Evolution is racist. Why is this concept not being proclaimed more clearly?
Evolution, as is popularly defined, is a gradual continuance and weeding out of physical traits. Therefore all the physical traits that we know as defining race……skin color, shape of the eyes, hair, etc., are all supposed to be due to some evolutionary benefit for survival. So we are told, no trait survives the proces of natural selection unless it benefits survival in some way. Therefore all the races of human got that way due to some evolutionary reason. The shape of the eyes, skin and hair color, all presumably got that way for a reason benefitting survival. This, by definition, is racial.
Notice what I’m NOT saying. This does not mean that every person who holds to evolution is a biased racist. I’m not saying that at all. But I am saying that the system of evolution is a racist system, for it holds that the evolutionary process made distinctions in people that form the races of people we know today.
Now there are several interesting cultural aspects of this. First, no one ever wants to admit that evolution is racist. Even the anti-evolutionists shy away from it. Second, while some will admit that portions of physical characteristics happened by evolution, no one wants to admit that intelligence is race-based and evolution-based (The book The Bell Curve nothwithstanding). Third, most all of society has long rejected social Darwinism, yet they cling tenaciously to biological Darwinism with an emotional ferver. Fourth, if evolution is held to be true, then each race could claim that their racial characteristics were better, at least in a sense of enhancing survival, since it helped them survive when other racial characteristics died out due to natural selection. Being able to claim ‘my race is better for surviving’ fits the modern popular definition of racism. This is exactly what the Nazis taught.
By contrast, we Christians hold that God created us lovingly the way that He desired. Christianity teaches that God created us the way we are, beautifully and gracefully. It seems to me the Christian apologist should be beating this drum up and down main street every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Thomistic Bent 
Wrong. Evolution is organisms adapting to the environment, and neither are perfect. Racism touts that one race is better than another; it makes a moral judgment on those differences. Evolution just states that differences exist between organisms due to the adaptation to the environment. So of course there are going to be differences between a Swedish person and a Nigerian person. It doesn’t mean that one is better than the other.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Before you so quickly consider the bubble burst, I beg to differ.
First, putting moral values on the racial distinctions are not necessary for racism. Racism merely says that there are distinctions between races that are inherent to that race. For example, saying members of a particular race are all faster runners would be racist, even though running speed is not a moral judgment.
Second, you have still not dealt with the issue of intelligence. If evolution is organisms adapting to the environment, and differences exist in the groups you mention due to environmental adaptation, it would appear that certain races would evolve more intelligence than others. But we shy away from this because we immediately recognize the implications that we do not want to face.
Third, similar to the first two, if evolution is as you say, “of course there are going to be differences,” then some are faster runners, some are stronger, some are weaker, some are sickly, some taller, etc. Stereotyping people with these differences is indeed distinguishing races, and is therefore racism. The term ‘better’ as you have used it, would customarily be applied to some cases, such as stronger as opposed to weaker, but not necessarily to others, such as taller as opposed to shorter, for tall is not necessarily ‘better.’
Fourth, the definition you give to evolution is the same that the Nazis gave. They claimed that their race had been made stronger due to having to survive in a more difficult winter climate. The Nazis are universally held to be racist for this.
So the claim for evolution being racist still holds.
You are inventing a narrow definition of racism that fits your argument here. The definition in any dictionary is different. Wikipedia defines it as “Racism is […] the belief that different racial groups are characterized by intrinsic characteristics or abilities AND that some such groups are therefore naturally superior to other.”
Racism is about what ought to be, not what is.
Taller is “better” if you’re a Masai, and have to see approaching lions over five-foot high grass. White is better for Swedes, if they have to absorb Vitamin D from sunlight.
Darwin’s book WAS NOT entitled “The Origin of Species” as many believe it to be.
The Full title is:
“On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of
Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.”
So, please, tell me again how Darwin’s theory of evolution isn’t racist, because I do very much enjoy being lied to and haven’t yet gotten a firm grasp of the appropriate use of sarcasm on the internet.
Ps. POP! goes YOUR bubble, kid.
Well played Hugo. Well played
Pingback: The Fruit of Hitler’s Nazis Came From What Source? | Thomistic Bent
Pingback: Was God Racist When He Commanded The Destruction of Canaan? | Thomistic Bent