78.
Eugenics
And Foul Smelling Government Policies
Eugenics is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and reduced reproduction of less desired people and traits.[1]
The American Journal of Eugenics (1906) defined it as “the science of good generation” and “the doctrine of Progress, or Evolution, especially in the human race, through improved conditions in the relations of the sexes.”
In 1970, I. Gottesman, a director of the American Eugenics Society, defined it in this way: “The essence of evolution is natural selection; the essence of eugenics is the replacement of ‘natural’ selection by conscious, premeditated, or artificial selection in the hope of speeding up the evolution of ‘desirable’ characteristics and the elimination of undesirable ones.”
Eugenics in the first part of the 20th century was not just an academic exercise. Eugenicists were organizing, particularly in England and the United States, to implement policies consistent with their theories. The work of the eugenicists included: racism and white supremacy, promoting birth control among the dysgenic, restricting immigration, sterilizing the handicapped, promoting euthanasia, and seeking for ways to increase the number of genetically well-endowed individuals.
The American Journal of Eugenics (1906) defined it as “the science of good generation” and “the doctrine of Progress, or Evolution, especially in the human race, through improved conditions in the relations of the sexes.”
In 1970, I. Gottesman, a director of the American Eugenics Society, defined it in this way: “The essence of evolution is natural selection; the essence of eugenics is the replacement of ‘natural’ selection by conscious, premeditated, or artificial selection in the hope of speeding up the evolution of ‘desirable’ characteristics and the elimination of undesirable ones.”
Eugenics in the first part of the 20th century was not just an academic exercise. Eugenicists were organizing, particularly in England and the United States, to implement policies consistent with their theories. The work of the eugenicists included: racism and white supremacy, promoting birth control among the dysgenic, restricting immigration, sterilizing the handicapped, promoting euthanasia, and seeking for ways to increase the number of genetically well-endowed individuals.
History
Eugenics, as a modern concept, was originally developed by Francis Galton. Galton had read his cousin Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, which sought to explain the development of plant and animal species, and desired to apply it to humans. In 1883, one year after Darwin’s death, Galton gave his research a name, Eugenics.[2]
Throughout its recent history, eugenics remains a controversial concept.[3] Many countries enacted various eugenics policies and programs, including: genetic screening, birth control, promoting differential birth rates, marriage restrictions, segregation (both racial segregation and segregation of the mentally ill from the rest of the population), compulsory sterilization, forced abortions or forced pregnancies and genocide. Most of these policies were later regarded as coercive and/or restrictive.
The methods of implementing eugenics varied by country; however, some of the early 20th century methods were identifying and classifying individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups — such as the Roma and Jews — as “degenerate” or “unfit”; the segregation or institutionalisation of such individuals and groups, their sterilization, euthanasia, and in the case of Nazi Germany, their mass murder.[4]
Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities, and received funding from many sources.[5] Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenicists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States.[6] Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in a variety of other countries, including Belgium,[7] Brazil,[11] Canada,[12] and Sweden,[8] among others.
In addition to being practiced in a number of countries, eugenics was internationally organized through the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations. (Black 2003, p. 240) Its scientific aspects were carried on through research bodies such as the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity and the Eugenics Record Office (Black 2003, p. 45).
Its moral aspects included rejection of the doctrine that all human beings are born equal and redefining morality purely in terms of genetic fitness (Black 2003, p. 237). Its racist elements included pursuit of a pure “Nordic race” or “Aryan” genetic pool and the eventual elimination of less fit races (see Black, Chapter 5 Legitimizing Raceology and Chapter 9 Mongrelization).
Throughout its recent history, eugenics remains a controversial concept.[3] Many countries enacted various eugenics policies and programs, including: genetic screening, birth control, promoting differential birth rates, marriage restrictions, segregation (both racial segregation and segregation of the mentally ill from the rest of the population), compulsory sterilization, forced abortions or forced pregnancies and genocide. Most of these policies were later regarded as coercive and/or restrictive.
The methods of implementing eugenics varied by country; however, some of the early 20th century methods were identifying and classifying individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups — such as the Roma and Jews — as “degenerate” or “unfit”; the segregation or institutionalisation of such individuals and groups, their sterilization, euthanasia, and in the case of Nazi Germany, their mass murder.[4]
Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities, and received funding from many sources.[5] Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenicists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States.[6] Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in a variety of other countries, including Belgium,[7] Brazil,[11] Canada,[12] and Sweden,[8] among others.
In addition to being practiced in a number of countries, eugenics was internationally organized through the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations. (Black 2003, p. 240) Its scientific aspects were carried on through research bodies such as the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity and the Eugenics Record Office (Black 2003, p. 45).
Its moral aspects included rejection of the doctrine that all human beings are born equal and redefining morality purely in terms of genetic fitness (Black 2003, p. 237). Its racist elements included pursuit of a pure “Nordic race” or “Aryan” genetic pool and the eventual elimination of less fit races (see Black, Chapter 5 Legitimizing Raceology and Chapter 9 Mongrelization).
Both the public and some elements of the scientific community have associated eugenics with Nazi abuses, such as enforced “racial hygiene”, human experimentation, and the extermination of “undesired” population groups. However, developments in genetic and reproductive technologies at the end of the 20th century are, as per some, raising for some people numerous new questions regarding the ethical status of eugenics, effectively creating a resurgence of interest in the subject.
Today it is still regarded by some as a brutal movement which inflicted massive human rights violations on millions of people.[9] Some practices engaged in by people in the name of eugenics involving violations of privacy, violations of reproductive rights, attacks on reputation, violations of the right to life, to found a family, to freedom from discrimination are all today classified as violations of human rights.
The practice of negative racial aspects of eugenics, after World War II, fell within the definition of the new international crime of genocide, set out in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.[10]
Today it is still regarded by some as a brutal movement which inflicted massive human rights violations on millions of people.[9] Some practices engaged in by people in the name of eugenics involving violations of privacy, violations of reproductive rights, attacks on reputation, violations of the right to life, to found a family, to freedom from discrimination are all today classified as violations of human rights.
The practice of negative racial aspects of eugenics, after World War II, fell within the definition of the new international crime of genocide, set out in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.[10]
International Federation of Eugenics Organizations
The International Federation of Eugenic Organizations (IFEO) was founded in 1925. Most members of this organization united eugenics with racism with political propaganda for the enhancement of the ‘white race’.” Charles Davenport founded the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations (IFEO) and was its first president. Charles Davenport was using the information gathered by other workers in the field of bastard studies to construct a ‘World Institute for Miscegenations’ and was working on a ‘world map’ of the ‘mixed-race areas,’ which he introduced for the first time at a meeting of the IFEO in Munich in 1928.” 11,12 Ernst Rüdin was director of the Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Psychiatrie (DFA) or the German Research Institute for Psychiatry (a Kaiser Wilhelm Institute). His expertise was in sterilization, and he wrote in his field of expertise. Rüdin was the second president of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations (IFEO), by 1933.[13]
References:
Source: Wikipedia and others.
[1]. Currell, Susan; Christina Cogdell (2006). Popular Eugenics: National Efficiency and American Mass Culture in The 1930s. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press. p. 203. ISBN 0-8214-1691-X.
[2]. http://www.amazon.com/DNA-The-Secret-Life-ebook/dp/B001PSEQAG
[3].Blom 2008, p. 336
[4].See for example, Black 2003
[5].Allen, Garland E. (2004). “Was Nazi eugenics created in the US?”. EMBO Rep. 5 (5): 451–2. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400158.
[6]. Barrett, Deborah; Kurzman, Charles (October 2004). “Globalizing Social Movement Theory: The Case of Eugenics”. Theory and Society 33 (5): 505.
[7]. “The National OFfice of Eugenics in Belgium” (PDF). Science 57 (1463): 46. 12 January 1923. Bibcode:1923Sci....57R..46.. doi:10.1126/science.57.1463.46.
[8]. a b Social Democrats implemented measures to forcibly sterilise 62,000 people. World Socialist Web Site
[9]. See for example Weigmann K (October 2001). “In the name of science. The role of biologists in Nazi atrocities: lessons for today’s scientists”. EMBO Rep. (European Molecular Biology Organization) 2 (10): 871–5. doi:10.1093/ embo-reports/kve217. PMC 1084095. PMID 11600445. It concludes, “It was scientists who interpreted racial differences as the justification to murder ... It is the responsibility of today’s scientists to prevent this from happening again.”
[10]. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 3, 2
[11]. Galton, Francis (1883). Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development. London: Macmillan Publishers. p. 199.
[12]. “Correspondence between Francis Galton and Charles Darwin”. Galton. org. Retrieved 2011-11-28.
[13]. “Darwin Correspondence Project » The correspondence of Charles Darwin, volume 17: 1869”. Darwinproject.ac.uk. Retrieved 2011-11-28.
Source: Wikipedia and others.
[1]. Currell, Susan; Christina Cogdell (2006). Popular Eugenics: National Efficiency and American Mass Culture in The 1930s. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press. p. 203. ISBN 0-8214-1691-X.
[2]. http://www.amazon.com/DNA-The-Secret-Life-ebook/dp/B001PSEQAG
[3].Blom 2008, p. 336
[4].See for example, Black 2003
[5].Allen, Garland E. (2004). “Was Nazi eugenics created in the US?”. EMBO Rep. 5 (5): 451–2. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400158.
[6]. Barrett, Deborah; Kurzman, Charles (October 2004). “Globalizing Social Movement Theory: The Case of Eugenics”. Theory and Society 33 (5): 505.
[7]. “The National OFfice of Eugenics in Belgium” (PDF). Science 57 (1463): 46. 12 January 1923. Bibcode:1923Sci....57R..46.. doi:10.1126/science.57.1463.46.
[8]. a b Social Democrats implemented measures to forcibly sterilise 62,000 people. World Socialist Web Site
[9]. See for example Weigmann K (October 2001). “In the name of science. The role of biologists in Nazi atrocities: lessons for today’s scientists”. EMBO Rep. (European Molecular Biology Organization) 2 (10): 871–5. doi:10.1093/ embo-reports/kve217. PMC 1084095. PMID 11600445. It concludes, “It was scientists who interpreted racial differences as the justification to murder ... It is the responsibility of today’s scientists to prevent this from happening again.”
[10]. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 3, 2
[11]. Galton, Francis (1883). Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development. London: Macmillan Publishers. p. 199.
[12]. “Correspondence between Francis Galton and Charles Darwin”. Galton. org. Retrieved 2011-11-28.
[13]. “Darwin Correspondence Project » The correspondence of Charles Darwin, volume 17: 1869”. Darwinproject.ac.uk. Retrieved 2011-11-28.
