Much good analysis, but do think you underestimate the role that Darwin played in racism. From Descent of Man:
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world."
Much good analysis, but do think you underestimate the role that Darwin played in racism. From Descent of Man:
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world."
If you accept Gould's account of the effect of this idea: "Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory."
I think it's important to emphasize that Darwin was making a prediction, not a recommendation. I'm not familiar with this claim by Gould, but it seems to contradict obvious facts. In between the publication of the Origin and the Descent, race-based slavery in the West, which was justified by biological differences, came to an end. The Nazis were not influenced by Darwin at all, as documented by Bob Richards in "Was Hitler a Darwinian?"
Anti-black racism was first developed by Muslim intellectuals early in the history of Islam, as they had to justify the mass enslavement of the children of Allah. Even nowadays, the colloquial Arabic for a Sub-Saharan African is ‘abd’ — ‘slave’ or ‘creature’: as in Abdullah = Slave of God.
They also developed anti-white racism at the same time and for the same reason. To the extent that racism increased after 1859, it was to “explain” European imperial dominance.
Gobineau’s ‘An Essay On the Inequality of Human Races’ came out in 1855. The demand was there already.
Much good analysis, but do think you underestimate the role that Darwin played in racism. From Descent of Man:
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world."
If you accept Gould's account of the effect of this idea: "Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory."
I think it's important to emphasize that Darwin was making a prediction, not a recommendation. I'm not familiar with this claim by Gould, but it seems to contradict obvious facts. In between the publication of the Origin and the Descent, race-based slavery in the West, which was justified by biological differences, came to an end. The Nazis were not influenced by Darwin at all, as documented by Bob Richards in "Was Hitler a Darwinian?"
Anti-black racism was first developed by Muslim intellectuals early in the history of Islam, as they had to justify the mass enslavement of the children of Allah. Even nowadays, the colloquial Arabic for a Sub-Saharan African is ‘abd’ — ‘slave’ or ‘creature’: as in Abdullah = Slave of God.
They also developed anti-white racism at the same time and for the same reason. To the extent that racism increased after 1859, it was to “explain” European imperial dominance.
Gobineau’s ‘An Essay On the Inequality of Human Races’ came out in 1855. The demand was there already.