http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i1/communism.asp
The Darwinian foundation of communism
TJ 15(1):89-95
April 2001
by Jerry Bergman
Summary
A review of the writings of the founders of communism shows that the
theory of evolution, especially as taught by Darwin, was critically
important in the development of modern communism. Many of the central
architects of communism, including Stalin, Lenin, Marx and Engels,
accepted the worldview portrayed in the book of Genesis until they
were introduced to Darwin and other contemporary thinkers, which
ultimately resulted in their abandoning that worldview. Furthermore,
Darwinism was critically important in their conversion to communism
and to a worldview that led them to a philosophy based on atheism. In
addition, the communist core idea that violent revolution, in which
the strong overthrow the weak, was a natural, inevitable part of the
unfolding of history from Darwinistic concepts and conclusions.
Darwinism as a worldview was a critical factor, not only in
influencing the development of Nazism, but also in the rise of
communism and the communist holocaust that, by one estimate, took the
lives of more than 100 million persons.1 Marx, together with his
forebears, associates and successors, was a doctrinaire evolutionist
who tried to build his society on evolutionary premises. There is
abundant documentation of this assessment and, few would even question
it.2
Beate Wilder-Smith suggested that evolution is
'a central plank in Marxist doctrine today. The Nazis were convinced,
as are communists today, that evolution had taken place, that all
biology had evolved spontaneously upward, and that inbetween links (or
less evolved types) should be actively eradicated. They believed that
natural selection could and should be actively aided, and therefore
instituted political measures to eradicate the handicapped, the Jews,
and the blacks, whom they considered as "underdeveloped" [emphasis in
original].'3
Many extremists were active before Darwin published his seminal work,
On the Origin of Species, in 1859, but since religious faith prevailed
among both scientists and non-scientists before Darwin, it was very
difficult for these radicals to persuade the masses to accept
communistic (or other leftist) ideologies. Partly for this reason,
Western nations blocked the development of most radical movements for
centuries. Darwin, however, opened the door to Marxism by providing
what Marx believed was a 'scientific' rationale to deny Creation and,
by extension, to deny God.4 His denial of God, and his knowledge of
Darwin, inspired Marx to develop his new godless worldview now known
as communism. And like other Darwinists, Marx stressed that his
communistic worldview was 'scientific' and, as such, employed a
'scientific methodology and scientific outlook'.5 Bethell notes that
Marx admired Darwin's book,
'not for economic reasons but for the more fundamental one that
Darwin's universe was purely materialistic, and the explication of it
no longer involved any reference to unobservable, nonmaterial causes
outside or "beyond" it. In that important respect, Darwin and Marx
were truly comrades
... .'6
And historian Hofstadter noted that most of the early orthodox
Marxists 'felt quite at home in Darwinian surroundings. On the shelves
of the socialist bookstores in Germany the words of Darwin and Marx
stood side by side'.7 He adds that communist books 'that came pouring
forth from the Kerr presses in Chicago [the major U.S. publisher of
Communist books] were frequently adorned with knowing citations from
Darwin, Huxley, Spencer and Haeckel'.7
Karl Marx
Born in 1818, Marx was baptized a Lutheran in 1824, attended a
Lutheran elementary school, received praise for his 'earnest' essays
on moral and religious topics, and was judged by his teachers
'moderately proficient' in theology (his first written work was on the
'love of Christ')8-10 until he encountered Darwin's writings and ideas
at the University of Berlin. Marx wrote tirelessly until he died,
producing hundreds of books, monographs and articles. Sir Isaiah
Berlin even claimed that no thinker 'in the nineteenth century has had
so direct, deliberate and powerful an influence upon mankind as did
Karl Marx'.11 Marx saw the living world in terms of a Darwinian
'survival-of-the-fittest' struggle, involving the triumph of the
strong and the subjugation of the weak.12 Darwin taught that the
'survival of the fittest' existed among all forms of life. From this
idea Marx believed that the major 'struggle for existence' among
humans occurred primarily between the social classes. Barzun13
concluded that Marx believed his own work to be the exact parallel of
Darwin's, and that,
'like Darwin, Marx thought he had discovered the law of development.
He saw history in stages, as the Darwinists saw geological strata and
successive forms of life. ... both Marx and Darwin made struggle the
means of development. Again, the measure of value in Darwin is
survival with reproduction--an absolute fact occurring in time and
which wholly disregards the moral or esthetic quality of the product.
In Marx the measure of value is expended labor--an absolute fact
occurring in time, which also disregards the utility of the product.
Both Darwin and Marx [also] tended to hedge and modify their
mechanical absolution in the face of objections.'14
Marx owed a major debt to Darwin for his central ideas. In Marx's
words: 'Darwin's book is very important and serves me as a basis in
natural selection for the class struggle in history. ... not only is it
[Darwin's book] a death blow ... to "Teleology" in the natural sciences
but their rational meaning is empirically explained'.15 Marx first
read Darwin's Origin of Species only a year after its publication, and
was so enthusiastic that he reread it two years later.16 He attended a
series of lectures by Thomas Huxley on Darwin's ideas, and spoke of
'nothing else for months but Darwin and the enormous significance of
his scientific discoveries'.17 According to a close associate, Marx
was also
' ... one of the first to grasp the significance of Darwin's research.
Even before 1859, the year of the publication of The Origin of the
Species [sic]--and, by a remarkable coincidence, of Marx's Contribution
to the Critique of Political Economy--Marx realized Darwin's epoch-
making importance. For Darwin ... was preparing a revolution similar to
the one which Marx himself was working for ... . Marx kept up with every
new appearance and noted every step forward, especially in the fields
of natural sciences ... .'18
Berlin states that after he became a communist, Marx detested
passionately any 'belief in supernatural causes'.19 Stein noted that
'Marx himself viewed Darwin's work as confirmation by the natural
sciences of his own views ... '.20 Hyman included Darwin and Marx among
the four men he considered responsible for many of the most
significant events of the 20th century.21 According to Heyer, Marx was
'infatuated' with Darwin, and Darwin's ideas clearly had a major
influence not only on him and Engels, but also on both Lenin and
Stalin. Furthermore, these men's writings frequently discussed
Darwin's ideas.22 Marx and Engels 'enthusiastically embraced'
Darwinism, kept up with Darwin's writings, and often corresponded with
each other (and others) about their reactions to Darwin's conclusions.
23,24 The communists recognized the importance of Darwin to their
movement and therefore vigorously defended him:
'The socialist movement recognized Darwinism as an important element
in its general world outlook right from the start. When Darwin
published his Origin of Species in 1859, Karl Marx wrote a letter to
Frederick Engels in which he said, " ... this is the book which contains
the basis in natural history for our view". ... And of all those eminent
researchers of the nineteenth century who have left us such a rich
heritage of knowledge, we are especially grateful to Charles Darwin
for opening our way to an evolutionary, dialectical understanding of
nature.'25
Prominent communist Friedrich Lessner concluded that Das Kapital and
Darwin's Origin of Species were the 'two greatest scientific creations
of the century'.26 The importance of Darwinism in the estimated 140
million deaths caused by communism was partly because:
'Clearly, for Marx man has no "nature". ... For man is his own maker and
will consciously become his own maker in complete freedom from
morality or from the laws of nature and of nature's God. ... Here we see
why Marxism justifies the ruthless sacrifice of men living today, men
who, at this stage of history, are only partly human.'27
Halstead adds that the theoretical foundation of communism
' ... is dialectical materialism which was expounded with great clarity
by Frederick Engels in Anti-Dührüng and The Dialectics of Nature. He
recognized the great value of the contributions made by geology in
establishing that there was constant movement and change in nature and
the significance of Darwin's demonstration that this applied also to
the organic world. ... The crux of the entire theoretical framework,
however, is in the nature of qualitative changes. This is also spelt
out by Engels in The Dialectics of Nature, "a development in which the
qualitative changes occur not gradually but rapidly and abruptly,
taking the form of a leap from one state to another". ... Here then is
the recipe for revolution.'28
Conner adds that communism teaches that by 'defending Darwinism,
working people strengthen their defenses against the attacks of ...
reactionary outfits, and prepare the way for the transformation of the
social order', i.e. a communist revolution.29
Friedrich Engels
Marx's co-worker and frequent co-author, Friedrich Engels, was raised
by a strict and 'pietist' Bible-believing father, but Engels, too,
rejected Christianity, evidently partly as a result of his studies at
the University of Berlin.30 At Marx's graveside, Engels declared:
'Just as Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so
Marx discovered the law of evolution in human history ...'.31 Himmelfarb
concluded, from her study of Darwin, that there was much truth in
Engels' eulogy to Marx:
'What they both celebrated was the internal rhythm and course of life,
the one the life of nature, the other of society, that proceeded by
fixed laws, undistracted by the will of God or men. There were no
catastrophes in history as there were none in nature. There were no
inexplicable acts, no violations of the natural order. God was as
powerless as individual men to interfere with the internal, self-
adjusting dialectic of change and development.'32
Alexander Herzen
Several others also were critically important in the development of
the communist movement. One was Alexander Herzen (1812-1870), the
first to articulate the new radicalism in Russia and, being a man who
was in full harmony with Marx's ideas, was a pioneer in calling for a
mass revolt to achieve Communist power. His theory was a distinctively
Russian version of socialism based on the peasant commune, which
furnished the primary ideological basis for much of the revolutionary
activity in Russia up to 1917. Herzen also was influenced by
evolution:
'Herzen's university writings are concerned primarily with the theme
of biological becoming ... . Herzen displays a good knowledge of the
serious scientific literature of the period ... especially works which
announced the idea of evolution ... [including] the writings of
Erasmus Darwin, the grandfather of Charles and to a point his
ideological predecessor... . He was abreast of the debate between the
followers of Cuvier, who held to the immutability of species, and
Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire, the tranformationist or evolutionist; and of
course he took the side of the latter, since the idea of continuous
evolution was necessary to illustrate the progressive unfolding of the
Absolute. In short, Herzen's scientific training lay essentially in
the raw materials for the biology of the Naturphilosophie.'33
Vladimir Lenin
Lenin also was influenced significantly by Darwinism, and operated in
accordance with the philosophy 'fewer but better', a restatement of
natural selection.34 He was raised by devout Bible-believing parents
in a middle-class home.35 Then, in about 1892, he discovered Darwin
and Marx's works, and his life was changed forever.36 A catalyst to
Lenin's adopting Marxism was the fact that the unjust Russian
educational system cancelled his father's tenure with one year's
grace, thus throwing his family into turmoil. Within a year, his
father died, leaving Lenin embittered at age 16.37 Lenin greatly
admired his father, who was a hard-working, religious and intelligent
man. Koster adds:
'The only piece of art work in Lenin's office was a kitsch statue of
an ape sitting on a heap of books--including Origin of Species--and
contemplating a human skull. This ... comment in clay on Darwin's view
of man, remained in Lenin's view as he worked at his desk, approving
plans or signing death warrants ... . The ape and the skull were a
symbol of his faith, the Darwinian faith that man is a brute, the
world is a jungle, and individual lives are irrelevant. Lenin was
probably not an instinctively vicious man, though he certainly ordered
a great many vicious measures. Perhaps the ape and the skull were
invoked to remind him that, in the world according to Darwin, man's
brutality to man is inevitable. In his struggle to bring about the
"worker's paradise" though "scientific" means, he ordered a great many
deaths. The ape and the skull may have helped him stifle whatever
kindly or humane impulses were left over from a wholesome
childhood.'38
Joseph Stalin
The Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin (born Joseph Djugashvili) murdered
an estimated 60 million people.39 Like Darwin, he was once a theology
student, and also like Darwin, evolution was important in transforming
his life from a professing Christian to a communist atheist.40,41
Yaroslavsky noted that while Stalin was still an ecclesiastical
student he 'began to read Darwin and became an atheist'. 42
Stalin became an 'avid Darwinian, abandoned the faith in God, and
began to tell his fellow seminarians that people were descended from
apes and not from Adam'.40 Yaroslavsky notes that it 'was not only
with Darwin that the young Stalin became familiar in the Gori
ecclesiastical school; it was while there that he got his first
acquaintance with Marxist ideas'.43 Miller adds that Stalin had an
extraordinary memory and learnt his lessons with so little effort that
the monks who taught him concluded that he would
' ... become an outstanding priest of the Russian Orthodox Church. But
in five years at the seminary he became interested in the nationalist
movement in his native province, in Darwin's theories and in Victor
Hugo's writings on the French Revolution. As a nationalist he was anti-
Tsarist and joined a secret socialist society.'44
The result was that
'His brutal childhood and the worldview he acquired in that childhood,
reinforced by reading Darwin, convinced him that mercy and forbearance
were weak and stupid. He killed with a coldness that even Hitler might
have envied--and in even greater numbers than Hitler did.'45
Koster added that Stalin had people murdered for two major reasons
' ... because they were personal threats to him, or because they were
threats to progress--which in Marxist-Darwinian terms meant some sort
of evolution to an earthly paradise of a type never yet shown to
exist.'46
The importance of Darwin's ideas is stressed by Parkadze, a childhood
friend of Stalin's:
'We youngsters had a passionate thirst for knowledge. Thus, in order
to disabuse the minds of our seminary students of the myth that the
world was created in six days, we had to acquaint ourselves with the
geological origin and age of the earth, and be able to prove them in
argument; we had to familiarize ourselves with Darwin's teachings. We
were aided in this by ... Lyell's Antiquity of Man and Darwin's Descent
of Man, the latter in a translation edited by Sechenov. Comrade Stalin
read Sechenov's scientific works with great interest. We gradually
proceeded to a study of the development of class society, which led us
to the writings of Marx, Engels and Lenin. In those days the reading
of Marxist literature was punishable as revolutionary propaganda. The
effect of this was particularly felt in the seminary, where even the
name of Darwin was always mentioned with scurrilous abuse. ... Comrade
Stalin brought these books to our notice. The first thing we had to
do, he would say, was to become atheists. Many of us began to acquire
a materialist outlook and to ignore theological subjects. Our reading
in the most diverse branches of science not only helped our young
people to escape from the bigoted and narrow-minded spirit of the
seminary, but also prepared their minds for the reception of Marxist
ideas. Every book we read, whether on archaeology, geology, astronomy,
or primitive civilization, helped to confirm us the truth of
Marxism.'47
As a result of the influence of Lenin, Stalin and other Soviet
leaders, Darwin became 'an intellectual hero in the Soviet Union.
There is a splendid Darwin museum in Moscow, and the Soviet
authorities struck a special Darwin medal in honour of the centenary
of The Origin'.48
Marx's opposition to religion
Acceptance of Darwinism and rejection of religion were critical for
the new movements of communism.
When Marx abandoned his Christian faith and became an atheist, he
concluded that religion was a tool of the rich to subjugate the poor.
He openly denounced religion as 'the opiate of the people', and in
nearly every nation where the communists assumed power, the churches
were, if not abolished outright, neutralized in their effect.49 Opium
is a pain-killing drug and Marx characterized religion as having the
same function, i.e. it was used to pacify the oppressed because it
stressed peace, non-violence, and loving one's neighbor. The result
was it made them feel better but did not solve their problems.
Marx felt that religion is not just an illusion: it had a deleterious
social function, namely to distract the oppressed from the truth of
their oppression and prevent people from seeing the harsh realities of
their existence. So long as the workers and the downtrodden believed
their patient, moral behavior and sufferings would earn them freedom
and happiness in heaven, they would allow themselves to be oppressed.
Marx concluded that workers would change their perception of reality
only when they realized that there is no God, no afterlife and no good
reason not to have what they want now even if they have to take it
from others.
The solution, Marx argued, was to abolish religion, which then would
allow the poor to openly revolt against their 'oppressors' (the land
owners, the wealthy, the entrepreneurs, et al.) and take their wealth
away so the poor could enjoy wealth and fulfillment in this world.
Furthermore, since 'the rich and powerful aren't just going to hand
these over, the masses shall have to seize them' by force.50 Eidelberg
noted that 'Marx's eschatology, his materialistic philosophy of
history is, for all practical purposes, a doctrine of permanent
revolution, a doctrine which cannot but issue in periodic violence,
terror and tyranny'.51
This is why Marx concluded that the 'abolition of religion' is a
prerequisite for the attainment of real happiness of the people.52
Consequently, an important cornerstone of communism was to take away
the opium (religion) from the people and convince them that they
should eat, drink and be merry now, for tomorrow they may die (and to
have the resources to eat, drink and be merry, they should steal from
the rich and the successful). Marx stressed that the Darwinist
philosophy, aside from personal pleasures in the here and now, life in
the long run has no meaning or purpose because we were accidents of
nature that, in all likelihood, never again would occur on the Earth.
53
One important factor, however, was not appropriately accounted for in
Marx's unrealistic (yet idealistic) worldview. This was the fact that,
as the Bible stresses, workers are worthy of their wages. Starting a
business usually entails an enormous amount of risk, and requires
extremely hard work and long hours by persons who often have enormous
talents to guide that business to success. Most new businesses fail--
fewer than one out of five succeeds--and the success of the vast
majority of these is usually only moderate.
On the other hand, enormous rewards can result if a business does
succeed. The rewards include not only wealth and prestige, but also
the satisfaction of achievement and building a successful business.
The rewards have to be great in order for people to assume the risks
involved. Many people who fail in business lose everything they own.
For these reasons, as an economic theory communism was doomed to
fail.
To ensure that communism maintains its power base, it is necessary to
indoctrinate people against religion, especially the Christian, Jewish
and Muslim religions, which stress that depriving people of their
property without due compensation is wrong and that killing people to
take away their property is a grievous sin.10 Furthermore, these same
religions also stress that, while we should stand for what is right,
justice is not guaranteed in this world (but God has promised rewards
in the afterlife for those who pursue righteousness).
Critical in the development of Marx's theorizing, as well as that of
many of his followers, was his rejection of Christianity and its moral
values and a turning to an agnostic/atheistic worldview. The
Scriptures teach that care, compassion and concern should be expressed
toward the poor, the widows, the orphans, the deformed, social
outcasts and even criminals, but they also stress that the worker is
worthy of his wages and condemn murder (even if part of a social
revolution--he who lives by the sword will perish by the sword,
Revelation 13:10). Christianity generally has served as a force that
resisted depriving people of the fruits of their labor.
The results of Marx's atheistic ideal, tragically, have now become
very apparent. The Communist ideal that 'each takes according to his
needs, and each gives according to his abilities' all too often became
'each takes whatever he can, and gives back as little as he can'. The
result has been economic bankruptcy for most Communist countries. In
the past decade, we have witnessed the collapse of all the Communist
regimes and their replacement by capitalist or socialist governments
(Cuba and China now have socialist governments, China has instituted
major broad capitalist reforms as it endeavors to coexist with
capitalism, and North Korea is fast moving toward a socialist
government). The quality of the society is a result of the caliber of
its leaders. The most qualified people should be running societies'
schools, factories, and governments. The economic poverty of Russia
and much of eastern Europe (which is due to complex, interrelated
factors) eloquently testifies to the failure of communism.
Why communism is atheistic, and why it produced a holocaust
Marx (1818-1883) was influenced considerably by Hegel's dialectic
concept. George Hegel (1770-1831) held that religion, science,
history, and 'most everything else' evolves to a higher state as time
progresses.54 It does this by a process called the dialectic, in which
a thesis (an idea) eventually confronts an antithesis (an opposing
idea), producing a synthesis or a blend of the best of the old and new
ideas.55 Marx concluded that capitalism is the thesis, and the
organized proletariat is the antithesis. Essentially, the central
conflict in capitalism was between those who controlled the means of
production (the owners, the wealthy class, or the bourgeoisie) and
those who did the actual physical work (the workers or the
proletariat). Marx's central idea was that the synthesis (i.e.
communism) would emerge from the struggle between the proletariat and
the bourgeoisie. This is illustrated by Marx's famous phrase, 'workers
of the world unite and overthrow your oppressors'.
Marx concluded that the masses (the workers--those persons who worked
in the factories and the farms) would struggle with the business
owners, the wealthy and the entrepreneurs. Since there were a lot more
workers than owners, Marx believed that the workers eventually would
overthrow the entrepreneurs by violent revolution, taking their
factories and wealth. The result would be a dictatorship by the
proletariat. Marx then believed that private property would be
abolished, and the workers would collectively own the country,
including the farms and the means of production. All the workers then
would share equally in the fruits of their labor, producing a
classless society in which everyone earned an equal amount of money.
This philosophy obviously appealed to millions of people, especially
the poor, the downtrodden, and many middle class people who had a
concern for the poor.
Communist revolutions resulted in forcibly taking the wealth from the
land-owning classes, the wealthy, the industrialists and others.
Appropriating the land and wealth from the property owners in general
resulted in an enormous amount of widespread resistance.
Many of these people had built their wealth from hard work and astute
business decisions, and were not willing to give up what in many cases
they had worked very hard for years to obtain. A bloodbath resulted
that took the lives of hundreds of millions of people. Those murdered
often included the most talented entrepreneurs, the most skilled
industrialists, and the intellectual backbone of the nation. The
workers were put in charge of the companies and factories once run by
what Marx called the bourgeoisie; many of these workers lacked the
skills and personal qualities necessary to run these businesses.
Consequently, inferior products, low productivity and an incredible
amount of waste was the rule for generations in the Communist world.
As Jorafsky notes, however harshly history may judge Marxism, the fact
is Marx's theory unified Darwinism and revolution intrinsically and
inseparably:
' ... an historian can hardly fail to agree that Marx's claim to give
scientific guidance to those who would transform society has been one
of the chief reasons for his doctrine's enormous influence.'56
Chinese communism
Darwinism also was a critical factor in the communist revolution in
China: 'Mao Tse-tung regarded Darwin, as presented by the German
Darwinists, as the foundation of Chinese scientific socialism'.20,57
The policies Mao originated resulted in the murder of as many as 80
million people. The extent that Darwinism was applied is shown by
Kenneth Hsü. When he was a student in China in the 1940s, the class
would exercise to make their bodies strong, and for the remainder of
the hour before breakfast, they were harangued by the rector. 'We had
to steel our will to fight in the struggle for existence, he told us.
The weak would perish; only the strong would survive.'58
Hsü added that they were taught that one acquires strength not through
the acceptance that his mother prescribed, but through hatred. Hsü
then points out the irony of the fact that
'At the same time on the other side of the battlefront a teenage
German boy listened to Goebbels's polemics and was inducted into the
Hitler Jugend. According to both our teachers, one or the other of us
should have prevailed, yet it would not have surprised my mother to
discover that we are now colleagues, neighbors, and friends. Though
both of us survived the war, we were victims of a cruel social
ideology that assumes that competition among individuals, classes,
nations, or races is the natural condition of life, and that it is
also natural for the superior to dispossess the inferior. For the last
century and more this ideology has been thought to be a natural law of
science, the mechanism of evolution which was formulated most
powerfully by Charles Darwin in 1859 in his On the Origin of Species
... . Three decades have passed since I was marched into the schoolyard
to hear the rector contradict my family's wisdom with his Darwinian
claim to superiority.'59
Hsü concludes that in view of what happened in the war, and since then
(and what may happen in the future), 'I must question what sort of
fitness is demonstrated by the outcome of such struggles. As a
scientist, I must especially examine the scientific validity of a
notion that can do such damage'.60,58
The importance of Darwinism, Hsü reports, was indicated by Theo
Sumner's experience on a trip with German Chancellor Helmit Schmit to
China. Theo was astonished to personally hear from Mao Tse-tung about
the debt Mao felt to Darwinism, and especially to the man who also
inspired Hitler, Darwinist Ernst Haeckel.61 Hsü concluded Mao was
convinced that 'without the continual pressure of natural selection'
humans would degenerate. This idea inspired Mao to advocate 'the
ceaseless revolution that brought my homeland to the brink of ruin'.
Summary
In the minds of Hitler, Stalin and Mao, treating people as animals was
not wrong because they believed that Darwin had 'proved' humans were
not God's creation, but instead descended from some simple, one-cell
organism. All three men believed it was morally proper to eliminate
the less fit or 'herd them like cattle into boxcars bound for
concentration camps and gulags' if it achieved the goal of their
Darwinist philosophy.62
Darwin's ideas played a critically important role in the development
and growth of communism. While it is difficult to conclude that
communism would not have flourished as it did if Darwin had not
developed his evolution theory, it is clear that if Marx, Lenin,
Engels, Stalin and Mao had continued to embrace the Judeo-Christian
worldview and had not become Darwinists, communist theory and the
revolutions it inspired never would have spread to the many countries
that they did. It follows, then, that the holocaust produced by
communism (which has resulted in the death over 100 million people)
likely never would have occurred. In Nobel Prize winner Alexander
Solzhenitsyn's words,
' ... if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the
main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million
of our [Russian] people, I could not put it more accurately than to
repeat: "men have forgotten God; that's why all this has
happened".'63
Acknowledgments
I want to thank Bert Thompson, Ph.D., Wayne Frair, Ph.D., Clifford
Lillo, and John Woodmorappe, M.A., for their comments on an earlier
draft of this article.
