Creationism is fascism. This is not an exaggeration. For the most part Mussolini defined fascism as the identification of the individual with the state. The government thereby becomes the science and the religion of the people. We are they and they are we. The truth can never be doubted in a fascist government/religion for it is political doctrine and not a matter of individual reason or empirical observation. Creationism works much the same. Granted evolution is a theory, but so is gravity a theory. In fact, what makes a theory a good theory is that it can be disproved with a single definitive empirical experiment. Creationism, on the other hand, regardless of its form is driven by white-knuckled believers. Indeed there are some unanswered questions with evolution, as with all good theories, but as yet there has not been a fatal flaw. Intelligent design on the other hand, the most sophisticated form of creationist fascism, has no experiments that can disprove the intelligent designer upon which it is based. One dinosaur bone in the wrong geological strata, however, disproves evolution as we know it. That is why evolution is vastly more likely than creationism to be empirically accurate. That misplaced bone has never been found... yet. Evolution is no more secure than any other scientific theory. It too is based on testable dubitable hypotheses, and that is its strength. The problem with creationism however, is it is rooted in the creationist’s faith in an infantile god that meddles with the creation of individual species. Creationism is indubitable, and that is its weakness. This explains why creationists hold evolution to a different standard than they hold creationism. Creationists require evolution to disprove their happy divinity whereas all they claim they need to do is cast doubts on evolution. Thank God we can doubt evolution; otherwise it would be a variety of fascism too. Evolution in its elegance is without ad hoc gobbledy gook, creationism however is ad hoc ad infinitum. Oh, and if even for an instant you think creationism is not a variety of fascism, ask yourself who would be more likely to physically punish, if not kill, his opponent: the creationist or the evolutionary scientist?
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Abbie Gonzalez
Boy, I would hate to believe in something that could not be doubted. It might make me a fascist!
As long as I doubt what I believe, I'll be fine.
2 - Randy Kirk
Our state run schools treat evolution as fact, as do our state run museums, zoos, and other places where evolution is mentioned. It never says "based on generally accepted theories of evolution," but rather "when birds evolved."
Whose the fascist?
I'll match your doctor and raise you
3 - Keith
Okay, if one dinosaur bone in the wrong stratum disproved the Theory of Evolution as we know it, what do human artifacts (necklaces, iron cookware) found embedded in coal suggest?
4 - Al Barger
James D. Carmine PhD, I could give a rat's ass about the authority you presume to wield by adding PhD to your name.
Further, I would be more circumspect than to call you a "fascist." However, this half-assed little essay certainly does look like bullying. You're the one here trying to intimidate people into acquiescence with your colloquial little worldview. Anyone who disagrees with your theory of how the world came to be is a fascist, like Mussolini. They're a no-good shit to be shunned or mocked.
You didn't even BEGIN to make an argument to justify this hateful assertion.
5 - DrPat
Isn't it ironic? Talking non-stop to prevent any interjection causes the listener to close mind and ears against the verbal barrage. Writing non-stop like this, all one paragraph, has the same effect on the reader.
Take a breath, man! Break up your argument into digestible bites.
You might also look up the word Fascism - "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
6 - andy marsh
Keith says - Okay, if one dinosaur bone in the wrong stratum disproved the Theory of Evolution as we know it, what do human artifacts (necklaces, iron cookware) found embedded in coal suggest?
It suggests that someone was in the wrong place at the wrong time!
7 - PseudoErsatz
Evolutionary Dogmatists can be just as white-knuckled in their beliefs. Oh, and if even for an instant you think Evolutionism is not a variety of fascism, ask yourself who would be more likely to stifle debate in a high school science class: the creationist or the evolutionary scientist?
8 - John Bambenek
Those darn Christians... we should kill them all.
9 - Nancy
Good evolutionists are not white-knuckled in any beliefs, and the regular donnybrooks they engage in at conventions, and the verbal brawls they have in various publications prove. I've never met a more contentious, argumentative, contrary group. It's very close to like being in the vicinity of the post game of a European soccer match. The point is, they MUST be flexible, or become petrified themselves. Just about every discovery or new technology shoots all hypotheses and carefully thought out evolutionary trees straight to hell and everyone has to start at the beginning again. It's a very plastic field; has to be. Not carved in stone (or bone, as some would say) at all.
10 - JR
Oh, and if even for an instant you think Evolutionism is not a variety of fascism, ask yourself who would be more likely to stifle debate in a high school science class: the creationist or the evolutionary scientist?
Too easy. Creationist.
11 - andy marsh
JR - did you go to a HS that taught both? I did and neither theory was stifled in the classroom. One of the theories may have been slightly stifled every first friday of the month when we had to go to church, but the discussions were not stifled in school.
It just amazes me how scared people are of an idea!
12 - JR
JR - did you go to a HS that taught both?
Honestly, I don't remember them teaching either one! My high school was more day care than education.
I do remember Creationism being explained in the science books I saw as a kid; usually at the beginning before they went on to describe how it was supplanted by evolution. Intelligent Design as such wasn't invented yet when I was growing up.
13 - andy marsh
I thought ID and creationism were pretty much the same thing. My point is...the folks that should be against the teaching of anything but creationism aren't! And the folks in public education that should teach it all won't!
14 - gonzo marx
oh andy, you ignorant, misinformed slut..
that is because Evolution is a scinetific Theory..and ID is not..it is metaphysics at best
so let's keep science in the science classroom and metaphysics where it belongs
i have no difficulty with ID being discussed..but NOT in a HS science class
nuff said?
Excelsior!
15 - Dave Nalle
Well, this bit of twaddle certainly isn't the brilliant counterpoint to the recent invasion of Christian book pseudo-reviewers we've had on BC.
Dave
16 - andy marsh
Gonzo...I said ID and creationism...not evolution...I know what evolution is...and BTW...you hurt my feelings...BITCH!
17 - MDE
re: "who would be more likely to stifle debate in a high school science class: the creationist or the evolutionary scientist?"
So high school science class should be a debating society?
Democracy in action! Let's have each class debate and vote on just what constitutes scientific explanation.
Similarly, in English class they can decide what constitutes good grammar.
Mark
18 - andy marsh
MDE...are you saying that different theories shouldn't be taught in school? Only the theory that YOU subscribe to?
19 - MDE
re: "MDE...are you saying that different theories shouldn't be taught"
I'm saying that there is a time and a place for everything under heaven, and that high school biology class isn't the place to debate creationism.
Mark
20 - andy marsh
why not? if half the world actually believes in it...why shouldn't it be bought up in class...how is a kid supposed to know what's right and wrong if he doesn't know both sides of the story?
Is it an ignorance is bliss kinda thing?
21 - gonzo marx
no andy, you silly bastard..
it is the difference between what is SCIENCE and what is NOT
now..i'm calling St. Agnes and telling the nuns yer being a dink, then the Monsigneur will send some Jesuits around to "explain" this shit to you
again
Excelsior!
22 - andy marsh
Man...they used to beat the hell out of me! I'm hiding!
23 - andy marsh
I know I've asked this question before...but isn't evolution a theory as well? or are we distinguishing between scientific theory and other theories?
24 - gonzo marx
yes andy, we are distinguishing between the rigors of scientific Theory and unproven, unfounded declarations with no evidence or experimental data
check the other Thread on this..i have beaten the horse into glue enough to satisfy even you
heh, and now i have your pic on my blog bit..time for some pie throwing if i go to VA...but since yer a home boy, i will even defrost the pie first
Excelsior!
25 - MDE
Andy - I find Evolution to be an unsatisfying and incomplete explanation what with its improbalilities and all. But that doesn't mean that I'm ready to give up on scientific explanation all together.
Mark