Progressivism and Playing God

God Bless the weirdos at Quora for asking the questions the rest of us are too afraid to ask.  Regular readers know that I relish Quora fodder, as questions range from the ridiculous to the thought-provoking, but usually fall into some kind of bizarre no-man’s land.

Such is the case with this question:  “Do humanzees (half-human, half-chimpanzee hybrids) exist, or have ones been recorded in the past?”  It’s the kind of question that’s both fascinating and lurid, like reading about a baby raised by wild animals.  Like allowing a human baby to be raised in the wild (what was once called “the forbidden experiment“), such a horrific, cross-species hybrid would be a disgusting mockery of Creation—so, like the terrible car wreck, we want to see more.

The top answer to the humanzee question is from Belinda Huntington, who explains how various species within the same genus can crossbreed, such as a horse and a zebra, or a lion and a tiger.  The more mundane example is the humble mule, the result of a male donkey and a female horse.

Huntington then goes on to detail the many differences between humans and chimpanzees physiologically, and how such differences would make any offspring, if possible, extremely vulnerable and fragile—differences in spinal structure, arm and leg length, cranial capacity, etc.

She doesn’t get into the more interesting metaphysical questions, much less the moral ones—should we interbreed humans and chimps (answer:  no)—but she does link to a piece about Soviet experiments to interbreed humans and chimps.

Leave it to a dangerously progressive, atheistic ideology to play God.

The piece about the Soviet experiments, “Blasts from the past: the Soviet man-ape scandal,” makes for macabre reading.  The mastermind behind this ghastly experiment was Ilia Ivanov, a pioneer in artificial insemination.  Ivanov used ideas about genetics and artificial insemination to improve the bloodlines of Czarist thoroughbreds, and created a prolific array of hybrid animals, such a “zeedonk” (zebra-donkey hybrid).

Following the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, Ivanov gained approval from the Soviet government to travel to Africa in the 1920s to conduct experiments into human-chimpanzee crossbreading.  Here’s a telling excerpt (emphasis added):

… In 1910, he told a gathering of zoologists that it might even be possible to create hybrids between humans and their closest relatives.

At that stage, Ivanov was simply speculating, but a decade and a revolution later, he was making plans to put theory into practice. In 1924, he put his proposals to the government. Despite the disapproval of the scientific establishment Ivanov got the go-ahead – and the funds to mount an expedition to Africa to collect apes. Documents show that the decision was pushed through by leading members of the Bolshevik government.

In February 1926, Ivanov set off for Africa. His first stop was Paris, where he won the enthusiastic support of the directors of the Pasteur Institute and the promise of access to the chimps at its new primate centre in Guinea, then part of French West Africa….

Note that other Russian scientists apparently objected to Ivanov’s proposed experiments, but that the Bolsheviks “pushed through” approval.  Further, the enthusiastic involvement of the French suggests something of their degraded state in the interwar period:  the First Daughter of the Church was now endorsing interbreeding humans and animals.  The cultural malaise and progressivism are palatable.

Ivanov spent a summer in Paris, working with a doctor who transplanted monkey sexual organs onto wealthy, aging Europeans who hoped to regain their potency.  They also transplanted a human ovary into a female chimpanzee.

After some unsuccessful experiments in Africa, he tried to convince the French government to allow him to inseminate human women with male chimpanzee sperm.  Even the French authorities and scientific community balked at this proposal, so Ivanov returned to the Soviet Union, where his government granted him permission to seek out female volunteers.

Fortunately, Ivanov’s transplanted monkeys perished, leaving only an older orangutan, Tarzan.  Tarzan suffered a brain hemorrhage, however, and died before his seed could be implanted into the waiting Russian volunteer.

The big question is why did Ivanov and the Soviets want to conduct this research so badly.  The author of the New Scientist piece, Stephanie Paine, points to three possibilities (emphasis added):

When Ivanov put his proposal to the Academy of Sciences he painted it as the experiment that would prove men had evolved from apes. “If he crossed an ape and a human and produced viable offspring then that would mean Darwin was right about how closely related we are,” says Etkind. When Ivanov approached the government, he stressed how proving Darwin right would strike a blow against religion, which the Bolsheviks were struggling to stamp out. Success would not only bolster the reputation of Soviet science but provide useful anti-religious propaganda to boot.

That might seem motive enough, yet as Etkind points out, some have suggested that the ageing Bolshevik leaders had something less intellectual in mind. “There is conjecture that Ivanov was sent to Africa to bring back apes in order to provide them with glands for rejuvenation.” The Kremlin’s doctors certainly dabbled in rejuvenation treatments and Ivanov did have links to Voronoff, but Etkind is not convinced. “If you want to cover up a bizarre scheme to rejuvenate ageing politicians then you wouldn’t choose an even more bizarre project that’s going to attract a lot of publicity.”

There is a third possible motive – that Ivanov’s research was part of an ambitious plan to transform society. The high-ranking Bolsheviks who backed Ivanov were intellectuals who saw science as a means of realising their dream of a socialist utopia. “Politicians could change the political system, nationalise industries and turn farms into vast collectives – but the task of transforming people was entrusted to scientists,” says Etkind. “The aim was to match people to the socialist design of Soviet society.”

Prove evolution, rejuvenate aging Bolsheviks, and genetically re-engineer humanity to make it perfect:  these, despite no official word from Ivanov himself for his motivations, are what likely drove the Soviet officials to endorse such monstrous experiments.

This is progressivism—Marxism—in a nutshell.  In order to create Heaven on Earth, Cultural Marxists will blasphemously, arrogantly try to remake humanity itself, rather than humble themselves before God.  Indeed, they’ll go to great lengths to disprove God, in a doomed, futile attempt to hide from His Judgment.

But what is really happening is that these alleged atheists know they’ve made a deal with the Devil, and like Adam and Eve, they’re desperately trying to hide their sin from God.  Trying to prove He doesn’t exist by (essentially) sleeping with apes and endorsing bestiality is just another form of diverting attention from their own guilt.  Sin yields to more sin, and error compounds error.

Note, too, the Bolshevik officials desperately attempting to prolong their lives, in a vain attempt to escape the flames of Hell.  To do so, they’d resort to the most unspeakable of experiments, if it buys them an extra few years of power and material comfort.

When an ideology is unmoored from a foundational belief in God, then Man assumes the role of the Almighty.  Thus, even attempting to crossbreed humans and chimpanzees becomes fair game.  The chilling reminder for us today is that this progressive ideology still exists, and is dominant.  Trannies reading kids books in the library is just another manifestation of this same impulse to despise God and His Creation, and to create a “new” morality.

We should all be going ape-sh*t about these offenses to God, country, and decency, instead of letting the progressives fling their poo.

4 thoughts on “Progressivism and Playing God

  1. Interesting post! I’ve stumbled across some weird experiments that you’ve mentioned before on YouTube such as “the feral child” which was about a child raised by dogs. But your thoughts could also be applied to plants and fruits we eat as well.

    We have numerous plants and fruit hybrids that we don’t find naturally until the human interfered. I have yet to read up on if the hybrid mixes are beneficial or not but great points in your post!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks for your comment, Dawnnn. My main point isn’t that hybrids aren’t beneficial or good; clearly, virtually everything we eat today is the result of some form of selective breeding or crosspollination.

      Rather, my point is that attempting to hybridize _humans_ and animals is ungodly—a reckless upending of Creation, and our place in it.

      I wrote a post Wednesday that discusses the concept of stewardship—of man’s relationship to God’s Creation—that might shed some more light on my own thinking:

      In short, I think human’s can and should do quite a bit to cultivate animals and plants that will be beneficial to ourselves. I’m actually quite comfortable with genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) for that reason: it’s just a more advanced, sophisticated version of selective breeding, animal husbandry, horticulture, etc.

      But there’s a line between breeding a donkey with a horse to make a mule (perfectly fine, moral, and beneficial) and trying to breed a human with a monkey (or any other lower creature). It only serves to debase the unique value of humanity, while paradoxically attempting to make ourselves gods.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s