Mad rantings about politics, evolution, and microbiology. Comment policy: say what you want, but back it up with an email address. I don't like anonymous trolls.
By way of ScienceBlogling John Lynch, I read that George Gilder calls biologists "Darwinian stormtroopers." In the same NY Times article, John West claims (italics mine):
The [Darwinian] technocrats, he charged, wanted to grab control from "ordinary citizens and their elected representatives" so that they alone could make decisions over "controversial issues such as sex education, partial-birth abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research and global warming."
While Gilder and West don't realize it, they have stumbled across our Evil Darwinist Plot:
That's why we want the embryonic stem cells: to clone our army of Darwinian Stormtroopers!
Who says Hofstadter's paranoid style is dead?
While we're discussing that Times article, what burned me up was this (italics mine):
Some of these thinkers have gone one step further, arguing that Darwin's scientific theories about the evolution of species can be applied to today's patterns of human behavior, and that natural selection can provide support for many bedrock conservative ideas, like traditional social roles for men and women, free-market capitalism and governmental checks and balances."I do indeed believe conservatives need Charles Darwin," said Larry Arnhart, a professor of political science at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, who has spearheaded the cause. "The intellectual vitality of conservatism in the 21st century will depend on the success of conservatives in appealing to advances in the biology of human nature as confirming conservative thought."
These 'thinkers' aren't going "one step further", but one step backwards. What they're describing is called Social Darwinism... which supposedly was the reason William Jennings Bryan got all het up about evolution in the first place.
Morons.
Comments
Haha! That is amazing.
Posted by: Adrian Clement | May 7, 2007 12:29 PM
"The [Darwinian] technocrats, he charged, wanted to grab control from 'ordinary citizens and their elected representatives' so that they alone could make decisions over 'controversial issues such as sex education, partial-birth abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research and global warming.'"
As opposed to the religious righties who sued to overturn Oregon's assisted suicide law (passed by popular referendum) and who want to overturn all state-level decision making on civil unions and (in many cases) abortion by passing federal amendments banning the practice?
Not to mention that righties are in much the same position on many economic issues, i.e., "technocrats" who want to take control from "ordinary citizens and their elected representatives" who want things like single-payer healthcare.
Really, this "elites want to kill you" schtick is tired. Find something new, you assholes.
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | May 7, 2007 1:12 PM
Well, my evil Darwinist plot is an army of cyborg squid, but don't tell them that. It'll spoil the surprise.
Posted by: PZ Myers | May 7, 2007 2:17 PM
"The intellectual vitality of conservatism in the 21st century will depend on" reanimating zombies.
Posted by: blf | May 7, 2007 7:18 PM
thanks
Posted by: mirc | March 16, 2009 5:24 PM