In one of history’s weirder coincidences, two people who were to have a major impact on the world we’re living in right now were born on the very same day, thousands of miles apart and under vastly different circumstances. The date was February 12, 1809 and the two people were Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin.
It’s impossible to underestimate the historical importance of each man. But whereas every American schoolchild is aware of Lincoln’s legacy in preserving the Union and ending slavery, Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is not always given the credit it deserves when it comes to being seen as a transformative force. Darwin’s theory resonated far beyond mere biology; it had a major impact on how we think about ourselves, our religious beliefs, major world events and, in what is our focus here, on our politics, in ways that remain very much with us today.
Evolution and the Progressive Movement
Darwin was about 30 when he first came up with his Theory of Evolution. Yet he didn’t publish ‘On the Origin of Species’ for another 20 years.1 Why did he wait so long?
There are a variety of likely reasons, but three of them are almost certainly:
- Knowing that he would be challenging a mountain of shibboleths, Darwin wanted his data to be absolutely incontrovertible in its ability to withstand scrutiny.
- Darwin’s wife, Emma, was very religious and the two of them loved each other very much. Emma feared that her husband’s focus on science would deepen his doubts about religion, potentially condemning her to an afterlife without her beloved Charles.2 Charles also knew that publication of his theory would hurt Emma, something he wasn’t anxious to do but, in the end, would prove unavoidable.
- Charles knew that his theory would challenge the very foundations of both the scientific and religious communities. He was not looking forward to the consequences, but saw no way to avoid them.
But it was ultimately a fourth reason that likely tipped the scales: when in 1859, a colleague seemed to be on the verge of publishing something along the lines of what Darwin had spent years researching, Darwin felt that in order to protect his work, he had no choice but to publish.
It’s hard to think of a subject that has a brighter dividing line than evolution. For those who believe in it, evolution may be the greatest scientific discovery of all time. For those who don’t, its flat contradiction of the Bible can make it virtually tantamount to Satanism. But our focus here is not on the kerfuffle of today nor yesterday; it’s on how the theory of evolution was used and misused to justify abhorrent and inhuman behavior that in many ways, regretfully, still remains very much with us.
Progressivism
The Progressive Era is one of the most dynamic in American history. A decent overview of the changes brought about by Progressivism would be too lengthy to get into here, but there’s a fantastic article by Kirsten Swinth on the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History site that does an excellent job.
The article also ties into the Frances Perkins story of Part I, as well as mentioning how much of a pain in the ass Progressive reformist Teddy Roosevelt became to the Republican Party leadership. As Governor of New York, Roosevelt’s mania for reform apparently ruffled so many feathers in Albany that when the opportunity arose to effectively muzzle him by having him run as William McKinley’s running mate in 1900, GOP leadership jumped at the chance. You can imagine would-be-corrupt politicians in Albany doing the nineteenth-century equivalents of high-fives and back-flips when McKinley won.
Of course, the strategy backfired spectacularly when McKinley was assassinated less than a year into his second term, thereby making Teddy Roosevelt the 26th President of the United States.
Oops.
So, like it or not, in 1901 there was now “a new sheriff in town,” a reformist, energetic Progressive in the White House who was, at 42, the youngest person ever to serve as president. And Teddy wasted no time in using the power of the “bully pulpit” (as he called the office) to pursue his agenda. “Trust-busting” programs aimed at limiting the power of big business not only succeeded in curbing the power of corporate giants like John D. Rockefeller (Standard Oil) and J. P. Morgan (Railroad trusts), they would lay the groundwork for the even more sweeping reforms his fifth cousin Franklin would institute thirty years later.
Progressivism was part of the excitement of a new century – a new century in a new country that had boundless enthusiasm for a future that seemed unlimited. At the heart of Progressivism was the idea that scientific progress could lead the world into an age where human pain, crime and suffering could become things of the past.
But there was another side to Progressivism – an overweening obsession with peoples’ personal behavior that we today would find intrusive.
As Ms. Swinth says in her article:
While progressives guided the country down the path it would follow for much of the twentieth century toward regulation of the economy and government attention to social welfare, it also contained a strong streak of social control. This was the darker side of the movement…
…Eugenics also garnered the support of some progressive reformers. Eugenics was a scientific movement which believed that weaker or “bad” genes threatened the nation’s population. Eugenicists supported laws in the name of the rational protection of public health to compel sterilization of those with “bad” genes—typically focusing on those who were mentally ill or in jails, but also disproportionately affecting those who were not white.
The Eugenics movement was a direct outgrowth of Darwin’s theory of evolution. How to “improve” the quality of the human race was a common topic of socio-political debate throughout the beginning of the 20th century. Racism was endemic (casual or otherwise), White superiority was assumed and virulent racial oppression was a fact of life, particularly in the South, where lynchings happened on an almost-daily basis.
Roosevelt was probably somewhat more racially enlightened than most men of his day, but although he believed that those of lower status had the ability to advance through hard work and achievement, Roosevelt firmly believed that other races were inferior to Whites.3 Margaret Sanger, the acknowledged “mother of birth control” had a complicated and more troubling relationship with eugenics, a relationship that led Planned Parenthood, the organization she had founded, to disassociate themselves from her in 2020.
Eugenics was eventually discredited. But not before it had gained traction among some of the more right-wing elements of America’s political spectrum. Thus did some ideas that had arisen from the political “left” end up being used by the political “right” in ways that would culminate in some of the greatest evils the world has ever seen.
The Pioneer Fund
Harry Hamilton Laughlin was a man on a mission. An ardent proponent of “racial betterment,” Hamilton, probably more than any other single person, was one of the most forceful advocates of compulsory sterilization in the US.
Laws that Hamilton wrote, aggressively promoted and defended resulted in the forced sterilization of over 60,000 Americans, laws that remained on the books until as late as 1974.4
Meanwhile, in Germany, Hamilton’s work found a ready audience in the Third Reich, who was paying close attention. In 1933, Hamilton’s Model Eugenical Sterilization Law proposal was used as the basis for Nazi Germany’s Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring, under which over 400,000 people ended up being sterilized against their will.
In fact, the Nazis so admired what Laughlin had done that he was awarded an honorary degree by the University of Heidelberg in 1936 for his work on behalf of the “science of racial cleansing.”
So in a very real way, the “science” of the Holocaust didn’t come from Germany. It was born right here in the US, the product of a man from Oskaloosa, Iowa who had dedicated his life to the forced sterilization of those deemed “unfit” by him and his acolytes.
But Hamilton had still bigger plans. And when it came to defining what would be his ultimate legacy, he was only halfway there.
Wycliffe Preston Draper
The Draper Corporation was a Massachusetts-based company that made state-of-the-art looms that were sold to factories all over the world. They were a major player in textile manufacturing in the late 19th and early 20th century and for a time were very, very successful.
Draper’s history with labor was complex; they had originally treated their workers relatively well, endeavoring to create an “industrial utopia” for them. An October 25, 1887 article in the Boston Herald was positively glowing in its characterization of the Draper family and their management of the company:
“The Messrs. Draper leave no stone unturned in their endeavors to make the lives of their employees a happy lot. Good and remunerative wages are paid and the employment is steady and reliable. A faithful and skilled workman is assured of a life situation, and thus he can have no apprehension with regard to his latter days. For their employees the company builds neat and attractive cottages with all conveniences, which are leased out at nominal rent. For the heads of departments residences are built which would do honor to a metropolitan city… Excellent schools are provided; the electric light has been introduced, and the telephonic and telegraphic communication is to be had on all hands… That the employees appreciate all that their employers have done for them is patent from the fact that No Strikes Have Occurred Here, nor are they likely to occur.”
The Draper factory was built on the site of an utopian Christian community and George Draper, the company’s founder, seemed to pay respect to the spirit of the original settlement. Draper was not alone in trying to be a fair-minded owner; there were, indeed, employers who made an effort to treat their workers well and Draper’s “industrial utopia” is reminiscent of Henry Ford’s efforts to create “company towns,” all of which ended in failure.
By 1912, management of the company had passed down to Draper’s son Eban, a staunch Republican conservative who had served as Massachusetts lieutenant-governor and then governor. Between decisions Eban made as governor and later as the head of the Draper Corporation, the relationship between management and labor (who were by this time almost entirely immigrants) had deteriorated.
1912 brought the Hopewell Strike, where the Draper family tangled with the International Workers of the World (otherwise known as the IWW or the “wobblies”). Violence broke out, people were shot and Draper ended up on the losing end of the battle. The four-month strike clearly had an effect on Eban’s nephew Wycliffe Preston Draper, who thereafter “became a man obsessively seeking a way to restore the old order.”5
The Draper Corporation was a major player in the world of textile machinery makers, at one point employing over 3,000 people.6 Thus was Wycliffe given the freedom to embark on what seems a series of adventures, with stints in the British and American armies in WWI and numerous African safaris after the war. But Wycliffe’s life seemed to take a turn in 1935 when he went to Berlin to attend the International Congress for the Scientific Investigation of Population Problems. From Wikipedia:
At the conference, Draper’s travel companion, Dr. Clarence Campbell delivered an oration that concluded: “The difference between the Jew and the Aryan is as unsurmountable [sic] as that between black and white…. Germany has set a pattern which other nations must follow…. To that great leader, Adolf Hitler!”
Hamilton and Draper were a good match: both were passionate about racial purity, and Hamilton had a scientific method to put it into action. Draper was fervently anti-regulation, anti-union and anti-immigrant and had the funds to do something about it. An avowed eugenicist, segregationist and Nazi supporter, over the course of his life, Draper secretly contributed millions of dollars to fighting against Social Security, child labor laws and desegregation, as well as funding the Back to Africa movement, which advocated the deportation of the descendants of enslaved people to Africa.
In 1937, the two of them joined forces to form the Pioneer Fund, with Laughlin serving as its first president. The big innovation of the Pioneer Fund was to establish a pattern that subsequent right-wing foundations would follow. It goes like this:
- Funding of biased “research” that supports a predetermined conclusion
- Contributions to fund university chairs to be filled by academics who will act as “mouthpieces” for the message
- Monies to package, disseminate and promote the product on mass media
It’s just that simple. And it works.
The Draper Corporation was eventually absorbed by Rockwell International (who has right-wing ties of its own), but 88 years after its founding, The Pioneer Fund is very much still with us. These right-wing organizations tend to keep a low profile, so you may not have heard of them (which is kinda the idea), but you’ve probably heard of The Bell Curve, a book The Pioneer Fund published in 1994 that claims that in matters of intelligence, Blacks are genetically inferior to Whites.
The conclusions of the book have been roundly discredited. (Here’s one analysis at random from Scientific American – here’s another, and you can find more.) But that doesn’t stop the book from being regularly cited to this day as an authoritative source by right-wing messengers.
Just putting the subject out there causes doubt among the general public, so even if you disagree with the conclusion of the book, it’s still Mission Accomplished. That’s the insidious power of the Pioneer Fund model.
The Pioneer Fund has been classified as a hate group by the Southern Policy Law Center.
Organizations that have followed in its footsteps:
- Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation – Assets of almost $1 billion and over $1 billion given away in its history. With Rockwell International’s absorption of both Pioneer and Bradley (in 1967 and 1985, respectively), there is a straight line from Hamilton and the Holocaust to The Pioneer Fund to Bradley.
- Heritage Foundation – Assets of over $387 million, extreme MAGA, creators of Project 2025
- American Enterprise Institute – Assets of over $348 million, in favor of lowering taxes on corporations and the wealthy at all costs
- Sarah Scaife Foundation – Assets of over $644 million, huge supporter of right-wing groups
The key is to come up with inflammatory “information” that sounds credible, back it up with authoritative-sounding mouthpieces and promote it on mass-media social networks. Those “caravans” of murderous immigrant criminals poised to invade the US who magically disappear after Election Day are just one of many, many examples of how the extreme right uses its vast resources to strike unjustified fear and hatred into the hearts of Americans.
There’s a whole galaxy of organizations who use the Pioneer Fund model to funnel money into specific right-wing causes. For example, The Federalist Society who (despite a name that evokes the Founders) was founded only in 1982. Yet they have held a stranglehold on the Supreme Court, being responsible for all six Republican-nominated judges currently serving.
All of these organizations have one thing in common:
Unable to win in legitimate democratic debate, their purpose is to deceive the American people by using well-financed, attractively-packaged disinformation to persuade the public to vote against their own interests.
Under the leadership of Roger Ailes, Nixon’s TV producer for the 1968 presidential campaign, Fox News was originally formed as the communications arm of the Republican Party. Serving as part #3 of the Pioneer “recipe” (above), Fox has now has been mainstreaming disinformation into the American body politic for almost 30 years.
With 1% of the US population now controlling 50% of the wealth, you’d have to say it’s working.
All of this is the legacy of what Laughlin and Draper did with the Pioneer Fund. With the right-wing having now swallowed today’s Republican Party whole, Laughlin is the great-grandaddy of both today’s Republican Party and the Holocaust… and presumably somewhere there’s an honorary degree from the University of Heidelberg in 1936 to prove it.
In our next part, we’ll go into the radical overreach of the Supreme Court and the utterly disastrous consequences of the 2000 election, before it all falls down the memory hole.
