turns out, the world was better off without hitler... for entirely different reasons than we thought.

alright, can we just stop comparing people to hitler?

i'm sorry, but hitler perpetrated a holocaust in the name of racial cleansing and empire building, based on little more than his own prejudices, and ignorant theories.

so i'd rather not hear about how every time someone in any position of power does something that someone else doesn't like, oh no! they are the new hitler!

and you know what? let's cool it even insofar as using the insult "nazi". nazis were bigoted sheep following the orders of a maniacal dictator, hell bent on taking over the world and building a pure race of aryan people. let us not confuse it with anyone who has communist or socialist ideals, or anyone who wishes to make a broad change in society, or anyone who thinks that what you are doing is stupid.

enter kirk cameron.

kirk cameron is the latest to label someone as "hitler", and that someone is darwin.

ok, stow the main sail, and drop anchor, people.

darwin is nothing like hitler.

do i have to explain this?

ok, i will.

cameron is pushing an altered version of on the origin of species that comes complete with a 50 page introduction explaining how jesus is lord, god created everything, darwin was a prejudiced fascist, and how hitler was his intellectual progeny... and of course there is the ever present argument that, since god, by design, is an unprovable, insensible (meaning the 5 senses, not lacking in common sense. though he is lacking in that, he is not so by design, but by criticism) entity, therefore he can neither be proven to not exist. which is a logical fallacy in that this is merely an answer, or solution, without evidence, or any evolution of proof (did i say evolution? am i the new hitler?).

there was a pdf version of this linked to the huffPost article i linked above, but somehow it disappeared. weird...

to simply break this down without veering too far off track. this new origin intro quotes often from hitler's mein kampf, and only one quote indicates hitler's use of darwin's theory of evolution. the rest simply include the word evolution used in a context unrelated to natural selection and adaptation of species. in most of these quotes, hitler has merely used the word evolution to describe something completely different (at times it is the evolution of an idea, others the evolution of a political movement...), and in the one quote in which hitler is clearly using theories based on darwin's own, hitler is usurping them to explain the inherent dominance of a particular race over another. last i checked, darwin's work was called on the origin of species, not on the origin of race. furthermore, hitler was in fact talking about race, and race is not part of the zoological classification system. it goes kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species... the end. in addition, darwin does not propose an inherent dominance (or hierarchy) for species, but rather an evolved fitness for survival based on appropriate adaptations to particular climates and ecosystems. race does not make one more fit for survival, in natural terms, although hitler has proven that, with man's own will as the decider of evolutionary paths, race can be a deciding factor due to the faulty logic of the human brain, and our ability and willingness as a species to follow through on large scale with devastating and violent action, based on that very same faulty logic.

to put the final nail in this coffin, i don't care if hitler was a die hard darwinist, that doesn't make darwin's theories bunk, and it certainly doesn't make darwin hitler.

i loved john stamos in full house but i found myself less interested in his later work, does that make me the new rebecca romijn?

when i was a kid i used to love drawing the xMen, does that make me stan lee?

millions of people claim a belief in the writings of the old and new testaments, and many of them routinely attend church, and often they proselytize, if even on a small scale. does that make them jesus?

hitler believed that god struck down upon the earth, and from this came the instantaneous existence of man, an aryan, atop the highest point of mount everest, and that this man is the father of all humans on the planet. does that make hitler a darwinist?

oh, wait, that makes hitler a creationist.

but i am trying to put a stop to all this hitler talk. when someone is compared to hitler, a very specific comparison is being drawn. there is racial and religious cleansing going on in many places in the world right now, and in the recent past, but i have not heard nearly as many people (if any) drawing the hitler comparison. but why? because the hitler insult is merely a reactionary slur intended to strike a quick blow to the momentum of any movement, and more times than not, it doesn't make much sense. it makes more sense to call a war monger "attila the hun", or to call an empire builder "cyrus the great", or to call a communist "mao", or a witch hunter a "mccarthyist".

but you know what's even better? not trying to draw these connections over vast expanses of history in the first place.

instead, if you have a problem with someone, try to articulate the argument with some degree of logic and reason. you might get a little more leverage out of it.

because you know what you call someone who attempts to sway the masses toward a right wing political agenda by using illogical arguments, and appealing to the base instincts of man, instead of their higher intellect?

fascist.

but let's not name names.

cameron will be distributing copies of his new "book" at the top "50 universities in the country" on november 19th. even more schools will make the list... if you send him money.