Is Naziismthe FinalStageof Capitalism? 139FrancisGaltonnamedanotherhonorarymember.^59 Haeckel,too, wasgovernistand col-
lectivist.WritesArthurHerman,Haeckelaimedto havehis Romanticistphilosophy“re-
placeselfishindividualismwitha newethicalmonism” thatprioritized“the interestsof
the community.. .”^60 The writingsof Gobineau,Chamberlain,andLapougeshapedthe
fanaticalracialistattitudeof NewYorkzoologistMadisonGrant.As we discernedin the
previouschapter,GranthelpedDavenportpopularizethe advocacyof eugenicistgovern-
ism in the UnitedStates.
Galton,Haeckel,Davenport,andpsychologistHenryH. Goddardeachadditionally
contributedto Grant’s eugenicisttheories.In everyfiberof theirthinking,writesJonathan
Spiro,thesemen“wereprogressives,in the senseof wantingto use the stateto enact
scientificreformsthatwouldutilizethe nation’s germplasmmoreefficiently.” Hitler
directlyread,enjoyed,digested,andcitedthe worksof Gobineau,H. S. Chamberlain,^61
andMadisonGrant.^62 Additionally,fromthe 1920sto his deathin 1937,MadisonGrant
actedas an unofficialadviserandmentorto twoof the ThirdReich’s mostprominent
racialtheorists,EugenFischerand HansF. K. Günther.^63 Fischerservedas the directorof
the Instituteof Berlin,where“angelof death” JosefMengelereceivedhis medicaltrain-
ing.^64 Thatis, in bothdirectandindirectforms,the Nazislearnedtheireugenicistdoc-
trinesfromProgressivesin the USAand socialiststhroughoutEurope.
It is truethatWilliamGrahamSumner’s brother-in-lawWalterCamp,a YaleUniver-
sity footballcoach,had beena memberof MadisonGrant’s ECUSA—EugenicsCouncilof
the USA.^65 Nevertheless,Sumnerhimselfavoidedassociationwiththatorganization.In
the end,Hitler’s ideologywasinformednot by suchlaissez-faireistsas Sumnerand Spen-
cer, but by govenistswhorepudiatedwhatSumnerandSpencerstoodfor. Besidesthe
hitherto-mentionedfigures,suchas GrantandGobineau,suchmenincludedLudwig
FerdinandClauß,^66 ErnstKrause,OttoAmmon,LudwigWilser,WilhelmBölsche,Willi-
baldHentschel,and that notorioussocialistwe discussedearlier,LudwigWoltmann.^67 At
an April23, 1934,dinnerthrownin his honorin Germany,an elderlyKarlPearson—
whom,as we recallfromchapter2, consistentlytoutedsocialismin Britain,and whoheld
stronginfluenceoverEugenFischerand fellowGermaneugenicistAlfredPloetz—stood
up to announceto the roomhis supportfor Hitler’s eugenicpolicies.^68
The readermightbe astonishedto learnthe identityof anothersubstantialcontributor
to Nazieugenicistthought.It wasnoneotherthanexistentialistMartinHeidegger,who
gavelecturesin praiseof Hitlerand eugenicsduringthe summerof 1933at the Institute
for PathologicalAnatomy,and collaboratedextensivelywithEugenFischerin his eugen-
ics studies.Subsequentto 1945,Heideggercontinuedto exchangeletterswithFischer
regularlyand to visithim in personoccasionally.
Of specialsignificanceis Heidegger’s choicein terminology.Mostscholarswhocareto
acknowledgeHeidegger’s supportfor state-imposedeugenicswouldprobablyreferto
thissupportas socialDarwinism.However,EmmanuelFaye’s examinationof Heideg-
ger’s papersrevealsthatHeideggerrejectedthe termDarwinismandcriticizedit as a
doctrineexactlyon accountof his judgingit to be a philosophyconsistentwithlaissez-
faireliberalindividualism.In effect,HeideggeractuallyanticipatedRichardHofstadter’s
tacticof ideologicalargumentation.HeideggerandHofstadterdenouncedlaissez-faire
liberalismby accusingit of tryingto applybiologicaltheoriesto the socialsciences.
EmmanuelFayeelucidatesthatwhenHeideggertaughtclasseson eugenicsin the winter
of 1933to 1934,Heidegger’s “critiqueof liberalism” wasattachedto his “critiqueof
biology.” Thereare those,suchas HarmutTietjen,whomaintainthatHeideggercould
not havebeena consistentNazi,as Heideggerexplicitlystatedthat the generalprinciples
of “biology” cannotbe appliedproperlyto socialscience.Theassumptionsthereare (1)
thatanyonewhorefrainsfromapplyingbiologicaltheoryto socialstudiescannotbe a
socialDarwinistor eugenicist,and (2) someonecannotbe a Naziif he doesnot believein