🐱 University: Charles Darwin a ‘racist’ because theory of evolution ‘justifies white male superiority’

University: Charles Darwin a ‘racist’ because theory of evolution ‘justifies white male superiority’ | The College Fix

Except the renowned scientist was a fervent opponent of slavery, calling its abolition a 'sacred cause'

www.thecollegefix.com

According to a University of Sheffield teaching and research handbook, theory of evolution mastermind Charles Darwin “held racist views” because his science was used to “justify white male superiority.”

The Telegraph reports Darwin is one of 11 scientists in the so-called “decolonization” guide (titled “Applying a Decolonial Framework to Teaching and Research in Ecology and Evolution”) whose views allegedly “influenced the type of research they carried out and how they interpreted their data.”

Darwin believed his “renowned theory of natural selection justified the view that the white race was superior to others, and used his theory of sexual selection to justify why women were clearly inferior to men,” according to the Sheffield guide.

The handbook tells readers Darwin must be “historically caveated” when professors discuss evolution.

Other scientists in the guide include DNA discoverer James Watson and Carl Linnaeus, a Swedish botanist.

Historians say the Sheffield handbook is “unhistorical, misleading” and “authoritarian.” In Darwin’s case, he was fervently opposed to slavery saying the practice “made his blood boil” and that its abolition was a “sacred cause.”

“Almost everyone in Darwin’s day was ‘racist’ in 21st century terms, not only scientists and naturalists but even anti-slavery campaigners and abolitionists,” said Professor James Moore, a Darwin biographer. “What set his ‘racism’ apart – and makes him more like us today – was his profound conviction that all the human races are ‘family’, sisters and brothers.


“Darwin’s wokeness was most obvious in his maintaining the full common humanity and unity of the races in the face of a rising anthropology that insisted the races were in fact separately originated and unrelated species, thus offering justification of atrocities that Darwin is now blamed for.”

From the story:

Prof Nigel Biggar, an Oxford historian, added: “During Darwin’s lifetime the British Empire was busy emancipating slaves across the world.
“The ‘decolonising’ assumption that ‘colonial mapping’ was all about oppression is false, and the judgement that Darwin should be damned by association is morally stupid.
“Before propagating this ideology, did Sheffield University secure the consent of academic staff, and does it now allow for conscientious objection? If not, its conduct is authoritarian and arguably a violation of academic freedom.”
The latest move to decolonise the sciences and maths follows plans to diversify Sheffield’s engineering degrees, leaked to The Telegraph, taking aim at Sir Isaac Newton as a potential beneficiary of “colonial-era activity” whose rule of gravity requires context. …
The universities minister, Michelle Donelan, has previously warned that campuses risk mirroring the Soviet Union by “censoring history” with decolonising efforts.

A spokesman said Sheffield is “not removing key historical figures from [the] curriculum, but […] adding those who have also made significant contributions to the fields of maths, science and engineering that are not currently represented.”

Read the article.

 

[Honka Honka Burning Love]

I would just remove this unis accreditation at this point. Because it is clearly too fucking stupid to deserve it.

I bet if we looked up the people who decide which Unis get Accreditation, and the history of how that system got started..we would find ourselves a fun rabbit hole that would lead us to want to drink ourselves stupid.

 

[Lone MacReady]

Yes, we have been watching in real time the death of the meritocracy, and Idiocracy is quickly becoming the "norm".

 

[Kosher Dill]

Poor Charles Darwin has had such an ignominious afterlife. Everyone who doesn't like evolution (or a particular interpretation of it) seems to feel the need to go after him personally. Back during the heyday of Christian fundamentalism, they used to circulate stories of Darwin "recanting" the theory of evolution on his deathbed, as if that would somehow negate the whole thing. Now we're seeing the same thing from woke radicals, just with different supposed sins tacked onto the man's record.

The only other example of this I can think of in modern times is the German rejection of Einstein's relativity as "Jewish science".

 

[Fanatical Pragmatist]

Social Darwinism is not based on Darwinist thought. It's a secular ideology most often linked with fascism and Communism.

The problem though is these pussies cry "social darwinizms!!!" almost as fast as they cry racism.
"Don't think we should give everyone infinite gibsmedats? SOSHUL DARWINIZUM!111"
"Don't think you should get the vax to save deathfats from covid? SOSHUL DARWINIZUM!11"
"Don't think Lucas Werner deserves a government-provided fartbox? SOSHUL DARWINIZUM!11"
"Don't want to give all the joggers reparations? RAYCIZM AND SOSHUL DARWINIZUM!11"

Let me tell you about the real OG kangs and that backstabbin' coon Yakub. See we wuz building rockets n' shit when this nigga Yakub got roasted for having a bitch-ass melon head by the real OGs. So this coon plotted in secret and used his niggaology science to genetically engineer a golem race out of pigs, dogs, and his own coon DNA. This gave birth to the evil albinoid race of the wh*toids. These cracks ass bitches started stealin' our women n' shit and taking credit for our accomplishments! Us brothas could have destroyed Yakub but we wuz doing productive shit or somethin' I dunno. Eventually due to inter-breeding other "races" were made, and those with less melanin had less soul and that my nigga is the real history of the world.

CAN A NIGGA GET A DAT'S RIGHT?!

Spoiler: Some Niggaology.

View attachment 2158295
View attachment 2158296
View attachment 2158297

Your ancestors should have been nicer to Yakub.

 

[Just Another Apocalypse]

University: Charles Darwin a ‘racist’ because theory of evolution ‘justifies white male superiority’ | The College Fix

Except the renowned scientist was a fervent opponent of slavery, calling its abolition a 'sacred cause'

www.thecollegefix.com

According to a University of Sheffield teaching and research handbook, theory of evolution mastermind Charles Darwin “held racist views” because his science was used to “justify white male superiority.”

The Telegraph reports Darwin is one of 11 scientists in the so-called “decolonization” guide (titled “Applying a Decolonial Framework to Teaching and Research in Ecology and Evolution”) whose views allegedly “influenced the type of research they carried out and how they interpreted their data.”

Darwin believed his “renowned theory of natural selection justified the view that the white race was superior to others, and used his theory of sexual selection to justify why women were clearly inferior to men,” according to the Sheffield guide.

The handbook tells readers Darwin must be “historically caveated” when professors discuss evolution.

Other scientists in the guide include DNA discoverer James Watson and Carl Linnaeus, a Swedish botanist.

Historians say the Sheffield handbook is “unhistorical, misleading” and “authoritarian.” In Darwin’s case, he was fervently opposed to slavery saying the practice “made his blood boil” and that its abolition was a “sacred cause.”

“Almost everyone in Darwin’s day was ‘racist’ in 21st century terms, not only scientists and naturalists but even anti-slavery campaigners and abolitionists,” said Professor James Moore, a Darwin biographer. “What set his ‘racism’ apart – and makes him more like us today – was his profound conviction that all the human races are ‘family’, sisters and brothers.


“Darwin’s wokeness was most obvious in his maintaining the full common humanity and unity of the races in the face of a rising anthropology that insisted the races were in fact separately originated and unrelated species, thus offering justification of atrocities that Darwin is now blamed for.”

From the story:


A spokesman said Sheffield is “not removing key historical figures from [the] curriculum, but […] adding those who have also made significant contributions to the fields of maths, science and engineering that are not currently represented.”

Read the article.

Decolonising science

Sheffield University, in the north of England, is determined to ‘decolonise’ its science curriculum. This leads to some bizarre consequences and reveals the ...

m.youtube.com

History debunked did a video...

 

[Agent Abe Caprine]

How long until the "woke" start believing that the earth is only 6000 years old and dinosaurs roamed the earth during roman times?

That's the moderate form of young Earth creationism. The hardcore form believes the Earth is 6000 years old and that fossils are tests of belief. Some believe the Devil put the fossils on Earth to deceive. Basically, the idea is that dinosaurs never existed.

 

[murdered meat bag]

What will replace creationism and the theory of evolution? Some African creation myth?

it'd be the religion of now viewed by progressive lens. whatever, however right now is, is how it was, is and will be. earlier is evil, backwards and obsolete. later? later is just a better now.

taking african creation myths is appropriation. was, is, and will always be.

 

[Merrick]

This was predictable based on their denial of IQ as well as differences between the sexes.

Charles Darwin a ‘racist’ because theory of evolution ‘justifies white male superiority'

Well, if the shoe fits ...

 

[Unassuming Local Guy]

What's the difference between a university and a church? The priests actually read the books they talk about.

"Evolution doesn't imply superiority" is quite literally Evolution 101. It's one of the first things you learn about it. When moles evolved to be blind, they became weaker in a very major way, but in their very specific niche it was actually an improvement. They're not better, they're just different. That's evolution.

You have tenured university professors who literally don't know what the fuck they're talking about getting mad at a fictional reality they hallucinated while high off their ass on Woke, and kids have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for the privilege to essentially watch a lunatic make baseless assumptions and then coerce everyone else into agreeing with them.

I really don't see any future except one that involves a complete collapse of the entire university system, establishment backing or not. Nobody but an absolute moron will trust anything that comes out of a university and people with degrees will be looked at the same way as people trained in crystal healing.

 

[StraightShooter2]

University: Charles Darwin a ‘racist’ because theory of evolution ‘justifies white male superiority’ | The College Fix

Except the renowned scientist was a fervent opponent of slavery, calling its abolition a 'sacred cause'

www.thecollegefix.com

According to a University of Sheffield teaching and research handbook, theory of evolution mastermind Charles Darwin “held racist views” because his science was used to “justify white male superiority.”

The Telegraph reports Darwin is one of 11 scientists in the so-called “decolonization” guide (titled “Applying a Decolonial Framework to Teaching and Research in Ecology and Evolution”) whose views allegedly “influenced the type of research they carried out and how they interpreted their data.”

Darwin believed his “renowned theory of natural selection justified the view that the white race was superior to others, and used his theory of sexual selection to justify why women were clearly inferior to men,” according to the Sheffield guide.

The handbook tells readers Darwin must be “historically caveated” when professors discuss evolution.

Other scientists in the guide include DNA discoverer James Watson and Carl Linnaeus, a Swedish botanist.

Historians say the Sheffield handbook is “unhistorical, misleading” and “authoritarian.” In Darwin’s case, he was fervently opposed to slavery saying the practice “made his blood boil” and that its abolition was a “sacred cause.”

“Almost everyone in Darwin’s day was ‘racist’ in 21st century terms, not only scientists and naturalists but even anti-slavery campaigners and abolitionists,” said Professor James Moore, a Darwin biographer. “What set his ‘racism’ apart – and makes him more like us today – was his profound conviction that all the human races are ‘family’, sisters and brothers.


“Darwin’s wokeness was most obvious in his maintaining the full common humanity and unity of the races in the face of a rising anthropology that insisted the races were in fact separately originated and unrelated species, thus offering justification of atrocities that Darwin is now blamed for.”

From the story:


A spokesman said Sheffield is “not removing key historical figures from [the] curriculum, but […] adding those who have also made significant contributions to the fields of maths, science and engineering that are not currently represented.”

Read the article.

Well that's not entirely inaccurate.

Anyway, I'm honestly shocked that anyone (besides incels and rape-apologists) other than a very limited niche of professionals still believes in evolution in the 21st century anyway - it's just an outdated, Victorian era collage of mumbo-jumbo that dates back to a day and age when less than 5% of the population was even literate, predicated on shaky sciences and methodologies that go back to the 17-18th centuries anyway. There are so many superior fields of intellectual thought and speculation today that it's effectively rendered obsolete in every meaningful sense - so most likely the mindless anti-intellectual parroting of it is just the result of dumb people who've never gradated above and beyond whatever outdated, mass-market, 6th-grade reading level rote indoctrination was passed off to them and the general populace as "education" to begin with.

This was predictable based on their denial of IQ as well as differences between the sexes.



Well, if the shoe fits ...

The reality, of course is that a black scientist is going to have a higher IQ than a white meth-head, so any silly and solipsistic "arguments" about IQ differences which result in merit denial, don't really serve any purpose beyond the amusement of lonely white rape-obsessed incels who are never going to have an IQ above 90-100 to begin with, regardless of their skin color or melanin levels.

Similarly, differences between the sexes are only applicable in very limited contexts, such as specific types of interactions between members of the same or opposite sexes - so if they're misused in a way as to deny the reality of merit on the part of individuals, then postulating about them is likewise just a useless form of mental masturbation.

 

[OvercookedBacon]

Let me tell you about the real OG kangs and that backstabbin' coon Yakub. See we wuz building rockets n' shit when this nigga Yakub got roasted for having a bitch-ass melon head by the real OGs. So this coon plotted in secret and used his niggaology science to genetically engineer a golem race out of pigs, dogs, and his own coon DNA. This gave birth to the evil albinoid race of the wh*toids. These cracks ass bitches started stealin' our women n' shit and taking credit for our accomplishments! Us brothas could have destroyed Yakub but we wuz doing productive shit or somethin' I dunno. Eventually due to inter-breeding other "races" were made, and those with less melanin had less soul and that my nigga is the real history of the world.

CAN A NIGGA GET A DAT'S RIGHT?!

Spoiler: Some Niggaology.

View attachment 2158295
View attachment 2158296
View attachment 2158297

Ahem. I believe the correct response is a hearty "sheeeeeiiiiit".

 

[Maxxicus Callahan]

The phrase 'race' in the full title of the Origin of the species is not referring to the modern convention of race.
Here's a cheerful old man explaining why this is genuinely retarded. They have since pulled the document for being so retarded.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=rYMKtS97wpQ

Wow, this is wild I mean how can this actually be written at a University level?! I had my doubts about the SJW staying power thinking things would level out after the culture wars of 2016 but this is becoming more and more absurd and alienating to the average person who just rolls their eyes when having to absorb this introspective woke scolding.

It will have to end somewhere eventually. Unfortunately it will probably lead to a reactionary backlash or the loss of credibility and a moral conundrum for post-secondary institutions. I'd prefer it if white liberals didn't feel the need to self humiliate and downplay their own culture its not as good a look as they think it is to marginalized people. It shouldn't have to be said but white Europeans are not uniquely evil colonizers and black, brown and indigenous people are not inherently more moral and good. Its stupid to even have to say this and now even the CIA is getting woke along with every large multi-national corporation that abuses slave labour in their supply chains and exploits its workers while putting BLM hashtags on their twitter feed.

If social justice is so important to post-secondary institutions then make all education lectures, papers and journals freely available for anyone with an internet connection to access. Let go of all intellectual property rights for education and really push for free open source information to be available to the masses. The more convoluted the language becomes and the more conversations turn into a minefield for wrong think the more it just comes across like excessive gatekeeping to keep university access narrow and limited to the privileged and woke. Prejudice against people who aren't educated seems to be one of the last openly acceptable forms of prejudice in society. It annoys me greatly that this runs counter to leftism in principle and yet its all lumped together and actual leftists get called class reductionists when criticizing idpol.

From the esteemed anti-colonial settlers at Hammer City

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

So is Darwin's Deadly Legacy and other weird ass creationist documentaries now considered fact? Creationists the world over are jumping for joy. Well, at least until they come up with "critical evolutionary theory" or whatever that says species evolve based on how oppressed they are or whatever (expect it to win a Nobel Prize).

The only other example of this I can think of in modern times is the German rejection of Einstein's relativity as "Jewish science".

Funny enough, a few creationists like Andrew Schlafly of Conservapedia infamy also reject Einstein's relativity because it implies moral relativity which contradicts the Bible. Lesser known than "Deutsche Physik" is that there were Nazi versions of biology (of course), chemistry (which says atomic theory is bullshit, especially that Jew Niels Bohr's version), and even math (different races do math differently and only Aryans can properly understand reality).

I would also recommend the "World Ice Theory" which Hitler supported since it was good Aryan science but didn't get the support of Nazi colle. Or famously how the Soviets rejected Mendelian genetics and Darwinian natural selection because that was a bunch of capitalist bullshit.

 

[W00K #17]

I fucking predicted this would happen about a year ago. Seems that both Christianity and the religion of science touted by so many militant atheist neck beards are now considered politically uncouth.

What will replace creationism and the theory of evolution? Some African creation myth?

Yakub

 

[Enjoy_the_Soylence]

Creationists used to 'concern troll' biologists with this exact argument ~15 years ago. Full circle.

 

[Lord_Inquisitor_Kryptman]

As a Christian I am amused where this will go. The left-leaning gnostic types who virulently oppose creationism have always prized themselves on intellectual supremacy because they follow "science." I just wonder if they will remain true to their convictions or abandon the whole concept of evolution because their woke masters told them to?

 

[Tleilaxian]

The reality, of course is that a black scientist is going to have a higher IQ than a white meth-head, so any silly and solipsistic "arguments" about IQ differences which result in merit denial, don't really serve any purpose beyond the amusement of lonely white rape-obsessed incels who are never going to have an IQ above 90-100 to begin with, regardless of their skin color or melanin levels.

Lol, is someone still seething about when they found out that Koko the Gorilla had a higher IQ than the Black average?

 

[Penis Drager]

Friendly reminder that creationists were calling Darwin a racist before it was cool.

 

[Stoneheart]

The reality, of course is that a black scientist is going to have a higher IQ than a white meth-head

Yeah but in the same way chinks have a high IQ... you need a soul to be creative and negroes lack it.

 

[queue-anon]

I love when they tell on themselves that they do, in fact, think certain races are innately inferior to whites.

Thanks to their hard work, I'm now agnostic on this issue whereas, for most of my life, I would have stridently argued that there are no innate differences.