Page 6 The New Citizen June/July 2012
ccording to its own champions,the modern doctrine of “envi-ronmentalism” is rooted in the work of British naturalist Charles Darwin(1809-1882).
The neurotic, third-ratescientist Darwin, in turn, claimed Par-son Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) ashis own spiritual father. This gloomy parson had claimed that the human population expands geometrically (2,4, 8, 16,…), while food supplies growonly arithmetically (1, 2, 3, 4,…).Thus, according to Malthus, therewas necessarily an incessant strugglefor existence in which only the strongsurvive. Darwin declared that the re-sultant “war of each against all” led tothe “survival of the ﬁttest”, a processof “natural selection” that gave rise tonew species.Said Darwin: “[T]he Struggle for Existence amongst all organic beingsthroughout the world … inevitably fol-lows from their high geometrical pow-ers of increase…. This is the doctrineof Malthus, applied to the whole ani-mal and vegetable kingdoms. As manymore individuals of each species are born than can possibly survive; and as, consequently, there is a frequentlyrecurring struggle for existence, it fol-lows that any being, if it vary however slightly in any manner proﬁtable to it-self, … will have a better chance of sur-viving, and thus
be naturally selected.
”In the atmosphere of the England of his day, where the Anglican churchstill held enormous power (half thegraduates of the great universities of Cambridge and Oxford, for instance, became priests), and which main-tained—at least formally—the doc-trine of man as
(created inthe image of God), Darwin hesitated toapply the full implications of his 1859magnum opus
the Origin of Spe-cies by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races inthe Struggle for Life
race.Only after decades of relentless propa-ganda by his supporters to the effectthat man was indeed “simply another animal”, as implied by Darwin’s
, did Darwin, in his 1871
The De- scent of Man and Selection in Relationto Sex
, come roaring out of the closetto claim that his “favoured races” dog-ma applied to “human races as well”.Particularly important in preparingthe ground for this later proclamationwas the work of Darwin’s ﬁrst cousinand cothinker, Sir Francis Galton, infounding the pseudoscience of eugen-ics. Galton coined the term “eugenics”from the roots meaning “well-born” inGreek. Already in 1869 he had pub-lished the book
,in which he argued that mental qual-ities were biologically inherited; thatthe white race was the biologically best endowed to dominate the world;that the English were the cream of thewhite race; and that the Darwin fami-ly itself was living proof of this princi- ple. Darwin wrote to his cousin, “I donot think I have ever in all my life read anything more interesting and origi-nal…. I congratulate you on produc-ing what I am convinced will prove amemorable work.”In his
Descent of Man
Darwinwrote: “I have hitherto only consid-ered the advancement of man from asemi-human condition to that of themodern savage. But some remarks onthe action of natural selection on ci-vilised nations may be worth adding.This subject has been ably discussed by Mr. W. R. Greg, and previously byMr. Wallace and Mr. Galton. Most of my remarks are taken from these threeauthors.” Alfred Russel Wallace had ostensibly “co-discovered” the theoryof evolution with Darwin, while Gregis often credited as the “co-inventor of eugenics” with Galton. Like Gal-ton, Greg, whom a biographer called “one of the chief assailants of Christi-anity in his day”, argued that the Brit-ish were a “superior race”, destined torule the world and to wipe out any oth-er races standing in the way. Darwin’s
attempted to “prove” that themental powers of human beings are nodifferent than those of the higher apes.
Killing the “Unﬁt”
Following Malthus, Galton and Greg, Darwin bemoaned that modernsociety interfered with the “natural se-lection” of the ﬁttest:“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and thosethat survive commonly exhibit a vig-orous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmostto check the process of elimination;we build asylums for the imbecile,the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men ex-ert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There isreason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have suc-cumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propa-gate their kind. No one who has attend-ed to the breeding of domestic animalswill doubt that this must be highly in- jurious to the race of man. It is surpris-ing how soon a want of care, or carewrongly directed, leads to the degen-eration of a domestic race; but except-ing in the case of man himself, hardlyany one is so ignorant as to allow hisworst animals to breed.”Like Malthus, Darwin advocated genocide as the solution to the propa-gation of the unﬁt.And Malthus, like Darwin, had dis-covered nothing: he had plagiarised the 1790 book of a Venetian monk named Giammaria Ortes,
Reﬂectionson the Population of Nations
. Ortes’smasters in the Venetian oligarchy thathad ruled most of the world for centu-ries and had sponsored the rise of theBritish Empire itself, by the middle of the 18th century were hysterical over soaring population growth on the new-ly settled continent of North America.Benjamin Franklin’s beautiful 1751 pamphlet,
Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind
, in which heforecast that the population of Amer-ica would soon overtake that of Brit-ain itself, especially incensed and chal-lenged them.From time immemorial, empireshave practised “population control”(genocide) in order to keep subject populations in check. Thus did theRoman emperors, the Byzantine rul-ers who succeeded them, and the Ve-netians, whose monetarist empireemerged
A.D. 1000 and soonruled the world. The Venetians, in turn,sponsored the rise of the City of Lon-don-centred British Empire, follow-ing the 1688 Glorious Revolution (theinvasion of England by Venetian assetWilliam of Orange). It was anchored on the Bank of England (1694) and the fast-developing dope- and slave-running British East India Compa-ny (BEIC), the largest monopoly inworld history.From shortly after the consolida-tion of British world hegemony againstFrance in the Seven Years’ War of 1756-63, the kingpin of the BEIC wasLord Shelburne, Prime Minister of Britain in 1782-83. Shelburne and hisyoung protégé and successor as PrimeMinister, William Pitt, assigned Mal-thus to plagiarise Ortes, in order to jus-tify the BEIC’s policies of genocide athome and abroad.When the BEIC set up its Hailey- bury College in 1805 to train admin-istrators for its world-girdling empire,Malthus was installed in what histo-ry books call the “world’s ﬁrst chair in political economy”. Generations of BEIC employees, trained by Malthus,oversaw systematic genocide through-out the British Empire, killing tens of millions in India alone, and forcingthem to grow the opium with whichthe BEIC mass-poisoned the peopleof China.Continuing that grand tradition of genocide, King Edward VII knight-ed eugenics-promoter Galton in 1909for his “service to the Empire” in in-venting this new “scientific” ratio-nale for managing the empire. Dar-win’s son Leonard succeeded Galtonas the second and longtime chairman(1911-28) of the British Eugenics Ed-ucation Society, the ﬁrst such organ-isation in the world; other of Darwin’ssons and grandsons were Society ac-tivists as well.“Darwinism” went on to becomethe cornerstone of the new British im- perial science that emerged early inthe 20th century: “ecology”.The name was coined by Dar-win’s chief propagandist onthe European continent, thenotorious German racist and eugenicist Ernst Haeckel.Darwin’s work was knownto be humbug even in his life-time. It achieved fame only because it was championed by the British Crown’s PrivyCouncil, the ruling body of the British Empire. Typi-cal were the efforts of PrivyCouncillor Thomas Huxley,known as “Darwin’s bull-dog”.In fact, theBritish did not dare pub-lish Darwin’s
until1859, just after the death of the univer-sal genius Alexander von Humboldt,the greatest naturalist of the ﬁrst half of the 19th century. Contrary to Dar-win’s notion of each in struggle againstall, Humboldt’s master work,
Cosmos: A Sketch of a Physical Description of the Universe
, had demonstrated uni-versal harmony and the “progressivedevelopment of vegetable and animallife on the globe”, culminating in theemergence of man—of the creativehuman mind, as the pinnacle of thisvast creation:“From the remotest nebulae and fromthe revolving double stars, we have de-scended to the minutest organisms of animal creation, whether manifested inthe depths of ocean or on the surface of our globe, and to the delicate vegetablegerms which clothe the naked decliv-ity of the ice-crowned mountain sum-mit; and here we have been able to ar-range these phenomena according to partially known laws; but other laws of a more mysterious nature rule the high-er spheres of the organic world, in whichis comprised the human species in allits varied conformation, its creative in-tellectual power, and the languages towhich it has given existence.
A physi-cal delineation of nature terminates at the point where the sphere of intellect be- gins, and a new world of mind is opened to our view
.” (Emphasis added.)Even apart from his advocacy of eu-genics and his claim that man was mere-ly another animal, Darwin’s theory had enough holes in it to embarrass a sliceof Swiss cheese. He claimed that eachspecies gradually evolved into anoth-er through minute, favourable changes,mysteriously appearing in this or that in-dividual and being transmitted to proge-ny via the “survival of the ﬁttest”, withthe result of entirely new species. Yet al-ready in Darwin’s time, biologists, ge-ologists and naturalists were well awareof the clear evidence, in geological and paleontological remains from hundredsof millions of years, of repeated sudden
extinctions of species, whereup-on
species would suddenly appear with markedly different characteristicsthan those previously dominant.
The “Second Law of Thermodynamics”
Simultaneous with their sponsorshipof Darwin, Galton and the new “sci-ence of eugenics”, the Privy Council and British Royal Society cooked up anoth-er hoax, one which today underpins the“equilibrium” and “balance of nature”axioms of environmentalism: the Sec-ond Law of Thermodynamics.Spokesmen for the British imperial priesthood of science, such as Rudolf Clausius and Lord Kelvin, took valid,valuable work on heat-powered machinery done by the statesman and genius Sadi Carnot (1796-1832) and exploited those limited, very speciﬁc principles of abiotic machinery inconcocting the “Second Law of Thermodynamics”, which they thenclaimed to be a law of the Universe asa whole. In essence that “law” statesthat machines run down, unless youconstantly add new energy to them:that over time, energy-charged (heated) particles will gradually lose their heatand hence their ability to performwork. This is called entropy: the systemcontinually runs down; unless it isexternally recharged, its heat energywill eventually dissipate to nothing.In this “heat death”, also called an“equilibrium” state, the system has noability to conduct work, and thereforeundergoes no further change.In the early 20th century Sir Arthur Tansley, the Cambridge University protégé of Bertrand Russell who
Darwin’s two highly plagiarised emissions.
Earth, seen from space, presents a blue-green face that’s uniquein our solar system, because of the activity of living matter. Plantscarry out photosynthesis in tiny chlorophyll molecules, in chloro-plasts (inset, right); they use the sun’s energy to generate chem-ical energy, making food that fuels the self-developing biosphere.The notion of “ecosystems” underlies all mod-ern environmentalism. This CEC video provesthat it is a witting lie, cooked up by the noto-rious British imperialist and eugenicist Sir Ar-thur Tansley in 1935. His fraudulent conten-tion was that Nature is always in a mechanis-tic “equilibrium”.
For a free copy call toll-free 1800 636 432or write to: CEC, PO Box 376, Coburg, Vic-toria 3058.