Dave Schultz on House Education Committee Resolution 74 - Published in the Houma Courier.

After testifying before the House Education Committee on HCR 74, the resolution to label Darwin and "Darwinist ideology" as racist, I was asked to write an "op-ed" piece for the Houma Courier. Here is that piece:

On Tuesday May 1, the House Education Committee voted in favor of a resolution sponsored by Representative Sharon Weston Broome (HCR 74) to label Darwin and his ideas as racist. Although I personally feel that the removal of racism is an important goal for a just society, and I would normally applaud any actions by the state legislature aimed at reducing racism, I cannot applaud this action. I can't support it because the premise of this resolution is not factual.

Charles Darwin was not a racist, and his ideas can only be taken as racist if distorted. Darwin lived at a time when slavery was common, and through his own words Darwin can be shown to have been an abolitionist. He applauded the fact that England was among the first European countries to end slavery. In a letter to another biologist of his day, Asa Gray, Darwin stated, "Great God how I should like to see the greatest curse on Earth Slavery abolished." Many other statements exist in the historical record that show that Darwin did not stand on the side of racists. In a historical accounting of issues of racism, he was one of the "good guys."

What Charles Darwin did and why he is held in such high regard among scientists and philosophers today is that he made a major contribution to the understanding of life. His major work, "On the Origin of Species, Or, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Existence" was the starting point of the modern field of evolutionary biology. Evolution is now considered the major unifying concept of biology. Evolution, and the patterns it has produced, are so fundamental to our understanding of life that we can say nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution. The human genome project, as stated in HCR 74, has reinforced the commonality of the populations of humans throughout the world. It has also reinforced the commonality of all organisms on earth. We now know we're more like frogs, fish, and flies than anyone had previously imagined. This makes perfect sense in an evolutionary framework. In spite of exponential growth of our knowledge of life, no negative evidence concerning evolution has been uncovered.

Today, with the exception of some institutions controlled by fundamentalist religious organizations, no university omits evolution from its curriculum. Most have one or more evolutionary biologists on their faculty. Many are my colleagues and friends and I can say most evolutionary biologists today are social liberals, not racists.

Surely, if Darwin, or his ideas, were racist in their intent, they would have been recognized as such by biologists, sociologists, and philosophers long before now. Careers are made in academics through the discovery of weaknesses in long-standing ideas. Evolution and Darwin remain in high standing in academia.

The fact that Adolf Hitler and others may have used Darwin's ideas as a basis for their heinous acts does not prove Darwin's ideas were racist. The words of the Bible have been used for purposes that we recognize as immoral today. Hitler claimed to have a strong faith in God and believed that his acts were justifiable within his faith. The misuse of teachings by insane or immoral people does not prove the teachings themselves are wrong or should not be taught.

To negatively sanction Darwin's ideas on evolution because they can be used by misguided people to justify immoral acts is similar to omitting the theory of the atom from textbooks because such knowledge can be used to make very destructive bombs. Darwin's ideas are just as fundamental to biology as the periodic table is to chemistry. Disclaiming either would be a disservice to the students of this state.

If Darwin was not a racist, and if Darwin is held in high regard among many moral people who really understand his ideas, then why did Ms. Broome sponsor this resolution? I strongly suspect that it was part of a larger strategy to frame the whole idea of evolution as racist so that its teaching can be called into question. Most of the people who spoke in favor of this resolution did not speak about racism, they spoke about putative problems with the theory of evolution. The first to speak was Darrell White, leader of the Louisiana Family Forum, a right-wing religious organization. Mr. White has been pushing for restrictions on the teaching of evolution for several years. Others who spoke had similar arguments to Mr. White's. They did not speak strongly to the main issue of the resolution because it was weak, but they strongly support the resolution because it attempts to frame the teaching of evolution in a bad light.

The vote by the committee will bring ridicule on Louisiana. Louisiana will not be seen as an anti-racist leader. This action will be seen for what it truly is, a misguided attempt to label one of the foundations of modern biology as racist in order to drive a wedge between the teaching of evolution and the educational system. For the sake of Louisiana's students, I hope this resolution goes no further.

Dave Schultz

Back to Essays & Editorials

Home
Calendar
News
Who's Who
Congrats/Thanks
Essays & Editorials
Photos
Links
Library