The results

      So, after more then a hundred years of forced efforts to give the pagan idea of the animal ancestry of man a kind of scientific overhaul, evolutionary anthropogenesis appeared in a very delicate situation. Hundreds of scientific works have been published (only the Piltdown man bibliography consists of more than three hundred items). Research institutes and laboratories were created and still work, with thousands of staff members, specialized technical magazines like L'Anthropologie are being published. But it turned out that the very subject of this research does not exist and never had. The emperor happened to be naked!
       Since Origin of Species was published, the belief in animal ancestry showed its other faces in such names as Marxism, eugenics, Freudism etc. They could not fully declare their existence without the safe shield of Darwin's theory. But in no time they produced abundant offspring in form of nazism, racism, communism and another brutal theories.
       When Marx and his friends first read Origins, they could hardly speak of anything else but Darwin and the revolutionary meaning of his discoveries for several months.15 Marx was really fascinated by the way Darwin organized animal kingdom as civil society.16 He also used to say that Darwin's work is the natural science foundation in the understanding of the historical struggles of classes.17 Marx wished to dedicate his book Das Kapital to Charles Darwin, teacher and inspirer of this work. Marx asked Darwin about his permission to do that18, but since Darwin was not an expert in theoretical economy, he undervalued this request and refused, as was said for reasons of expediency.
       Marx's comrade, Friedrich Engels, decided to make a personal contribution in developing a natural science theoretical foundation for Marxism, using Darwin's ideas. Engels tried to give them a quasi-scientific look and in this difficult task, he somehow happened to invent the mathematical law of biological evolution:

Considering the whole history of evolution of living organisms, we should speak about the law of acceleration in proportion to square time distance from initial point.19

       It is a very promising "observation". This law means that in modern times evolution should proceed much faster in comparison with the past. Thus, in accordance with geochronological concept invertebrate evolved into fish 500 million years ago and that process took them 70 million years. So in modern times the qualitative leap of such a scale would take only 5 million years. Just imagine how rapidly the formation of new species would be. The law would allow for the danger of not recognizing your own dog one morning. However (according to the same theory) mammals appeared 230 million years ago and have never evolved into any new class since then.
       But if one is longing to believe something, such discrepancies do not matter. Thus, neither Engels nor Freud hesitated, because from the scientific point of view, both the recapitulation theory and Lamarkian theory of inheritance of acquired characteristic are nothing but groundless fantasy. However, these ideas were laid as a basis both for psychoanalysis and for the concept that labor and production relations at one time created and now sustain humankind. Freud refused to accept these presuppositions as erroneous and he, though avoiding open discussions, insisted on their reliability.20
       Various theoretical applications of a human animal origin concept simply ignored the obvious difference between man and any other living creature, which is quite impossible to explain from any of the evolutionary points of view. So, what evolutionary advantages can animals gain from everything that bonds the human community - conscience, moral duty, ethics, legislation? The answer is quite obvious - all demonstrations of virtue had to be swept out by natural selection. That is the essence of the difference between a human community and an animal pack. The basic concept of all human cultures - from the most primitive to the most developed pre-Darwinian - was responsibility for one's neighbor. Herd instinct of animals in dangerous situations saves the pack as self-value unit, nobody cares about lost individuals. However, in community, every individual has a special value, and it is a great disgrace to leave anybody in danger.
       Man, however, has one more feature that distingvishes him from animals. It is the ability to turn his own ideas into reality (and diminished ideas lead to a diminished life). The spreading of various social theories based on animal ancestry belief, due to this ability, caused the distortion of virtues - ties which make the community a unified whole - and thus the expanding of herd instincts. The main principle was: herd means everything, individual means nothing. In essence, the number of individuals doomed to death for the sake of the herd did not matter. Particular modification of that formula depended on the group considered to be a herd. It could be a race, nation, class, state, corporation or anything else. For example Lenin declared quite openly that if the success of communist ideas would demand wiping out nine-tenths of earth's population, he would do that without any hesitation. The same ideas filled his letters with such phrases as: you must be examples of ruthlessness (August 9, 1918); you must shoot... without any questions and avoiding stupid procrastination (August 22, 1918); we must encourage energy and mass scale of the terror (November 26, 1918); increase the speed and the scale of repressions (January 31, 1922).
       In 1869, just ten years after the catechism of neototemism was published, Darwin's cousin, F. Galton, published his book, Heredity of talent. This served as a foundation of "scientific" eugenics - the breeding of favoured human characteristics by means of selection. The book didn't answer the question of who would decide the level of characteristic favour. Adolf Hitler, who translated those ideas into life was absolutely clear - it is a herd:

The state has the responsibility of declaring as unfit for reproductive purposes anyone who is obviously ill or genetically unsound... and must carry through with this responsibility ruthlessly without respect to understanding or lack of understanding on the part of anyone.21

       We can see that the key word here is the same - ruthlessness. The focus is to decide which feature is the feature of genetic unsoundness. First members of the herd possessing these features would become rivals in the struggle for power (and that's why destined to "artificial selection" i.e. termination). Then the turn comes for those who can produce independent ideas:

In the decisive struggle for existence it is seldom the man who knows least that gets beaten, but the man who poorly draws conclusions from the knowledge he has22

The intellectual potential of workers and peasants is growing and strengthening in struggle for overthrowing bourgeoisie and its accomplices, weak-willed intellectuals, lackeys of capital, who consider themselves to be the brain of the nation. As a matter of fact they are not a brain, but ...........23

       Previously, this was common practice of all tyrants, but they preferred to act secretly. Now they acted openly and within a certain range, because, in spite of the obsolete ideas of virtue, they were equipped with progressive scientific theory. Having such support, they...

consider disgraceful the concealing of their opinions and ideas. They declare quite openly that they could reach their aims by forcible subversion of the whole social system.24

       The worshipping of animal ancestors could not be satisfied with reaching paramount goals but were urged on to new heights and found it necessary to switch to the wide-range "helping" of natural processes: terminating whole nations, races, classes - anything which could be opposed to the native herd, the superiority (i.e. a victory in the struggle for survival) of which would represent

absolutely unlimited - neither by laws, no by absolute rules, having no restraints, - basing directly on violence power.25

       During several dozen years, hundreds of millions of lives were put on the bloody altar of apeman worship, lives of those who lay on the battlefields, or burned in furnaces of Auschwitz, or turned into dust in Gulag camps, shot near the edges of dirty gutters, beaten to death with shovels of Pol Pot soldiers, or smashed by tanks on streets of Prague or on Tiananmen square. Who can count how many lives were mutilated? How many people, families, nations have lost their shelter, homeland, trust, hope for salvation?
       And what are the results? Maybe a new superhuman community is created? Or super race? Or it might be a single superman? Alas! All countries worshipping an ape up to the end of this century are lying in ruins, self-exhausted and self-terminated (excluding Germany and Japan which were lucky to lose World War II because they received the opportunity to begin the construction of a normal human community). Everything has been terminated - economics, moral principles, and the creative spirit which could bring revival to everything lost. When a man considers himself nothing more then an evolving ape and the struggle with his neighbor for his own survival as the greatest virtue, he willingly attains the likeness of the ape struggling for survival. As a result he looses everything that makes him human.
       This is a very old story. In the garden of Eden the Tempter whispered to our first mother, that should she only doubt the words of Creator, we humans will be like gods, and we ourselves will decide what is right and what is wrong. Exactly this phrase became the creed of the most ancient of all world ideologies - humanism (belief in man). The founder of the ideology from the first days of man's existence has being doing his best to make people forget where we are from. How can we know our destiny when we have denied our origin? As soon as we lose absolute criteria, we go into the labyrinth of human opinions. Humanistic relativism is the morass from which a man cannot get out without help. Relying proudly on our own reason and mind, we have lost our Way, our Truth and our Life. But our Creator is waiting for us, not willing that any should perish. Our destination is wonderful. Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. Why should we be superstitious, rejecting the Gift?

1. Charles Darwin. Origin of Species.- London, 1859.- p. 2.
2. Charles Darwin. Origin of Species. Teacher's Textbook. - Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 1987. - p. 18. These and following quotes from Darwin, Marx and Engels are translated from Russian editions.
3. Charles Darwin. Recollection of the Development of My Mind and Character. Ibid., p. 370.
4. Grigg Russell. Ernst Haeckel: Evangelist for evolution and apostle of deceit/Creation ex nihilo, 1996. Vol.18, #2. - pp. 33-36.
5. Malkolm Bowden. Ape-Men. Fact or fallacy? - Sovereign Publications, Bromley, Kent, 1988. - 260 p.
6. Science, Vol. 270, 24 November 1995, p.1297.
7. Nature, June 23, 1994, p. 645.
8. Science, January 26, 1996, p. 449.
9. Nature 77, 1908, p. 587.
10. White Monty A. J. The caring Neanderthal./Creation ex nihilo, Vol. 18, #4.- pp. 16-17.
11. Lyall Watson. The Water People./Science Digest, Vol. 90, May 1982, p. 44.
12. Nature, January 1, 1987, p. 31.
13. Science, January 16, 1995.
14. Independent, November 23, 1995.
15. V. Libkneht. Recollections of Marx and Engels. Moscow. Gospolitizdat, 1956, p. 100.
16. K.Marx. A Letter to Engels of 18 June, 1862. Complete works, 2nd edition. Vol. 30, p.204.
17. K.Marx. A Letter to F. Lassal of 16 January, 1861. Ibid., p.475.
18. Sir Gavin de Beer. Charles Darwin. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., Inc. 1964, p.266)
19. F. Engels. Dialictics of Nature. Complete works, 2nd edition. Vol.20, p.620.
20. Frank J. Sulloway. Freud, Biologist of the Mind. Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England, 1992, p.241.
21. Adolf Hitler. Mein Kampf. Munchen: Verlag Franz Eher Nachfolger, 1933, pp.447-448.
22. Ibid., .452-453.
23. V. I. Lenin. A Letter to Gorkyj of 15th September 1919. Complete works, 5th edition. Vol. 51, p.48.
24. K. Marx, F. Engels. Communist Manifesto. Complete works, 2nd edition. Vol. 4, p .459.
25. V. I. Lenin. Complete works. 2nd edition. Vol. 25, p.441.