252 Chapter 10
TheColumbinekillershappenedto havean inadvertentdisciplein Finlandby the
nameof Pekka-EricAuvinen(b. 1989).Underthe username“NaturalSelector” he posted
videomanifestoson the websiteYouTubeto air his ravings,aggrandizinghimselfas “a
cynicalexistentialist,anti-humanhumanist,anti-socialsocial-Darwinist,realisticidealist
andgod-likeatheist.”^121 On November7, 2007,Auvinenwentto JokelaHighSchool,
whichhe regularlyattendedas a student,and shoteightotherpeoplebeforeturninghis
gun on himself.Hourspriorto the incident,he posteda videoon YouTube^122 in whichhe
stated,“I, as a naturalselector,will eliminateall whoI see unfit,disgracesof humanrace
andfailuresof naturalselection.”^123 I havepointedout manyironiesthroughoutthis
book,but it is an irony-upon-ironiesthattheseschoolshootershaveproclaimedthem-
selvesto be the latestexponentsof a nineteenth-centuryideologicaltraditionthat had not
trulyexisteduntilthe schoolshootersthemselveshaddecidedto entertainit seriously.
Predictablythe self-fashionedpunditson YouTubeimmediatelybuzzedaboutthe Jokela
Highshootingmerehoursafterit tookplace.Oneof the punditswasTerroja“T.J.” Lee
Kincaid,betterknownonlineas “TheAmazingAtheist.” Kincaidhad actuallyarguedwith
Auvinenabouthis ideologyin e-mailsandin YouTubevideosmonthsprecedingthe
shooting.Not surprisingly,KincaidascribesAuvinen’s homicidalbehaviorto “socialDar-
winism,”^124 whichKincaidthinks“shouldrightlybe called‘socialSpencerism.’ “^125
Quitepresciently,Spencerestimatedin his ownlifetimethatin about“threecasesout
of fourthe allegedopinionsof minecondemnedby opponents,are not opinionsof mine
at all, but are opinionswronglyascribedby themto me; sometimesfromcarelessnessbut
morefrequentlyfromperversity:seeming,not unfrequently,too deliberate.”^126 Eversince
HofstadterreleasedAmericanThought, to the day of the presentwriting,the situationhas
worsened.As GeorgeH. Smithrightlyapprehends,“moreoftenthannot,slanderand
misrepresentationhavebeenthe stocktoolsof Spencercritics.”^127
Indeed,in the journalVictorianStudies, RichardL. Schoenwaldwritesthat that the best
explanationfor Spencer’s laissez-fairepoliticsis thathe resentedhis toilettraining.^128 I
wishI werejoking,but I am not.
The revisionisthistorianHarryElmerBarnes(1889–1968)carpsthatSpencer’s “persis-
tentandevergrowingresentmentagainstthe extensionof governmentalactivityprob-
ablywas personallymotivatedby a subconsciousneuroticreaction.”^129
Neo-conservativewriterGertrudeHimmelfarb(b. 1922)animadvertsuponSpencer
for beinga “dilettantewhosewritingwasas facileas his thinking”; to her,his “imageis
comicand pathetic.”^130
Fortunately,not everyoneis like Kincaid,Schoenwald,Barnes,or Himmelfarb.Jonah
Goldbergis one of the few writersto admitthe truthaboutSpencer.He scribes,“Herbert
Spencer...wassingledout as the posterboyfor all thatwaswrongin classical” laissez-
faire“liberalism.Spencerwasindeeda Darwinist.. ., but his interpretationof evolution-
ary theoryreinforcedhis viewthatpeopleshouldbe left alone.In almosteverysense,
Spencerwasa good—albeit classical” laissez-faire—“liberal:he championed charity,
women’s suffrage,and civilliberties.But he was the incarnationof all that was backward,
reactionary,andwrongaccordingto the progressiveworldview,not becausehe sup-
portedHitlerianschemesof forcedracehygienebut becausehe adamantlyopposedthem.
To this dayit is de rigueuramong” left-winggovernist“intellectualsandhistoriansto
takepotshotsat Spenceras the philosophicalwellspringof racism,right-wing‘greed,’
and eventhe Holocaust” (emphasisGoldberg’s). Just as I do, GoldbergthustakesRichard
HofstadterandSDATto taskfor propagatingthe misconceptionsaboutSpencerand the
nineteenth-century’s industrialists.Goldberg soundlyjudges SDATto be a workof
“deeply flawed scholarship,” resulting in Hofstadtergetting “much of his history
wrong.. .”^131