French Revolution & Indiana University

And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city,

which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt,...

Revelation 11:8

 

"Evolutionists are off the rails, applying Darwinian theory to matters of the mind and intellectual

history.

If it’s been awhile since you heard anything about the French Revolution of 1789-1793, here’s a brief refresher. It was bad; really bad. It represented the collapse of a government into chaos and anarchy, with heads rolling everywhere (literally). Mob rule fueled by radical-leftist totalitarians gave the world a glimpse of dictatorships to come. Hanne Nabintu Herland, writing in an article on WND describes some of the horrors at the height of the revolution:

Under the French revolutionary leader, Maximilien de Robespierre, guillotines were set up on almost every street corner in Paris. The little that was left of order now fell apart. People were executed at the smallest hint of opposition; orgies were organized in churches as a direct move by radicals to spite religion.

Robespierre summarized his totalitarian logic, stating that there are only two types of people in France, *the people and *their enemies. Anyone who opposed the revolution was to be eliminated. Priests and the well-educated were beheaded and killed by the thousands without trials or examining evidence; their bodies were thrown into the streets. Nobody cared about the rule of law in the midst of this so-called glorious revolution. And it was profoundly anti-religious. Churches were locked up; priests demeaned and killed. The French Revolution meant the end of religious freedom in France. A new tyranny had begun – a “democratic” tyranny.

And yet this followed the so-called “French Enlightenment,” in which deists and atheists wrote passionate works demanding the authority of “reason” and “evidence,” promising a golden age of “liberty, equality, and fraternity” for all, once society had freed itself from the shackles of religious

tradition.

Robespierre is said to have justified the executions with the proverb, “To make an omelette, you have to break a few eggs”. Whose omelette?
-Who appointed him the cook?
-And who wants to eat an omelette with blood in it?
-That kind of attitude would be used by Lenin, Stalin and Mao.

Herland says that order was not returned until Napoleon seized power and re-instituted the rule of law, including religious toleration, restoring some semblance of order.

The French Revolution was profoundly different from the American Revolution, which did usher in an age of “liberty and justice for all”

based

*not on equality of outcome,

*but equality of opportunity.

 

It also sprang from the ideals of the Declaration of Independence, with its “self-evident” truth that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights.

The Darwinian Takeover of History
With that refresher in mind, look at what some Darwin-drunk eggheads at Indiana University came up with. In their paper in the elite Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), they apply biological evolution to explain the French Revolution. This is not a joke; you can read the open-access paper yourself.

Our mapping of the French Revolution’s turbulent early days in terms of the creation,

sharing, and destruction of word-use patterns complements existing studies of specific ideas (much as evolutionary biology analyzes both mechanisms of transmission/selection and the particular phenotypes for which an environment selects).

Could they just be using evolutionary biology as an analogy? They can’t possibly mean this, can they? Look at the Conclusion of the paper:

The history of human culture is more than just the rise and fall of particular ideas. It is also the emergence of new information-processing mechanisms and media, and roles that individuals and institutions play in creating and propagating these ideas through time. In the language of biological evolution, we must understand not only the characteristics for which an environment selects but the strength of that selection over time and the shifting and heterogeneous nature of the transmission mechanisms.

The figure in the paper shows a plot of novel ideas surviving through time in the same manner as

novel traits in a population of organisms. They treat the members of committees, the writers of pamphlets, and debaters just like they would bacteria in a test tube or ants in an ant farm, watching which innovations “emerge” to carry the evolution forward. They treat the words of the revolutionaries as “patterns” that mutate and evolve.

A press release from Indiana University shows photos of the two main suspects perpetrating this latest Darwin fraud, Rebecca Spang and Alexander Barron. “Adopting analytical tools to track word-use patterns, they found the French Revolution’s principles, ideals and goals emerged and evolved in the assembly’s speeches and debates.”

Readers should take notice that this paper is completely amoral. There are no condemnations of Robespierre or the horrific executions and terrors of the French Revolution. It’s just stuff that happened according to the aimless meanderings of the blind evolutionary process."
CEH