34 Chapter 2
in a stageof doubtabouttheology,includingthe supernaturalelement,and indeedof the
wholeschemeof salvationthroughvicariousatonementand all the fabricbuiltuponit, I
camefortunatelyuponDarwin’s and Spencer’s works:‘The Dataof Ethics,’ ‘FirstPrinci-
ples,’ ‘SocialStatics,’ ‘TheDescentof Man.’” Thatlast bookwasby Darwin;Spencer
authoredthe otherslisted.Carnegie’s passagecontinues,“Reachingthe pageswhich
explainhowmanhas absorbedsuchmentalfoodsas werefavorableto him,retaining
whatwas salutary,rejectingwhatwas deleterious,I rememberthat lightcameas in a food
and all was clear.Not onlyhad I got rid of theologyand the supernatural,but I had found
the truthof evolution.... Manwasnot createdwithan instinctfor his owndegradation,
but fromthe lowerhe had risento the higherforms.Noris thereany conceivableend to
his marchto perfection.” The so-calledrobberbaronthenspoutsthis incredibleseriesof
claimsabouthis philosophicmentor.“Spencerwas alwaysthe calmphilosopher.I believe
thatfromchildhoodto old age... he neverwasguiltyof an immoralact or did an
injusticeto any humanbeing.He wascertainlyone of the mostconscientiousmenin all
his doingsthat everwas born.Fewmenhavewishedto knowanothermanmorestrongly
thanI knowHerbertSpencer,for seldomhas one beenmoredeeplyindebtedthanI to
him and to Darwin.”^78 As Blackputsit, Davenportand othereugenicists“relieduponthe
powerful,the wealthy,andthe influentialto maketheirwaragainstthe weaka conflict
foughtnot in public,but in the administrativeand bureaucraticfoxholesof America.” In
Black’s mind,eugenicslegislation“wasnothingless thanan alliancebetweenbiological
racismandmightyAmericanpower,position,andwealthagainstthe mostvulnerable,
the mostmarginaland the leastempoweredin the nation.”^79
Thissignifies,yes, that somewealthyindividualssupportedstate-trumpetedeugenics.
But it provesabsolutelynothingunseemlyaboutunencumberedmarkets.First,YaleUni-
versityhistorianDanielJ. KevlesrevealsthatMrs.MaryWilliamsonHarrimanbeganto
bankrollDavenport’s eugenicsprojectsprimarilyat the requestof her daughter,Mary
RumseynéeHarriman(1882–1934).As Kevlesarticulates,MaryRumseydevelopedsucha
zealfor government-backedeugenicsas a directresultof her beinga “socialactivistwith
a [left-wingwelfare-state]liberalbent.” MaryRumsey’s brotherwas W. AverellHarriman
(1891–1986),FDR’s ambassadorto the SovietUnion.^80 She wasalsoa friendof Eleanor
RooseveltandFDR’s U.S.LaborSecretary,FrancesPerkins(1882–1965),^81 whom,I may
add,championedthe 1938FairLaborStandardsAct.MaryRumseyherselfheadedthe
Consumers’ AdvisoryBoardof the NationalRecoveryAdministrationunderthe New
Deal.DanielKevles,writesthatgovernisteugenicsstruckMaryRumsey“as a meansof
socialimprovement.. .” She convincedher mother,MaryHarriman,of the same,and this
persuadedMrs.Harrimanto bankrollDavenport’s work.^82
Auditthe notionthatSpencerinspiredCarnegie’s governisteugenicism.Thevery
magazinethat Spenceroncehelpededit,The Economist, has,as recentlyas the twenty-first
century,ominouslyimplicatedSpencerin supposedlysupplyingCarnegiewitha ruthless
attitude.In 2003,the writerPeterKrasscameout withhis ownbiographyof Carnegie.
Thatsameyear,The EconomistreviewedKrass’s bookin its pages.The periodicalpraises
Krassfor noticingthat one of the “mainmotivatingforces” of Carnegie’s careerwasnone
otherthan“the harshformof Darwinismtaughtby HerbertSpencer,Carnegie’s guru
(andwriterforThe Economist). Spencerheldthat‘societyadvanceswhereits fittestmem-
bersare allowedto asserttheirfitnesswiththe leasthindrance,and wherethe leastfitted
are not artificiallypreventedfromdyingout.’”^83
I havealreadydispelledthe falseaccusationthatSpencerhatedprivatecharity.The
sourceof the quotationaboutthe “leastfitted” being“not artificiallypreventedfrom
dyingout” is unclear.Whenyou rummagethroughthe endnotessectionof PeterKrass’s
Carnegiebiography,yousee thatKrasscitestwoworksaboutHerbertSpencer.^84 Krass
purportsto be discussingSpencer’s booksSocialStatics(whichis the sourceof my Spencer