Creationist Movie Expelled with Ben Stein: A Blasphemy to Nazi-Resister Teachers
There were many heroes who resisted Nazi occupation and practices during World War II. Some, like the Norwegian resister Max Manus, are the stuff of legend.
Teachers were among the major, but unsung heroes. When the Nazis occupied Norway, and installed the traitor Quisling as their puppet, they told the nation's teachers that they had to teach Nazi curriculum in the schools. A first-grade math problem asked this: "3 Jews and 2 Africans are in a room. How many inferior people are in the room?" [Note the origins of the rightwing push-pollsters?]
The teachers refused. They said they could only teach that part of the curriculum that was true. Nothing else was possible. The Nazi regime locked them out, and so the teachers went on strike. Civil disobedience in a Nazi state!
The standoff continued. Hitler could not abide it. The teachers' union (yes, Ben Stein, the union!) were imprisoned, and sent to a labor camp in frigid northern Norway. About a third of them died; but, they refused to buckle.
Eventually, Quisling relented. The children needed to be in school so their parents could perform slave labor, sending their products to Germany. The teachers signed a statement indicating that they would teach Nazi curriculum only if it were true.
Ben Stein's Expelled is a polemical film designed to insinuate creationism, aka "Intelligent Design", into science curriculum in the public schools. Stein manufactures a conspiracy theory in which Big Science, Big Media, and Big Government conspire to suppress academic freedom. Rejecting Intelligent Design curriculum is a denial of free inquiry; after all, he says, just teach "the controversy".
What "controversy"? There is not a single scientific experiment ever performed testing so-called intelligent design. There is not a single paper presenting scientific evidence supporting intelligent design. It is not a real controversy, it is manufactured---a manufactroversy ™.
If they can manufacture a controversy, why not manufacture a word to describe it?
Sure, there are questions and unresolved issues in evolution science. And, who knows, some day a revised theory of the universe may alter our understanding of how life evolved. I would be surprised if it did not.
Gaps in the evidence supporting our current understanding of evolution is hardly scientific proof of intelligent design, anymore than it is proof that an alien species arrived on earth, and copulated with apes or the horseshoe crab to produce homo sapiens. If there are gaps in the evidence supporting the science of evolution, why not teach that alternative in the schools as well?
Science classes in schools only teach concepts for which a mountain of evidence has accumulated, when the evidence far outweighs any contradictory information. Without that standard, we could spend the entire middle school and high school curricula teaching any fantasy about human development that had more than 2 parents who promulgated it. Does that not qualify as a "controversy" by Ben Stein's definition?
There is a simple distinction between science and ideology (or theology or philosophy) that students, and adults, should remember: science explains conditions of natural phenomena; ideology (or theology or philosophy) justifies preferences.
As the title of Al Gore's Oscar-winning film "An Inconvenient Truth" conveys, science is indifferent to our preferences, it is what it is. Humankind ignores that reality at its peril.
The Soviet Union decided that the facts of genetics provided "inconvenient" truths for its ideology. Denying the scientific facts of inheritance and expression of dominant genes, Soviet agriculture embarked on a nonsensical attempt to grow wheat on frozen tundra resulting in huge losses and the need to import grain just to feed their people.
Ben Stein's father was a famous economist and Chair of the Council of Economic Advisors. Would he want our high school students, already 29th in the world in high school science proficiency, to suffer further economic disadvantage by learning non-science propaganda, and thus not even understanding the difference between science and theology? Would he want to follow the communist Soviet Union and allow ideological preferences to trump reality?
That would be like the Norwegian teachers under Nazi rule teaching their students the 'scientific' inferiority of Jews.
Too many brave people, too many brave and principled teachers, sacrificed their lives and were subjected to torture to preserve the dignity of the truth.
Mr. Stein and his creationist funders blaspheme their sacrifice.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Evolution should be taught in biology class (not, say, political science class). It should be taught with a humility that contemporary science (professionals in the field) does not have. Intelligent Design should not be taught as science.
But Ben Stein should be able to question evolution without being compared to the Nazis. Take a breath.
That whiffing sound was the point of this piece, speeding by you completely unimpeded.
Stein is the one doing the Nazi comparisons, comparing his merry band of fantasists to the resistance movements of old.
Ben Stein certainly has the right to question evolution and support intelligent design, and this should of course not warrant comparing him to a Nazi. Comparing him to a bumpkin, a hayseed, an imbecile, a fool, a dreamer, or a hopelessly uninformed, latter-day Quixote, tilting the windmills of reality in a futile quest to make other people as confused and lost as himself, all that's fair. Nazi is a bit strong, I agree.
But to be clear, Stein is the one who threw that canard out.
Actually, as author, let me say that Stein's repeated use of Nazis in his film had nothing to do with my choosing a Nazi regime as the example.
It was the central role of teachers, and the importance that teachers attach to truth.
Had I known of an historical event like this in non-Nazi settings I might have chosen that.
These teachers lost their lives just defending the truth of what they taught in the classroom.
Stein wants to bastardize knowledge. He does not like the implications, but does not have the guts to accept the truth.
Mr Abrams you say that "Ben Stein manufactures a conspiracy theory in which Big Science, Big Media, and Big Government conspire to suppress academic freedom. "
But Ben Stein is actually somewhat acurate in this assumption. He has the correct idea, but with all the wrong actors. The Big Science (corporate science) The Big Media (corporate media) and Big Government (The Republican Party) still to this day conspire to suppress the truth and academic freedoms.
Really think about it, his argument is sound, but the narrative and players are simply wrong, in order to continue the right wing meme of a "Liberal" bias in education. People of color have long known that there is a history of the United States that is not accurately told, promoted by those in Power, because it isn't really pretty. And how exactly does anyone think this happens? With the help of some in power, John Yoo is a prime example. He, of the torture memo, teaches our young people. What "truth" is he teaching???
I think a lot of the redundancy can be taken out of "The Big Science (corporate science) The Big Media (corporate media) and Big Government (The Republican Party)" - by just calling it the one thing it is - The Corporation that rules the United States. Science is defined by an academic process - not a corporate one - and it pains me (as a scientist) when opportunitism (i.e. doing pseudo-science for the purpose of profit) is used as an adjective to describe corporate activities. Having said that, the science taught in grade school (at least in my corner of the world - north of the 49th parallel) is fairly solid fundamentals of scientific principle. I'm not sure why it is such a huge issue in the US, but no one would bring the theory of any one religion into a public classroom. We had social studies where we learned about culture and various belief systems and their origins - exploring the nuanced similarities rather than the differences - since those similarities would likely give a better indication of the truth. If people want their children to be exposed to a different perspective - they can do that on their own time and bill - main danger of that is that they would be part of that demographic that would vote for Hillary Clinton.
there you go...liberal trick #1...whenever anyone disagrees, just trot out some 'nazi' references...
Ben Stein is many things, but I he's not a liberal. Still, I agree with you: Ben Stein shouldn't use the Nazi bogeyman against people who disagree with him, whatever his tilt.
You have it backwards, meanguy. The makers of this 'film' equate evolution with the Holocaust. But of course, conservative trick #1 is project, project, project.
I thought conservative trick #1 was to make up dumb crap and scream over and over and over that this dumb crap is what liberals think.
How come you seem to be the only person in the past 8-10 years who has been capable of responding to Intelligent Design fanatics and their manufactroversy?
Actually there are plenty of people who have responded to Creationism and ID. My favorite is Richard Dawkins who has addressed these issues in his book and has a hilarious post on Huffpo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-dawkins/sexpelled-no-intercourse_b_97465.html
Also, see the movie "Flock of Dodos" and a recent Nova episode.
I couldn't tell from the trailer whether Ben really doesn't know what science is or if he made the movie only to make a buck.
Anyway, Ben, if you're reading this and still have time to edit, here's another argument you can put in the film. Every time a fossil is found that fits in the middle of a gap in the fossil record, that just means there are twice as many gaps!
Ben Stein is the ultimate proof that there is NO intelligent design.
Stein's movie is political hackery. I think his main purpose is simply to discredit science in the minds of the gullible in order to deflect political will from taking on the climate problem.
I thought is was to make money for Stein.
One stone, two birds. He is a paid propagandist.
Excellent post and nice historical connection.
ben stein--the guy is a hack.
embarrassing on many levels.......
d
Mr. Abrams, I am glad you drew a parallel to the absurdities of Lysenkoism in this excellent post. The creationists may not take seriously being called Nazis, but they surely will not like being compared to the Soviets, whom they strongly resemble on this point.
The analogy to Lysenkoism is much stronger and more appropriate than the Nazi one. The Soviet Union was also under the control of people who rigidly believed in an ideology regardless of facts and it hurt them immensely. I thought the analogy to the Nazis was a bit of a stretch. Yes its logical but the Nazis are already used too often as the yardstick for everything evil. I would prefer to use them to point out the evils of torture, wars of conquest (which is what Iraq really is), and not trot them out for every social ill that we don't like.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
