Hitler was influenced by Darwin's theory of evolution

Pro's caseHitler's racial viewsMy opponent has not given any reason why Hitler needed Darwin's theory in order to achieve his goals. Breeding predates Darwin's theory by thousands of years.Hitler's scientific knowledgeMy opponent keeps mentioning genes, but we don't know Hitler knew anything about genes. Anyway, Darwin certainly knew nothing of genes, so the association my opponent is trying to make is invalid.Hitler's knowledge of inferior specimens in breeding would have come from common knowledge of animal breeding. Something humans had been doing long before Darwin's theory. Hitler may have had an awareness of natural selection, but my opponent has not given any evidence that his actions were influenced by it. A creationist often has an awareness of natural selection but we cannot say his actions are influenced by that knowledge.Con's case1. Hitler was a creationistMy opponent's baboon quote is from the Table Talks. I mentioned right at the beginning of my previous round that the Table Talks are unreliable. The French translation, on which the English is based, omits some things from the German and adds new things.[1][2] We have an inconsistency here anyway. For, from my opponent's own source, in the Table Talks Hitler is also quoted as saying,"Where do we acquire the right to believe that man has not always been what he is now? The study of nature teaches us that, in the animal kingdom just as much as in the vegetable kingdom, variations have occurred. They've occurred within the species, but none of these variations has an importance comparable with that which separates man from the monkey — assuming that this transformation really took place."[3]This is why I suggested we leave the Table Talks aside.My point in showing Hitler was a creationist was to show that his views are incompatible with the theory of evolution. My opponent brings up theistic evolution, but someone who believes in theistic evolution is not a creationist. The reliable source, Mein Kampf, shows that Hitler was a creationist.2. Other views of Hitler are incompatible with Darwin's theoryThe resolution is that the theory of evolution influenced Hitler. What I showed in round 2 was that Hitler's views of racial breeding were contrary to the central tenets of Darwinism. Variety is crucial to the process of evolution, so how can Hitler have been influenced by the theory of evolution if his ideas were opposed to variety in the human species?I showed that Darwin said evolution does not consider human standards of perfection. So how can Hitler have been influenced by the theory of evolution if what he was trying to do was to achieve some kind of human perfection?3. Hitler never refers to Darwin or evolution in Mein Kampf."I haven't even read the entire work, but have already seen it referred to as Nature's will."What does "Nature's will" have to do with the theory of evolution? The phrase doesn't appear in On the Origin of Species. Nature's will is a concept that predates Darwin by thousands of years. It is the very conception of religion. 4. Darwin's works were rejected by Nazi authorities."It's obvious that they adapted the principle of natural selection, into their policy of artificial selection. As such, it was necessary to remove literature that would tell the populace that their policies were artificial rather than natural."You do not need the principle of natural selection to remove groups of people from the population.Ethnic cleansing was not invented after Darwin's time. For example, The Book of Jin records that General Ran Min ordered the extermination of the Wu Hu during the Wei–Jie war in the fourth century AD. People with the racial characteristics of a high-bridged nose and bushy beard were killed. 200,000 were massacred in all.[4][5]My opponent's hypothesis about the banning of Darwin's book is that the leaders did not want the people to read it because they would see the killings of Jews and others in a negative light. Here he defeats his own case. If reading Darwin's book would lead people to conclude that the Holocaust was wrong, then obviously the book is not an influence on Nazi policies, but the opposite. 5. "Social Darwinism" does not reflect, nor is it a development of, Charles Darwin's theory of evolution."If there was no link between the two then it wouldn't be called Social "Darwinism""Many of you live in the United States of Columbus, geographically known as North Columbus, part of the continent The Columbuses. The USC is named after Christopher Columbus who was the first to discover it in 1492, as you are taught in school. The President of Columbus is Barack Obama. Except, of course, for some reason the country was named after Amerigo Vespucci, who came after Columbus and only went to South America.[6]The Matthew effect was named after the writer of the Gospel of Matthew. It describes the phenomenon where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.[7][8] No-one thinks the lineFor unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken even that which he hath.[9] actually has anything to do with sociology or economics.These two pages, http://en.wikipedia.org... and http://en.wikipedia.org... are long lists of theorems and laws named after the wrong person. I'll pick out three.Euler's number,e, is the base of the natural logarithm. It was discovered by Jacob Bernoulli.Heine–Borel theorem was proved in 1872 by Émile Borel, and not by Eduard Heine at all.Vigenère cipher was originally described by Giovan Battista Bellaso but misattributed to Blaise de Vigenère.Some more examples of misattribution:Haemophilus influenzae, a bacterium, was named because it was thought to be the cause of influenza, until the virus was discovered in the 1930s.[10]Acanthophis antarcticus (the death adder) is not from Antarctica, but Australia.[11]There are a whole load of misnamed animals here: http://www.curioustaxonomy.net...French fries probably originated in Belgium.[12][13][14]The people of Bologna do not eat spaghetti Bolognese.[15][16]Pompey's Pillar, a 27m tall column in Alexandria, was neither erected by or dedicated to Pompey.[17]The resolution is not "Hitler was influenced by Social Darwinism", that theory which inappropriately bears Darwin's name, but "Hitler was influenced by Darwin's theory of evolution". Do not mistake the two because of the name. That would simply be an error.Social Darwinism is contrary to Darwin's idea of the "struggle for existence", which included co-operation. Darwin said that he meant the term in a "large and metaphorical sense including dependence of one being on another"[18] On my opponent's Christian analogy, no-one disputes that texts can fail to influence their readers. The correct analogy between the Bible and Social Darwinism would be this:A man who is influenced by the Satanic Bible[19] is not a Christian.Just as Hitler, influenced by Social Darwinism, was not influenced by Darwin's theory of evolution, so a man influenced by the Satanic Bible is not influenced by the Bible.[1] http://moourl.com... [2] http://moourl.com...[3] http://rationalwiki.org...[4] Li, Bo; Zheng Yin (Chinese) (2001) 5000 years of Chinese history, Inner Mongolian People's publishing corp[5] http://moourl.com...[6] Amerigo Vespucci by Frederick A. Ober http://moourl.com...[7] http://moourl.com...[8] Malcolm Gladwell, Outliers, Penguin Books. pp30[9] Matthew 25:29, King James Version.[10] http://moourl.com...[11] http://moourl.com...[12] http://moourl.com...[13] http://moourl.com... [14] http://moourl.com...[15] http://moourl.com...[16] http://moourl.com...[17] http://moourl.com...[18] http://moourl.com...[19] http://moourl.com...