Voting for a Different Candidate Is Not an Affair

You’re definitely onto something there. The “myth of human moral progress” is connected to the long-debunked theory that evolution is “teleological” or “a view of evolution that suggests that it is directional and predetermined, with a goal or purpose”– and that purpose is generally assumed to be about “improving.” But, in fact, evolution is simply a matter of a species accruing traits– for better or worse– in response to random environmental factors.

There’s a whole book on that subject you might enjoy titled “When Atheism Becomes Religion.” It’s not actually an attack on atheism or atheists but about a specific pseudo-ideological movement generally framed as “organized rationalism” or the “Skeptics” which is essentially an existentialist cult of “scientism” (junk science, usually regarding genetics, which an authority deems absolute and unquestionable– in other words, like an absolutist religious dictate but under the banner of science).

Anyway, one of the themes the author focuses on is the myth of human moral evolution. As a cult, the Skeptics have to do the thing that defines all cults which is to pretend that moral evolution is possible by selling the totally crock idea that paradise on earth is possible… if only people will follow the vaunted leaders of the cult who are themselves supposedly examples of morally evolved, transcendent individuals. Some of the Skeptics’ thought leaders, like Richard Dawkins, actually subscribe to another debunked concept– Lamarckian evolution (though rebranded as “memetic evolution”)– which posits that acquired traits like thoughts and beliefs can be “heritable.” In this way the cult can promise that subscribing to the cult’s belief systems will actually change people’s DNA and make them genetically “better” whereas believing in things that the cult does not condone will make people genetically inferior (and, by the way, killable according to leading Skeptic icon Sam Harris).

It’s really just Nazi bs or general totalitarian nonsense. The Nazis believed the Aryan race was morally superior and promised that, by forcibly breeding and culling the rest of humanity, they could get rid of the inferior elements, breed superior elements and pave the way for “paradise on earth.” Stalin believed that bourgeois ideology was heritable which justified slaughtering or starving entire ethnic groups, regional populations and political classes. Former fascist Spanish dictator Franco believed that socialism was heritable (passed on by “politically psychopathic” Republican mothers) which justified the theft and displacement of 300,000 infants in order to “lessen the expression” of the supposed “red gene.”

Basically there’s no guarantee that our species will get better in any way, least of all morally. There’s no guarantee we’ll get worse either though, in light of the modern chemical shitstorm we’re swimming in, it seems sadly likely. Turns out PFAs, pesticides and synthetic hormones alter DNA for the worse. But, imagining we can some clean up the world and avert climate change disaster, simply being realistic about the static status of human moral nature could actually be helpful in somewhat improving things through cautious long term social engineering and organization. You can’t fix anything if you don’t admit what exactly is wrong with it to begin with and what’s “wrong” with humans is we’re basically apes with smart phones and a lot of atomic bombs.