for themselves by relying

on the theory of evolution.

This book clarifies the scientific collapse of the theory of

evolution in a way that is detailed but easy to understand. It

reveals the frauds and distortions committed by evolutionists

to “prove” evolution. Finally it analyzes the powers and

motives that strive to keep this theory alive and make people

believe in it.

Anyone who wants to learn about the origin of living things,

including mankind, needs to read this book.



Many societies that rebelled against the will

of Allah or regarded His messengers as enemies

were wiped off the face of the earth

completely… All of them were destroyedÐ

some by a volcanic eruption, some by a disastrous

flood, and some by a sand storm…

Perished Nations examines these penalties

as revealed in the verses of the Quran and in

light of archaeological discoveries.


The purpose of this book is to warn people

against the day on which they will say “If

only we did not rebel against Allah. If only we

listened to the messengersÉ” and therefore

feel deep regret. This is a summons to live

for the cause of Allah when there is still time.


Fourteen centuries ago, God (Allah) revealed the Qur’an,

the guide to truth for mankind, and summoned all humanity

to seek salvation by following the commandments of

this Book. From the day it was first revealed until Judgement

Day, this final holy Book will remain the sole guide

for humanity. The unprecedented style and the superior

wisdom inherent in the Qur’an is conclusive evidence

confirming that it is the Word of Allah. Apart from this,

there are a number of miracles verifying the fact that the

Qur’an is the revelation of Allah, one of them being that,

1,400 years ago, it declared a number of scientific facts

that have only been established thanks to the technological

breakthroughs of the 20th century. In this book, in

addition to the scientific miracles of the Qur’an, you will

also find messages regarding the future and examples of

its “mathematical miracle.”


They said ‘Glory be to You!

We have no knowledge except what

You have taught us.

You are the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.’

(Surat al-Baqara: 32)

Ruling over the world of science in the 19th century, the materialist philosophy had proposed

that the universe is an uncontrolled heap of matter that existed since eternity. The

discoveries made in the twentieth century, however, entirely refuted this materialist claim.

Today, science has proven that the universe was created from nothing with a Big Bang.

Moreover, all physical balances of the universe are designed to support human life.

Everything from the nuclear reactions in stars to the chemical properties of a carbon atom

or a water molecule, is created in a glorious harmony.

This is the exalted and flawless creation of Allah, the Lord of All the Worlds.

The Creation of the Universe will soon be available also in French and Spanish.