Nuus

Eugenetika

Eugenetika


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Eugenetika is die praktyk of voorspraak van die verbetering van die menslike spesie deur selektief paring van mense met spesifieke gewenste oorerflike eienskappe. Dit is daarop gemik om menslike lyding te verminder deur siektes, gestremdhede en sogenaamde ongewenste eienskappe van die menslike bevolking te "uitbrei". Vroeë ondersteuners van eugenetika het geglo dat mense geestesongesteldheid, kriminele neigings en selfs armoede erf, en dat hierdie toestande uit die genepoel gebore kan word.

Histories het eugenetika mense van sogenaamde gesonde, superieure voorraad aangemoedig om reproduksie van verstandelik gestremdes of iemand wat buite die sosiale norm val, te reproduseer en te ontmoedig. Eugenetika was in die grootste deel van die eerste helfte van die twintigste eeu in Amerika gewild, maar tog het dit sy negatiewe assosiasie verkry, hoofsaaklik deur Adolf Hitler se obsessiewe pogings om 'n beter Ariese ras te skep.

Moderne eugenetika, wat meer dikwels menslike genetiese ingenieurswese genoem word, het 'n lang pad gekom - wetenskaplik en eties - en bied hoop vir die behandeling van baie verwoestende genetiese siektes. Tog bly dit omstrede.

Francis Galton

Eugenetika beteken letterlik 'goeie skepping'. Die antieke Griekse filosoof Plato was moontlik die eerste persoon wat die idee bevorder het, hoewel die term "eugenetika" eers op die toneel verskyn het toe die Britse geleerde Sir Francis Galton dit in 1883 in sy boek geskep het, Navrae oor die menslike fakulteit en die ontwikkeling daarvan.

In een van Plato se bekendste literêre werke, Die Republiek, het hy geskryf oor die skepping van 'n superieure samelewing deur hoëklasmense saam te verwek en koppeling tussen die laer klasse te ontmoedig. Hy het ook 'n verskeidenheid paringsreëls voorgestel om 'n optimale samelewing te skep.

Mans moet byvoorbeeld slegs 'n verhouding met 'n vrou hê as hulle deur hul heerser gereël word, en bloedskande tussen ouers en kinders is verbied, maar nie tussen broer en suster nie. Alhoewel Plato se idees as 'n vorm van antieke eugenetika beskou kan word, het hy min krediet van Galton gekry.

Eugenetika in Amerika

Aan die einde van die 19de eeu het Galton - wie se neef Charles Darwin was - gehoop om die mensdom beter te maak deur die voortplanting van die Britse elite. Sy plan het nooit werklik in sy eie land posgevat nie, maar in Amerika is dit wyer omhels.

Eugenics het sy eerste amptelike verskyning in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis gemaak deur middel van huwelikswette. In 1896 het Connecticut dit onwettig gemaak vir mense met epilepsie of wat “swakgesind” was om te trou. In 1903 is die Amerikaanse telersvereniging gestig om eugenetika te bestudeer.

John Harvey Kellogg, van Kellogg graanroem, het die Race Betterment Foundation in 1911 georganiseer en 'n 'stamboomregister' gestig. Die stigting het in 1914, 1915 en 1928 nasionale konferensies oor eugenetika aangebied.

Namate die konsep van eugenetiek posgevat het, het prominente burgers, wetenskaplikes en sosialiste die saak beywer en die Eugenics Record Office gestig. Die kantoor het gesinne en hul genetiese eienskappe opgespoor en beweer die meeste mense wat as ongeskik beskou word, is immigrante, minderhede of armes.

Die rekordkantoor van Eugenics het ook volgehou dat daar duidelike bewyse is dat veronderstelde negatiewe gesinskenmerke veroorsaak word deur slegte gene, nie rassisme, ekonomie of die sosiale sienings van die tyd nie.

Gedwonge sterilisasies

Eugenetika in Amerika het in die vroeë 20ste eeu 'n donker wending geneem, gelei deur Kalifornië. Van 1909 tot 1979 het ongeveer 20.000 sterilisasies in die geestesinstellings van die staat Kalifornië plaasgevind onder die dekmantel om die samelewing te beskerm teen die nageslag van mense met geestesongesteldheid.

Baie sterilisasies is gedwing en op minderhede uitgevoer. Drie-en-dertig state sal uiteindelik onwillekeurige sterilisasie toelaat by wie wetgewers wat onwaardig geag word om voort te plant.

In 1927 het die Amerikaanse hooggeregshof beslis dat gedwonge sterilisasie van gestremdes nie die Amerikaanse grondwet skend nie. In die woorde van hooggeregshofregter Oliver Wendall Holmes, "... is drie geslagte onbesonne genoeg." In 1942 is die uitspraak omvergewerp, maar nie voordat duisende mense die prosedure ondergaan het nie.

In die dertigerjare het die goewerneur van Puerto Rico, Menendez Ramos, sterilisasieprogramme vir Puerto Ricaanse vroue geïmplementeer. Ramos beweer dat die aksie nodig was om armoede en ekonomiese twis te bestry; Dit kan egter ook 'n manier gewees het om te voorkom dat die sogenaamde superieure Ariese genepoel besmet raak met Latino-bloed.

Volgens 'n ondersoek van die regering se aanspreeklikheidskantoor in 1976 is tussen 25 en 50 persent van die inheemse Amerikaners tussen 1970 en 1976 gesteriliseer. Daar word vermoed dat sommige sterilisasies sonder toestemming tydens ander chirurgiese prosedures, soos 'n blindederm, plaasgevind het.

In sommige gevalle is gesondheidsorg vir lewende kinders geweier, tensy hul moeders ingestem het tot sterilisasie.

Adolf Hitler en Eugenics

So afgryslik soos gedwonge sterilisasie in Amerika was, niks in vergelyking met Adolf Hitler se eugenetiese eksperimente voor en tydens die Tweede Wêreldoorlog nie. En Hitler het nie op sy eie die idee van 'n voortreflike Ariese ras bedink nie. Trouens, hy verwys na die Amerikaanse eugenetika in sy boek uit 1934, Mein Kampf.

In Mein Kampf, Verklaar Hitler nie-Ariese rasse soos Jode en sigeuners as minderwaardig. Hy het geglo dat Duitsers alles moontlik moes doen, insluitend volksmoord, om seker te maak dat hul genepoel suiwer bly. En in 1933 het die Nazi's die Wet op die Voorkoming van Oorerflik Siek Nageslag geskep wat duisende gedwonge sterilisasies tot gevolg gehad het.

Teen 1940 het Hitler se meesterren-manie 'n vreeslike wending geneem, aangesien honderdduisende Duitsers met verstandelike of fisiese gestremdhede deur gas of dodelike inspuiting genoodsaak is.

Josef Mengele

Gedurende die Tweede Wêreldoorlog het konsentrasiekampgevangenes gruwelike mediese toetse verduur onder die dekmantel om Hitler te help om die perfekte wedloop te skep. Josef Mengele, 'n SS -dokter in Auschwitz, het toesig gehou oor baie eksperimente met tweeling vir volwassenes en kinders.

Hy het chemiese oogdruppels gebruik om blou oë te skep, gevangenes met verwoestende siektes ingespuit en chirurgie sonder narkose uitgevoer. Baie van sy 'pasiënte' het gesterf of het permanente gestremdheid opgedoen, en sy grusame eksperimente het hom die bynaam 'Engel van die dood' gekry.

In totaal word geraam dat elf miljoen mense tydens die Holocaust gesterf het, die meeste van hulle omdat hulle nie by Hitler se definisie van 'n superieure ras pas nie.

Genetiese ingenieurswese

Danksy die onuitspreeklike gruweldade van Hitler en die Nazi's, verloor eugenetika momentum ná die Tweede Wêreldoorlog, hoewel gedwonge sterilisasies steeds plaasgevind het. Maar namate mediese tegnologie gevorder het, het 'n nuwe vorm van eugenetika op die toneel verskyn.

Moderne eugenetika, beter bekend as menslike genetiese ingenieurswese, verander of verwyder gene om siektes te voorkom, siektes te genees of u liggaam op 'n beduidende manier te verbeter. Die moontlike gesondheidsvoordele van menslike genterapie is verbysterend, aangesien baie verwoestende of lewensgevaarlike siektes genees kan word.

Maar moderne genetiese ingenieurswese hou ook 'n moontlike koste in. Namate tegnologie vorder, kan mense gereeld uitskakel wat hulle as ongewenste eienskappe in hul nageslag beskou. Deur genetiese toetse kan ouers reeds 'n paar siektes in hul baarmoeder in die baarmoeder identifiseer, wat veroorsaak dat hulle die swangerskap kan beëindig.

Dit is omstrede, want wat presies 'negatiewe eienskappe' is, is oop vir interpretasie, en baie mense voel dat alle mense die reg het om gebore te word, ongeag die siekte, of dat daar nie met die natuurwette gepeuter moet word nie.

Baie van Amerika se historiese eugenetiese pogings, soos gedwonge sterilisasies, het ongestraf gebly, hoewel sommige state herstelwerk aan slagoffers of hul oorlewendes aangebied het. Dit is egter meestal 'n grootliks onbekende vlek in die geskiedenis van Amerika. En geen bedrag kan ooit die verwoesting van Hitler se eugenetiese programme herstel nie.

Terwyl wetenskaplikes 'n nuwe eugenetiese grens begin, kan mislukkings uit die verlede as 'n waarskuwing dien om moderne genetiese navorsing met sorg en deernis te benader.

Bronne

Amerikaanse telersvereniging. Universiteit van Missouri.
Charles Davenport en die Eugenics Record Office. Universiteit van Missouri.
Gedwonge sterilisasie van inheemse Amerikaners: Late Twentieth Century Physician Cooperation with National Eugenic Policies. Die Sentrum vir Bio -etiek en menswaardigheid.
Griekse teorieë oor eugenetika. Tydskrif vir Mediese Etiek.
Josef Mengele. Holocaust Ensiklopedie.
Latina -vroue: gedwonge sterilisasie. Universiteit van Michigan.
Moderne eugenetika: bou 'n beter persoon? Helix.
Nazi -mediese eksperimente. Holocaust Ensiklopedie.
Plato. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Ongewenste sterilisasie- en eugenetiese programme in die Verenigde State. PBS.


Die deurmekaar geskiedenis van eugenetika

As geskiedenis in skole geleer word, is daar 'n standaard kurrikulum waaraan onderwysers voldoen. Hulle hou oor die algemeen by dinge soos die Amerikaanse rewolusie, 'n afgewaterde weergawe van die burgeroorlog, en miskien 'n bietjie van die wêreldoorloë.

Maar hulle raak gewoonlik nie die werklik donker dinge wat in die hoeke van die mensdom se verlede skuil nie. Dit is eintlik geen wonder nie - kinders is nie gereed vir sulke dinge nie, en hulle sal beslis nie snags slaap nie.

Die ontwikkeling van die eugenetika van die mensdom is beslis een van die dinge. Op 'n stadium (en ons sal presies praat oor watter punt), het 'n ou wat beslis 'n blanke Europese man was, besluit dat natuurlike seleksie nie so goed presteer as dit kom by die feit dat die mensdom bestaan ​​uit die beste van die beste nie . Die room van die gewas, as jy wil. Hy het besluit dat iets daaraan gedoen moet word, en omdat mense redelik vreeslik kan wees, het hulle daarmee gehardloop. Geskiedenisklasse leer kinders nie oor die tye wat die mensdom probeer het om selektief 'ongewenste' te kweek nie, en dit is jammer - want dit is 'n deel van die geskiedenis wat ons moet onthou.


Eugenetika - GESKIEDENIS

Die naam wat afkomstig is van die Griekse “eugenes, ” wat beteken "goed gebore", ” behoort geen verrassing te wees dat “eugenics probeer om 'n beter menseras te ontwerp deur doelbewus goeie eienskappe te kies en slegte dinge uit te skakel soos gewoonlik by die teel van diere. Deur die jare het eugenetika 'n aantal voorstanders gehad, van sommige van die grootste en mees bewonderde denkers in die westerse beskawing tot die ergste menslike monsters wat ooit op die aarde geloop het.

Eugenetika is so oud soos Plato (alhoewel hy dit nie so genoem het nie) en in Die Republiek, Plato (428-347 vC) het aangevoer dat die staat die voortplanting van sy regerende klasse moet beheer:

Die goeie moet gekombineer word met die goeie en die slegte met die slegte.

Alhoewel sy siening met die ouderdom temper, het hy selfs aan die einde gedink dat heersende klashuwelike onder die toesig van 'n raad van matrone, wat deur die landdroste aangestel is, gevoer moet word. ”

Hierdie denke was in ooreenstemming met, alhoewel meer menslik as die algemene praktyk van kindermoord in Sparta, wat gebruik is om die bevolking in stryd te hou.

Eugenetika in die 19de en 20ste eeu

Menslike seleksie

Idees om te kies en om die sterkste te oorleef het in die middel tot laat 1800's baie gewild geword danksy die werk van Charles Darwin in sy Oor die oorsprong van die spesies (1859).

Op grond daarvan het sy neef, Francis Galton, 'n beroemde wetenskaplike in eie reg (hy het die eerste weerkaart geskep), belangstelling in die doelbewuste seleksie van menslike eienskappe opgewek en die term eugenetika bedink.

Met slegs die beste bedoelings (en met die oog op onbedoelde gevolge), verduidelik Galton sy filosofie en doel:

Verhoog die gemiddelde kwaliteit van ons land tot die van sy beter groep op die oomblik. . . . Die algemene toon van die huishoudelike, sosiale en politieke lewe sou hoër wees. Die wedloop as 'n geheel sou minder dwaas, minder ligsinnig, minder opgewonde en polities meer versorgend wees.

In die volgende 80 jaar het die belangstelling in eugenetika in die Verenigde State en Europa toegeneem. Miskien was die berugste inkarnasie daarvan in Duitsland in die 1930's en 1940's. Maar dit was nie net die Nazi's wat dit ondersteun het nie, Winston Churchill en ander prominente figure was ook sterk voorstanders.

Begin ernstig in 1933, die Wet vir die voorkoming van geneties siek nageslag uitgevaardig is. As gevolg hiervan is ongeveer 400 000 gedwonge sterilisasies uitgevoer op diegene wat óf swak, skisofrenies, manies-depressief, epilepties, doof, blind was, Huntington gehad het of 'n ernstige misvorming gehad het-of 'n alkoholis was.

Teen 1935 het die wette vir Neurenberg en Marital Health die eugenetika-program uitgebrei tot Joodse mense en het hulle huwelike (en seks) met nie-Jode verbied. Vir 'n veilige maatreël sou mediese ondersoeke plaasvind dat daar geen rasse besoedeling sou wees nie, en#8221 was nodig voor die huwelik.

Blykbaar was hierdie maatreëls onvoldoende, want in 1939 het sekere dokters die opdrag gekry om 'n genadedood te gee aan pasiënte wat deur 'n mediese ondersoek ongeneeslik siek beoordeel is. , en die lesse wat uit hierdie projek geleer is, is later toegepas op uitwissings in die konsentrasiekampe.

Tog het Nazi -Duitsland in oorlogstyd eugenetika tot 'n uiterste punt geneem. Benewens die massamoorde wat ons almal ken, is Duitse burgers ook geteiken:

In Duitsland self het genadedood na Augustus 1942 deel geword van die normale hospitaalroetine. Gestremde babas is gereeld doodgemaak vir persone wat langtermyn psigiatriese sorg benodig het en as ongeneeslik beskou word, het hulle dieselfde lot gely. Genadedood operasies is soms gekoördineer met bombardemente: bejaardes of andersins swak. . . is doodgemaak om plek te maak vir oorlogswonde.

Uiteindelik word geskat dat 200 000 mense in die genadedoodprogram dood is, en ongeveer 11 000 000 mense is tydens die holocaust dood.

Gedwonge sterilisasie in die VSA

Dit is moeilik om te oorskat hoe gewild eugenetika in die Verenigde State teen die vroeë 20ste eeu geword het. Dink daaraan dat teen 1936 31 van die 48 state 'n soort eugenetika of sterilisasiewet gehad het.

Gelukkig was die wetgewing nie so ekstreem soos 'n paar eugenetiese advokate, soos die neuroloog Foster Kennedy, wou hê nie. Soos hy in 1942 geskryf het: “I am ten gunste van genadedood vir die hopeloses wat nooit gebore moes gewees het nie- foute van die natuur.

In werklikheid het Kennedy voorgestel dat 'n aangestelde mediese raad sou vasstel dat die volgende as 'n gebrekkige kind vyf jaar oud word:

Gebrekkig het geen toekoms of hoop op een nie, dan is ek van mening dat dit barmhartig en vriendelik is om daardie gebrekkige - dikwels gemartelde en stuiptrekkende, groteske en absurde, nuttelose en dwase en heeltemal ongewenste - die pyn van lewe te verlig.

Nog 'n toonaangewende voorstander van eugenetika, Henry Laughlin van die invloedryke Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, was effens minder gevoelig. In plaas van moord op genade, was hy tevrede met die stop van die voortplanting van onvoldoende, en hy het 'n Model Eugeniese sterilisasiewet Met daardie einde in sig.

Hierdie modelwet het voorsiening gemaak vir die sterilisasie van die “sosiaal onvoldoende ”, wat uit 'n baie wye reeks afwykings bestaan: ”

A sosiaal onvoldoende persoon is iemand wat uit sy eie poging, ongeag etiologie of prognose, chronies versuim om in vergelyking met normale persone homself as 'n nuttige lid van die georganiseerde sosiale lewe van die staat te handhaaf.

Die sosiaal onvoldoende klasse, ongeag etiologie of prognose, is … swakgesind … kranksinnig (insluitend die psigopatiese) … kriminalistiek (insluitend die misdadigers en eiesinnige) … epileptiese … dronk (insluitend dwelmgebruik) … siekes (insluitend die tuberkulose, die sifilitiese, die melaatses en ander met chroniese, aansteeklike en regsafskeidbare siektes) …blind … doof … vervorm (insluitend kreupeles) … en afhanklik (insluitend weeskinders, ne ’er) -do-wells, haweloses, boemelaars en armes).

In 1927 het die Amerikaanse hooggeregshof in Buck v. Bell, gevind dat die eugenetika van Virginia, gebaseer op Laughlin se modelwet, grondwetlik is met betrekking tot die gedwonge sterilisasie van 'n swak vrou met 'n swak gesindheid: ”

Die uitspraak vind. . . dat Carrie Buck die moontlike potensiële ouer is van sosiaal onvoldoende nageslag. . . dat sy seksueel gesteriliseer kan word. . . en dat haar welstand en die van die samelewing deur [dit] bevorder sal word. . . .Dit is beter vir die hele wêreld as die samelewing in plaas daarvan om te wag om ontaardde nakomelinge tereg te stel vir misdaad of om te laat honger ly vir die onbeskaafdheid, diegene wat kennelik ongeskik is, kan voortgaan om hul soort voort te sit.

Altesaam is meer as 60 000 mense in die Verenigde State aan onwillekeurige sterilisasie blootgestel teen die tyd dat die wette in die middel van die 20ste eeu afgeskaf is. Soortgelyke wette kan in die hele Westerse wêreld gevind word, en dit word ook afgeskaf as 'n reaksie op die uiterste maatreëls waarna die Nazi's in hul eugenetiese programme getref het.

Amerikaanse immigrasiewette

Soos u kan voorstel, het rassiste en xenofobe eugenetiese beginsels gebruik om hul agenda te bevorder. Met name soos die Race Betterment Foundation, het aktiviste die kongres aangemoedig om die Immigration Act van 1924 aan te neem wat beperkings stel op die aantal immigrante uit 'n minderwaardige voorraad soos Suid -Europa en Asië. Die president wat die wet onderteken het, Calvin Coolidge, het eenkeer oor die kwessie gesê: Amerika moet Amerikaans gehou word. . . . Biologiese wette toon dat die Nordies agteruitgaan as dit met ander rasse vermeng word. ”

Onlangs het Noord -Carolina 'n vergoedingsfonds van $ 10 miljoen gestig vir slagoffers van onwillekeurige sterilisasie, en dit lyk asof Virginia gereed is om iets soortgelyks te doen. Nietemin het eugenetika nie verdwyn nie, en eintlik het dit die afgelope jare 'n sentrale debatpunt geword onder genetici, etici en aktiviste.

Met die fokus op prenatale en pre-inplantingsdiagnoses, argumenteer 'n aantal genetici en ander ten gunste van 'n nuwe eugenetika:

As gevolg van vooruitgang in genetiese sifting, is ons in staat om die voorkoms van siektes wat veroorsaak word deur enkele geenmutasies te verminder, bv. sekelsel-anemie, sistiese fibrose, PKU, Huntington ’s siekte … [en] Downsindroom.

Baie van hierdie voorstanders meen: dat mense wat 'n geen soos GSS dra ['n vreeslike en noodlottige neurodegeneratiewe siekte] 'n morele plig het om pre -inplantingsdiagnose te gebruik - as hulle dit kan bekostig - om die volgende generasie te spaar. ”

Aan die ander kant van die debat voer hulle aan dat die genetiese toetsing van embrio's en fetusse lei tot diskriminerende keuses wat op die lange duur 'n negatiewe uitwerking sal hê. gebore. ”

Diegene teen die moderne eugenetika wys ook op die moontlike gladde helling in genetiese toetse:

ANamate meer mense genetiese sifting aanneem, kan die keuse om dit te gebruik 'n moeiliker manier wees om van die hand te wys, sodra dit moontlik is om die superieure eienskappe van die mens te ontwerp, sou die enigste morele keuse van 'n ouer wees om het geneties beter kinders.

Diegene wat geweier het, sou hul kinders na die onderklas stuur. Of soos een van hierdie “inferior ” kinders dit in die film stel GattacaEk sal nooit verstaan ​​wat my ma gehad het om haar geloof in God se hande te plaas nie, eerder as haar plaaslike genetikus. ”

As u van hierdie artikel hou, kan u ook van ons nuwe gewilde podcast, The BrainFood Show (iTunes, Spotify, Google Play Music, Feed), hou:

  • Terwyl hy progressief was wat swart mense en vroueregte betref, het Teddy Roosevelt nie misdadigers, siekes of kreupeles en ander in so 'n groot guns gehou nie, ten gunste van eugenetika (ironies genoeg in ag genome sy eie lang geskiedenis van mediese siektes). Roosevelt het hieroor gesê: 'Ek wens baie dat die verkeerde mense heeltemal verhinder kan word om te broei, en as die bose aard van hierdie mense voldoende flagrant is, moet dit gedoen word. Misdadigers moet gesteriliseer word en swakgesindes moet verbied word om nageslag agter hulle te laat. ”
  • Alhoewel dit waar is dat, na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog, openbare steun vir eugenetika bykans verdwyn het danksy hierdie vereniging, het talle lande steeds met geweld gesteriliseer, waaronder die Verenigde State met die laaste gedwonge sterilisasie wat in 1981 plaasgevind het. Swede was nog 'n voorbeeld van 'n land wat die eugenetiese fakkel het tot 1975 gebrand, ongeveer 21 000 mense met geweld gesteriliseer en nog 6 000 gedwing om “vrywillig” gesteriliseer te word. Daar is 'n verbasend groot lys lande wat sulke programme na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog nog 'n geruime tyd aan die gang gehou het, meer hieroor.
  • Tot 2011 het Swede omstrede nog steeds sterilisasie nodig voor seksveranderings. Na 'n onsuksesvolle poging om die wet deur die parlement te verander, is dit uiteindelik deur die administratiewe appèlhof van Stockholm afgeskaf.
  • Baie etimoloë dink dat Adolf Hitler se van afkomstig is van 'Huettler' of 'iemand wat in 'n hut woon.'
  • 'Nazi' is nie net die naam van 'n eenmalige prominente politieke party nie, maar ook die Swahili-woord vir 'kokosnoot'. As ons dus niks anders van hom weet as sy naam en sy partyverband nie Ek sou waarskynlik aanvaar dat Hitler 'n man was wat in 'n hut gewoon het en by die klapperpartytjie aangesluit het.

23 opmerkings

Hoe nuuskierig, Melissa, dat dit lyk asof u die rol van die stigter van Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, weggelaat het of nie ontdek het nie: as deel van haar pogings om geboortebeperking te bevorder, het Sanger algemene oorsaak gevind met voorstanders van eugenetika, in die oortuiging dat hulle albei probeer het om die wedloop na die uitskakeling van die ongeskikte te help. deur diegene wat as ongeskik beskou word. Die eugenetiese beleid van Sanger ’ het 'n uitsluitende immigrasiebeleid, gratis toegang tot geboortebeperkingsmetodes en volledige outonomie vir gesinsbeplanning vir mense met 'n verstandelike gesindheid, en verpligte segregasie of sterilisasie vir ernstig gestremdes ingesluit. [74] [75] In haar boek The Pivot of Civilization pleit sy vir dwang om te voorkom dat die “ ongetwyfeld swaksinnig ” voortplant. [76] ”

Of jou navorsingsmetodes is 'n glans, of jy volg die partytjie van hierdie dodelike persoon slaafs. Hoe dan ook, dit sal u nie help om op die lange duur 'n bekende en gerespekteerde skrywer te word nie.

@vanderleun: “ Of jou navorsingsmetodes is 'n glans, of jy volg die partylyn van hierdie dodelike persoon slaafs. ” Ek kan aan baie ander redes dink waarom Sanger eintlik nie genoem is nie. Nie alles is swart en wit nie#8230 Trouens, byna niks is swart en wit nie, behalwe die letterlike swart en wit kleure, dink ek. Melissa moet 'n groot onderwerp saamdruk in 'n artikel wat mense wil lees en werk onder baie streng riglyne (wat ek terloops stel). As sy al die belangrikste persone wat eugenetika ondersteun en hul betrokkenheid by die bevordering daarvan genoem het, sou hierdie artikel maklik 500 of 600 bladsye kon wees en nog steeds 'n bietjie oor die onderwerp gemis het, en nie een persoon sou dit verby die intro gelees het nie. As dit u beter laat voel, is daar ander artikels met ander hoeke oor hierdie onderwerp op TodayIFoundOut wat wel melding maak van Sanger en haar ondersteuning van eugenetika. Die feit is dat die oorgrote meerderheid van die prominente politieke figure in die wêreld in daardie tydperk dit ondersteun het uit alle lewensterreine (godsdienstig en nie). As u hulle almal boos gaan noem, is dit goed. Maar daar is geen partytjie hier nie. Byna elke politieke party van die era het prominente lede gehad wat dit ondersteun het.

Michael Crichton het oor dieselfde ding geskryf in die opstel agter in sy boek, en#8220State of Fear ” –, hy het baie meer diepte ingegaan en meer name genoem wat verband hou met die “science ”. Die volledige opstel is hier beskikbaar en die moeite werd om te lees: http://www.michaelcrichton.net/essay-stateoffear-whypoliticizedscienceisdangerous.html

Noem jy dit fassinerend?
Ek dink dit is betreurenswaardig.

Skaam jou dat jy dit laat lyk “cool ”

@Marcel: Fassinerend is geensins 'n sinoniem van cool nie, en baie dinge wat betreurenswaardig is, is ook fassinerend. Die twee woorde kan op dieselfde onderwerp toegepas word. Fassinerend beteken eenvoudig “ uiters interessant / boeiend ”.


George Bernard Shaw

Hou jy van hierdie galery?
Deel dit:

Die eugenetiese beweging sal vir ewig geassosieer word met Adolf Hitler, wie se strewe om 'n Ariese meesterras te bou gedurende die dertiger- en veertigerjare, uitloop op die uitwissing van miljoene.

Hitler was egter nie die eerste wat die idee verdedig het om mense wat as ongeskik beskou word, af te vee nie. In groot mate het hy eintlik inspirasie uit die Verenigde State geneem. Soos Hitler in 1924 opgemerk het Mein Kampf, "Daar is vandag een staat waarin ten minste 'n swak begin na 'n beter opvatting merkbaar is. Dit is natuurlik nie ons model Duitse Republiek nie, maar die Verenigde State."

Die gewildheid van eugenetika en verwante idees destyds in die VSA (sowel as Wes -Europa) was deels 'n reaksionêre reaksie op verhoogde industrialisering en immigrasie. Laasgenoemde was aan die toeneem en stede het meer geword namate mense nader aan die werk gekom het. En omdat ondersteuners van die vroeë eugenetiese beweging geglo het dat mense eienskappe soos swakheid en armoede oorerf, beteken dit vir hulle dat die samelewing 'n plig het om hierdie groeiende kudde te dun.

Boonop was die Westerse eugenetika 'n uitvloeisel of rassistiese en kolonialistiese ideologieë. Pseudowetenskappe (soos byvoorbeeld frenologie) het sommige blankes in staat gestel om hul wispelturigheid 'wetenskaplik' te regverdig - en dinge dan 'n stap verder te neem deur te beweer dat 'minder' rasse uitgefaseer moes word. Op hierdie manier het Sosiale Darwinisme 'n manier geword om 'n veronderstelde hiërargie van ras te bou - en te verseker dat wit mense (en hul gene) die ideaal bly.

Passend genoeg het die eugenetika eintlik sy wortels by Charles Darwin. Sy teorieë oor 'survival of the fittest' het sy neef, Francis Galton, geïnspireer om die eugenetiese beweging te begin soos die wêreld dit in die laat 19de eeu sou leer ken (en die woord 'eugenetika' self sou munt).

Van daar af geniet die eugenetika eintlik 'n periode van algemene gewildheid in sowel die Engelse Darwin as Galton, sowel as die VSA en elders in die laat 19de eeu en vroeg in die 20ste. In die buiteland en in die Verenigde State was voorstanders van die eugenetiese beweging van mening dat dit 'n Kaukasiese verantwoordelikheid was om ander beskawings te verwester. Dit het gepaard gegaan met die idee om minder te produseer, beter kinders wat 'n beter ras sou skep en baie ekonomiese en sosiale probleme sou genees.

Voordat Hitler die eugenetika tot sy dodelike uiterstes geneem het, het meer mense as wat jy sou dink, ten minste sommige idees wat verband hou met eugenetika as heeltemal wettig beskou, ondanks hul ernstige morele implikasies. Eugenetika was iets wat baie prominente mense eens ondersteun het, hetsy vokaal, finansieel of polities. Presidente, ekonome, aktiviste en filosowe - waarvan jy nooit sou dink dat hulle ondersteuners sou wees nie - het almal eenmaal uitgespreek ter ondersteuning van die eugenetiese beweging.

Kyk self in die galery hierbo.

Grawe vervolgens dieper in die lelike geskiedenis van Amerikaanse eugenetika. Leer dan meer oor hoe Hitler se pogings tot eugenetika as deel van die Lebensborn -program werk.


Sanger se Planned Parenthood -missie

In 'n brief aan CJ Gamble uit 1939, het Sanger hom aangespoor om sy onwilligheid om ''n voltydse neger -dokter' aan te stel, te oorkom, aangesien die 'bruin negers' nader aan hul eie lede kan kom en min of meer hul kaarte op die tafel kan lê wat beteken dat hulle onkunde, bygelowe en twyfel is. ”

Net soos die aborsielobby vandag, het Sanger dr. Gamble aangemoedig om die hulp van geestelike leiers in te roep om hul dodelike werk te regverdig, en skryf: 'Ons wil nie hê dat die woord van die neger moet uitroei nie, en die minister is die man wat die idee kan regstel as dit ooit by een van hul meer opstandige lede opduik. ”

En die gees van rassisme duur vandag voort, soos meer as 300 voormalige en huidige werknemers van Planned Parenthood onlangs in 'n ope brief gesê het met 'n 'giftige' omgewing.

'Planned Parenthood is gestig deur 'n rassistiese, blanke vrou. Dit is 'n deel van die geskiedenis wat nie verander kan word nie, 'het hulle opgemerk en geskryf dat die patroon van' sistemiese rassisme, betaalongelykheid en 'n gebrek aan opwaartse mobiliteit vir swart personeel 'voortduur.

Margaret Sanger in Washington, DC, op 1 Maart 1934. (Foto: Onbekend/AP)

Die kulturele ikoon Kanye West het opslae gemaak met sy onlangse uitsprake oor aborsieverkopers van Planned Parenthood, wat volgens hom “deur wit oppergesagters in stede geplaas is om die werk van die duiwel te doen.” Hy het reg oor die ligging van die besighede.

Die oorgrote meerderheid van die aborsieverkopers het winkels in minderheidsbuurte opgerig, wat gesien kan word in die skaars statistieke wat beskikbaar is by die Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Alhoewel hulle slegs 13% van die vroulike bevolking is, het Afro -Amerikaners 38% van alle aborsies wat in 2016 gevolg is, uitgemaak.

In die sewentigerjare, toe die Roe V. Wade -beslissing van die Hooggeregshof aborsie gewettig het, het die peiling getoon dat swartes 'aansienlik minder geneig was om aborsie te bevoordeel' as blankes. Maar in New York word meer swart babas elke jaar geaborteer as lewendig gebore. En die dinkskrum van die aborsiebedryf, die Guttmacher Institute, merk op dat “die aborsiesyfer vir swart vroue byna vyf keer soveel is as vir wit vroue”.

Dit wil voorkom asof Sanger se visie om swart lewens te beëindig, waar geword het, maar om presies te wees, het sy ook die einde van die Chinese geboorte ondersteun.

Onder diegene wat pleit vir die verwydering van statute, tekens en spore van rassistiese voorouers, is daar geen balans tussen goeie en slegte dade nie. Dit sou skynheilig wees om te sê dat die rassistiese houdings en eugenetiese beleidsvoorkeure van Sanger geïgnoreer moet word, omdat dit 'n 'taktiek' was om geboortebeperking te bevorder, wat sommige as 'n sosiale voordeel beskou, die posisie van die beroemde feministe Gloria Steinem.


Eugenics in America: The Legacy of Sanger and Gates

Elke vorm van sosiale of kulturele diskriminasie in fundamentele persoonlike regte op grond van geslag, ras, kleur, sosiale omstandighede, taal of godsdiens moet beperk en uitgeroei word as onverenigbaar met die ontwerp van God. (Kategismus van die Katolieke Kerk, #1935)

Eugenetiese geskiedenis

Die Eugenics -beweging was 'n kragtige politieke krag in die vroeë 20ste eeu in Amerika. Die lidmaatskap was egter baie anders as Hitler en die soldate van die Derde Ryk. Soos Ross Douthat in die New York Times,

[Hierdie] Amerikaanse eugenici was dikwels politieke en sosiale liberale - voorstanders van sosiale hervorming, partydige wetenskaplikes, kritici van stilstand en reaksie. [Aanhaling van die skrywer Richard Conniff] “ Hulle was nie sinistere karakters nie, maar omgewingsbewustes, vredesaktiviste, fiksheidsliefhebbers, entoesiaste wat gesond leef, uitvinders en gesinsmanne, wat die soeke na 'n beter genepoel gesien het breër droom van menslike vooruitgang. ”

One of the original members of this crusade was Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. Her unwavering support of eugenics as a means of achieving economic stability and improved public health was well-documented in her many essays and speeches.

The Eugenics Movement faded to the background after World War II amid the horrors of the Nazi holocaust. However, it continues to exert an influence on the modern activities of Planned Parenthood, particularly regarding its relationship with African-Americans and other minorities. It also can be seen in the philanthropic activities of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Their tactics for combating climate change and addressing global health issues would make Margaret Sanger proud.

The Negro Project

We who advocate Birth Control, on the other hand, lay all our emphasis upon stopping not only the reproduction of the unfit but upon stopping all reproduction when there is not economic means of providing proper care for those who were born in health. Margaret Sanger, “Birth Control and Racial Betterment” (February, 1919)

Sanger’s most successful endeavor toward this goal was what she called “The Negro Project.”

The propaganda of The Negro Project was that birth control meant better health. So, on this premise, the Birth Control Federation of America (later named Planned Parenthood) designed two southern Negro Project “demonstration programs” to show “how medically-supervised birth control integrated in to existing public health services could improve the general welfare of Negroes, and to initiate a nationwide educational program.” Tanya L. Green, The Negro Project: Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Plan for Black America

In order for The Negro Project to succeed, Sanger emphasized the need to have influential black leaders and, especially, ministers, educated in the goals of the birth control movement.

Sanger knew blacks were religious people–and how useful ministers would be to her project. She wrote, “The minister’s work is also important and he should be trained perhaps by the Federation as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go our that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” (Green, 4)

“Abortion is Racism”

Backed by funding from the wealthy Rockefeller Foundation, The Negro Project was a success.

By 1949, Sanger had hoodwinked black America’s best and brightest into believing birth control’s “life-saving benefits.”

[Black leadership] certainly wanted to decrease maternal and infant mortality and improve the community’s overall health. They wholly accepted her message because it seemed to promise prosperity and social acceptance. … [However,] aside from birth control, she offered no other medical or social solutions to their adversity. Considering the role eugenics played in the early birth control movement…the notion of birth control as seemingly the enigste solution to the problems that plagued blacks should have been much more closely scrutinized. (Green, 5)

Sanger lost control of The Negro Project to other members of her Federation before her vision was completely achieved. However, current statistics attest to the lingering success of her strategy.

79 percent of Planned Parenthood’s surgical abortion facilities are located in or within walking distance of predominately African-American and Latino communities.

African-Americans have a disproportionately high abortion rate though they make up 13 percent of the U.S. population, they comprise 30 percent of the country’s abortions (From Protecting Black Life. org)

Clearly, according to African-American pro-life leader, Dr. Alveda King, “Abortion is racism.”

The Urgency of Population Issues

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated billions to the cause of improving global health, largely by sponsoring vaccine and agricultural programs in Third World countries. In an interview on the PBS program NOW with Bill Moyes (May 9, 2003), Moyes asked Gates how, given his background at Microsoft, he came to this champion this particular cause. Bill Gates responded:

The two areas that are changing in this amazing way are information technology and medical technology. Those are the things that the world will be very different 20 years from now than it is today.

I’m so excited about those advances. And they actually feed off of each other. The medical world uses the information tools to do their work. And so when you have those advances you think will they be available to everyone. [pause]

The one issue that really grabbed me as urgent were issues related to population… reproductive health.

Then he revealed that, for a time, his father, William H. Gates, Sr. was the head of Planned Parenthood.

Decreasing Population Through Better Health Care?

As did Sanger, Gates believes in the eugenist Thomas Malthus’s idea that the sustainability of the world’s resources is completely dependent upon maintaining population control. Ironically, Gates believes that improving health care, primarily through vaccinations, will accomplish this.

And maybe the most interesting thing I learned … is that, as you improve health in a society, population growth goes down.
You know…before I learned about it, I thought it was paradoxical. Well if you improve health, aren’t you just dooming people to deal with such a lack of resources where they won’t be educated or they won’t have enough food? You know, sort of a Malthusian view of what would take place.

And the fact is that health leads parents to decide, “Okay, we don’t need to have as many children because the chance of having the less children being able to survive to be adults and take care of us, means we don’t have to have 7 or 8 children.” Now that was amazing. (Bill Gates, NOU interview).

Gates emphasizes vaccination programs as the best means of combating Third World poverty. However, as with birth control and The Negro Project, this exclusive focus on vaccines has raised some suspicion among the civic leadership. For example, in 2014, the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association and the Kenyan Catholic Bishops Conference issued a statement expressing concern that a UNICEF/WHO Tetanus vaccine was tainted with hCG, a contraceptive hormone. While this accusation has been denied by the agencies involved, the Catholic groups remain wary.

“Innovating to Zero”

Population control is also central to the issue of climate change, another of Gates’s passionate causes. In a talk titled, Innovating to Zero, presented at the 2010 Technology, Entertainment and Design (TED) Conference, Gates proposed a goal of achieving zero carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2050. He explained his mathematical formula by which that goal may be achieved.

Noting that the first factor in the equation is population, Gates remarked:

To that end, since 2012, Melinda Gates, a Catholic, has pledged over a billion dollars from the Gates Foundation to support Family Planning 2020 (FP2020). She helps lead this international effort whose goal is to get birth control to 120 million more women by 2020. This despite strong objections from groups such as Culture of Life Africa who resent “the disturbing encroachment of the bold and wealthy proponents of the Culture of Death.”

“All Lives Have Equal Value”

It remains, even if well-intentioned, the activities of Bill and Melinda Gates, like Margaret Sanger, are in direct opposition to the teachings of the Catholic Church. As stated by Pope Francis In his encyclical, Laudato Si:

Instead of resolving the problems of the poor and thinking of how the world can be different, some can only propose a reduction in the birth rate. At times, developing countries face forms of international pressure which make economic assistance contingent on certain policies of “reproductive health”. Yet while it is true that an unequal distribution of the population and of available resources creates obstacles to development and a sustainable use of the environment, it must nonetheless be recognized that demographic growth is fully compatible with an integral and shared development. To blame population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues. (50)

It is remarkable that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation webpage has as its slogan, “All Lives Have Equal Value.” Would that they and Margaret Sanger actually believed that was true.


The Origins of Eugenics

By the late 1800s, the Industrial Revolution had changed both how and where goods were made in the United States and much of Europe. More and more people were leaving the countryside for manufacturing jobs in large urban centers, where they lived and worked among strangers. As so many lives and livelihoods went through dramatic changes, many people perceived the "strangers" of different races, ethnicities, and classes they encountered as threats to their social status and economic well-being. Many white Americans blamed society’s ills on others, including African Americans, immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, Native Americans, and anyone who looked, spoke, or acted differently than people perceived to be of white, Anglo-Saxon heritage.

Francis Galton, an English mathematician and Charles Darwin’s cousin, offered an attractive solution to those who believed that these groups posed a threat.

Galton decided that natural selection does not work in human societies the way it does in nature, because people interfere with the process. As a result, the fittest do not always survive. So he set out to consciously “improve the race.” He coined the word eugenics to describe efforts at “race betterment.” It comes from a Greek word meaning “good in birth” or “noble in heredity.” In 1883, Galton defined eugenics as “the science of improving stock, which is by no means confined to questions of judicious mating, but which . . . takes cognizance of all influences that tend in however remote a degree to give the more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable than they otherwise would have had.” 1

Galton was particularly concerned with the decline of genius in society. He believed that intelligence is an inherited trait and that the upper classes contain the most intelligent and accomplished people. He was therefore alarmed to discover that the poor had a higher birth rate. In 1904, Galton explained how eugenics might address that problem:

Eugenics is the science which deals with all influences that improve and develop the inborn qualities of a race. But what is meant by improvement? We must leave morals as far as possible out of the discussion on account of the almost hopeless difficulties they raise as to whether a character as a whole is good or bad. The essentials of eugenics may, however, be easily defined. All would agree that it was better to be healthy than sick, vigorous than weak, well fitted than ill fitted for their part in life. In short, that it was better to be good rather than bad specimens of their kind, whatever that kind might be. There are a vast number of conflicting ideals, of alternative characters, of incompatible civilizations, which are wanted to give fullness and interest to life. The aim of eugenics is to represent each class or sect by its best specimens, causing them to contribute more than their proportion to the next generation that done, to leave them to work out their common civilization in their own way.

There are three stages to be passed through before eugenics can be widely practiced. First, it must be made familiar as an academic question, until its exact importance has been understood and accepted as a fact. Secondly, it must be recognized as a subject the practical development of which is in near prospect, and requires serious consideration. Thirdly, it must be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion. It has, indeed, strong claims to become an orthodox religious tenet of the future, for eugenics cooperates with the workings of nature by ensuring that humanity shall be represented by the fittest races. What nature does blindly, slowly, and ruthlessly, man may do providently, quickly, and kindly. As it lies within his power, so it becomes his duty to work in that direction, just as it is his duty to be charitable to those in misfortune. The improvement of our stock seems one of the highest objects that can be reasonably attempted. We are ignorant of the ultimate destinies of humanity, but feel perfectly sure that it is as noble a work to raise its level as it would be disgraceful to abase it. I see no impossibility in eugenics becoming a religious dogma among mankind, but its details must first be worked out sedulously in the study. Over-zeal leading to hasty action would do harm by holding out expectations of a near golden age which would certainly be falsified and cause the science to be discredited. The first and main point is to secure the general intellectual acceptance of eugenics as a hopeful and most important study. Then let its principles work into the heart of the nation, which will gradually give practical effect to them in ways that we may not wholly foresee. 2

Galton was not sure how to bring about these changes. Although he spent years studying heredity, by the time he died in 1911 he still had no idea how traits are passed from parent to child. In his research, however, Galton stumbled upon two discoveries that might have led another scientist to abandon eugenics. Neither fazed him. One was the result of a test he devised to measure intelligence. To his dismay, the poor did as well on the test as “the better elements in society.” He concluded that the problem lay in the test rather than his theory.

His second discovery resulted from his efforts to track successive generations of pea plants. He found that, no matter how high the quality of the parent strains, some offspring were as good as the parent plant and some worse, but most were a little worse. This idea is known in statistics as “regression toward the mean” or middle. Galton suspected it was true for humans as well. If so, it would be impossible to improve the “race” through eugenics. Yet neither finding altered Galton’s beliefs. He continued to insist that intelligence is linked to social class and that “the fittest” parents produce superior offspring.

Oudio

Listen to an audio version of this reading.

By the late 1800's the populations in cities in the United States had increased dramatically. More people were living among people who were different from themselves. Often such encounters caused people to blame others for their own misfortunes or for larger society ills. An English mathematician, Francis Galton, sought to "solve" the problem of those deemed undesirable in this country in developing the pseudo-scientific theory of Eugenics--identifying and breeding the "best" traits in society. One of his biggest concerns was the supposed decline of intelligence because of the "breeding" between individuals deemed less intelligent. In 1904 he addresses this supposed problem in this essay from "Nature" magazine.


What Margaret Sanger Really Said About Eugenics and Race

I t was 100 years ago&mdashon Oct. 16, 1916&mdashthat Margaret Sanger opened the first birth-control clinic in the United States. An advocate for women&rsquos reproductive rights who was also a vocal eugenics enthusiast, Margaret Sanger leaves a complicated legacy &mdash and one that conservatives have periodically leveraged into sweeping attacks on the organization she helped found: Planned Parenthood.

Last year, 25 House Republicans campaigned to have a bust of the pioneering family planner removed from the Smithsonian&rsquos National Portrait Gallery, where it has been included in an exhibit featuring American civil rights leaders, called &ldquoThe Struggle for Justice,&rdquo with Ted Cruz&rsquos office issuing a press release explaining that she didn&rsquot belong there for a number of reasons, the most damning of which is that as part of her &ldquoinhumane life&rsquos work&rdquo she &ldquoadvocated for the extermination of African-Americans.&rdquo It&rsquos not the first time Sanger has faced this accusation. During this past primary season, Ben Carson proclaimed that Sanger &ldquobelieved that people like me should be eliminated&rdquo &mdashlater clarifying, per PolitiFact, that he was &ldquotalking about the black race&rdquo&mdashand in 2011, Herman Cain alleged that Sanger&rsquos original goal for Planned Parenthood was to &ldquohelp kill black babies before they came into the world.&rdquo

Historians and scholars who’ve examined Sanger’s correspondence, as Salon reported in 2011, challenge those who call the activist racist.

Much of the controversy stems from a 1939 letter in which Sanger outlined her plan to reach out to black leaders &mdash specifically ministers &mdash to help dispel community suspicions about the family planning clinics she was opening in the South.

&ldquoWe do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members,&rdquo she wrote. It was, as the Washington Post called it, an &ldquoinartfully written&rdquo sentence, but one that, in context, describes the sort of preposterous allegations she feared &mdash not her actual mission. The irony is that it has been used to propagate those very allegations. Cruz&rsquos letter to the director of the National Portrait Gallery, for example, quotes only the first half of the sentence.

Sanger&rsquos stated mission was to empower women to make their own reproductive choices. She did focus her efforts on minority communities, because that was where, due to poverty and limited access to health care, women were especially vulnerable to the effects of unplanned pregnancy. As she framed it, birth control was the fundamental women&rsquos rights issue. &ldquoEnforced motherhood,&rdquo she wrote in 1914, &ldquois the most complete denial of a woman&rsquos right to life and liberty.&rdquo

That&rsquos not to say that Sanger didn&rsquot also make some deeply disturbing statements in support of eugenics, the now-discredited movement to improve the overall health and fitness of humankind through selective breeding. She did, and very publicly. In a 1921 article, she wrote that, &ldquothe most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.&rdquo

She was, of course, not alone in this viewpoint: In the 1920s and 1930s, eugenics enjoyed widespread support from mainstream doctors, scientists and the general public. Planned Parenthood officials are quick to note that, despite her thoughts on the idea in general, Sanger &ldquouniformly repudiated the racist exploitation of eugenics principles.&rdquo

In 1966, Martin Luther King Jr. made clear that he agreed that Sanger&rsquos life&rsquos work was anything but inhumane. In 1966, when King received Planned Parenthood&rsquos Margaret Sanger Award in Human Rights, he praised her contributions to the black community. &ldquoThere is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger&rsquos early efforts,&rdquo he said. &ldquo&hellipMargaret Sanger had to commit what was then called a crime in order to enrich humanity, and today we honor her courage and vision.&rdquo

As Gloria Steinem pointed out in a 1998 essay for TIME, Sanger&rsquos embrace of the eugenics rhetoric may have been less a heartfelt belief than a political ploy to broaden birth control&rsquos appeal. But even speaking the language of eugenics could be insidious. Steinem writes:

[Sanger] adopted the mainstream eugenics language of the day, partly as a tactic, since many eugenicists opposed birth control on the grounds that the educated would use it more. Though her own work was directed toward voluntary birth control and public health programs, her use of eugenics language probably helped justify sterilization abuse. Her misjudgments should cause us to wonder what parallel errors we are making now and to question any tactics that fail to embody the ends we hope to achieve.

Read Gloria Steinem’s full essay, here in the TIME archives: Margaret Sanger


Eugenics - HISTORY

Hou jy van hierdie galery?
Deel dit:

And if you liked this post, be sure to check out these popular posts:

A child's head is measured to determine his personality and predict his future.

Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. 1932. Ullstein Bild via Getty Images

A poster warns that breeding among the unfit creates an unwanted burden on the rest of society.

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1926. Wikimedia Commons

German Dr. Bruno Beger measures a Tibetan woman's head to demonstrate the ("inferior") characteristics of her race.

Beger would soon work for the Nazi SS to help identify Jews.

Tibet. 1938. Wikimedia Commons

French researcher Alphonse Bertillon demonstrates how to measure a human skull.

Parys, Frankryk. 1894. Adoc-Photos/Corbis via Getty Images

A map illustration revealing which states in the United States have laws condoning forced sterilization.

New York. 1921. Wikimedia Commons

A woman wearing a psychograph, a machine designed to determine someone's mental faculties by measuring their skull.

Verenigde State. 1931. Library of Congress

Families compete in the "Fitter Family" contest, meant to find the most eugenically perfect family.

Topeka, Kansas. 1925. Wikimedia Commons

Babies compete in the "Better Baby Contest," where doctors try to find the perfect infant human specimen.

Washington DC. 1931. Library of Congress

A photograph of a child with a cleft lip, taken to demonstrate the type of child that should be kept from breeding.

London, England. 1912. Wikimedia Commons

Composite photographs, created to show the common faces of criminality and disease.

Geneem vanaf Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development. 1883. Internet Archive

A Eugenics and Health Exhibit teaches the crowd how illiteracy can be controlled through selective breeding.

Verenigde State. Date and location unspecified. Wikimedia Commons

An anthropometry class learns about the different types of human noses.

Parys, Frankryk. Circa 1910-1915. Library of Congress

A phrenologist demonstrates how to measure the mental energy inside of a woman's head.

London, England. 1937. Hulton-Deutsch Collection/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images

A class studies the Bertillon method of criminal identification, based on measuring body parts.

Parys, Frankryk. Circa 1910-1915. Library of Congress

A photograph of a criminal, with the measurements of his various body parts.

Parys, Frankryk. 1902. Wikimedia Commons

A convicted criminal's head is measured.

Netherlands. 1896. Wikimedia Commons

The New York City Police Department practices taking arm measurements using anthropometric methods.

New York City, New York. 1908. Library of Congress

A phrenologist demonstrates how to measure a person's head.

United Kingdom. 1937. Hulton Archive/Getty Images

A demonstration of how to measure a criminal's ear.

Parys, Frankryk. 1894. Adoc-Photos/Corbis via Getty Images

The New York City Police Department demonstrates how to measure a criminal's cranium.

New York City, New York. 1908. Library of Congress

Photographs of "human races," organized to suggest a common trait shared by "primitive" Australians, Africans, and Neanderthals.

Norway. 1939. Wikimedia Commons

Bruno Beger measures the facial characteristics of a Tibetan man.

Tibet. 1938. Wikimedia Commons

A humiliated-looking man with "eunuchism" allows scientists of the Eugenics Society to photograph him in the nude.

Children afflicted with rickets, photographed by the Eugenics Society to demonstrate that their condition is hereditary and could be controlled through selective breeding.

A family of children born with rickets, as photographed by the Eugenics Society.

A photograph from the Eugenics Society showing a family with the "lobster claw" deformity, meant as a demonstration of a hereditary defect.

Composite photographs of patients with and without various diseases, created to find the common facial characteristics of people who are resistant to disease.

London, England. 1912. Wellcome Images

Various types of Indian dwarfs and giants, photographed by the Eugenics Society to demonstrate how humans could be selectively bred to control size.

Photographs of "Indian Dwarfism" from the Eugenics Society.

A woman with achondroplasia (a form of dwarfism), as photographed by the Eugenics Society. The notes point out that her parents and children also have achondroplasia.

Portraits demonstrating the standard head shapes of "criminal types" of various races.

Frankryk. 1914. Wikimedia Commons

Researchers measure the capacity of a human skull by filling it with water.

National Academy of Sciences. 1885. Wikimedia Commons

A craniologist demonstrates how to measure a human skull.

Sweden. 1915. Wikimedia Commons

A human skull in a glass display.

National Academy of Sciences. 1885. Wikimedia Commons

French weightlifter Alexandre Maspoli poses as an ideal human specimen on the cover of La Culture Physique.

Frankryk. 1904. Wikimedia Commons

Hou jy van hierdie galery?
Deel dit:

There was a time when eugenics wasn't generally viewed as dark, racist, or evil. Before the atrocities of World War II, eugenics was something that you could bring up over brunch and expect to elicit nods and smiles of support. We've tried to erase this from our past, but eugenics was once viewed as the height of enlightened scientific thought.

Eugenics – the system of measuring human traits, seeking out the desirable ones, and cutting out the undesirable ones – was once practiced the world over. The idea of controlling human breeding to strengthen the evolutionary process wasn't some dark, fringe theory. On the contrary, it was a popular idea.

These "undesirable" traits were often illnesses and deformities. Conditions like dwarfism, deafness, and even things as simple as a cleft palate were viewed as human defects that needed to be wiped out of the gene pool.

Scientists would measure human skulls in an effort to map the parts of the brain that make criminals violent, in an effort to eradicate criminality. Other eugenics proponents would simply suggest cutting entire groups of people our of the gene pool because of the color of their skin. Eugenics books would boast the superiority of the white race, labeling African and Asian people as Neanderthals and Mongoloids that needed to be kept from diluting the white gene pool.

For some eugenicists, controlling breeding just meant keeping people apart. Alexander Graham Bell, for one, railed against immigration and pushed to separate people with the same "undesirable" conditions to keep them from breeding.

These comparatively gentle approaches, though, were rare. Many more pushed to forcibly sterilize or even kill those deemed "unfit" to breed. In America, by the 1930s, 31 states passed compulsory sterilization laws, forcing the disabled and the mentally ill to destroy their own reproductive organs.

This wasn't a crude minority forcing its will on the majority. A poll in 1937 found that two-thirds of all Americans supported forced sterilization.

Sometimes, however, things went even further. A mental institution in Illinois euthanized its patients by deliberately infecting them with tuberculosis, an act they justified as a mercy killing that cut the weak link in the human race.

After these kinds of ideas took root in Nazi Germany and sparked the horrors of the Holocaust, eugenics turned into a dirty word. With the dark conclusion of its philosophy exposed before the world, it became difficult to justify forced sterilization as a tool for the greater good.

History was then subtly rewritten, with eugenics discussed as something that the Germans did and from which the rest of the world could wash its hands clean.

But, as these photos make clear, for nearly 100 years, eugenics was much more than a German idea. The whole world was complicit.

Next, discover how American eugenics helped inspire the Nazis. Then, for another glance into humanity's dark and troubled relationship with race, view these vintage photos taken inside human zoos. Finally, read up on ten fringe sciences that are as fascinating as they are terrifying.


15 Replies to &ldquo Eugenics: The hidden history of the progressive movement &rdquo

Genetic determinism which is proven by twin studies continues to haunt our society

Honestly I don’t know of any good way to refute it out right

Yes it’s true that genes our biology influence every walk of our life

But how much and to what extent

Genes run the gamut from purely deterministic, as seen in genetic diseases like Huntington’s, to those that afford probabilistic predispositions. Eugenics made the false conclusion that genetics was purely deterministic.

In many respects, the ideology behind eugenics long predated Darwin and the theory of evolution, and this ideology still exists today, even amongst those who don’t accept evolution.

I didn’t mean to say proven by twin studies I wanted to say that twin studies are used to try to prove it.

I absolutely hate genetic determinism the very thought that my DNA puppeteers my decisions my likes and my dislikes devalues everything including politics

Sorry, but that really is a bit of a stretch, trying to discredit the BLM protests against being the victims of centuries of endemic racism by trying to tie them to the eugenics movement. It completely ignores the fact that there was widespread support for eugenics -at least in its passive form – in the early twentieth-century from many parts of society including a number of churches and religious leaders. Trying to portray the protests as massive riots by “progressives” bent on tearing down the very fabric of American society is a smear tactic which attempts to shift the blame from where it belongs.

LoL! Trying to pawn off rioting and looting as “protests” is a perversion of reality and an attempt to escape responsibility for being ounks.

@seversky cool start explaining why BLM has been tearing down Abolitionist statues
Please also explain to me all the videos of them beating the crap out of innocent people and business owners
And how bout Nick Cannon and his last ridiculous statement
And white Shaun King and his demands about tearing Jesus statues down

And do you have to be so stereo typically left or is that just in your DNA

I don’t know of any good way to refute it (genetic determinism) out right.

Here are a few articles along that line,

Gene previously linked to obesity is unrelated – June 29, 2015
Excerpt: … in the real world of careful analysis, scientists are just not finding the “genes” that the headline writers need. British geneticist Steve Jones points out that most human traits are influenced by so many genes that there is no likely systematic cause and effect:
“We know of more than 50 different genes associated with height … That has not percolated into the public mind, as the Google search for “scientists find the gene for” shows. The three letter word for — the gene FOR something — is the most dangerous word in genetics.”
And the craze is not harmless, he warns. …
http://www.uncommondescent.com. unrelated/

What If (Almost) Every Gene Affects (Almost) Everything? – JUN 16, 2017
Excerpt: If you told a modern geneticist that a complex trait—whether a physical characteristic like height or weight, or the risk of a disease like cancer or schizophrenia—was the work of just 15 genes, they’d probably laugh. It’s now thought that such traits are the work of thousands of genetic variants, working in concert. The vast majority of them have only tiny effects, but together, they can dramatically shape our bodies and our health. They’re weak individually, but powerful en masse.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/06/its-like-all-connected-man/530532/

Theory Suggests That All Genes Affect Every Complex Trait – June 20, 2018
Excerpt: Mutations of a single gene are behind sickle cell anemia, for instance, and mutations in another are behind cystic fibrosis.
But unfortunately for those who like things simple, these conditions are the exceptions. The roots of many traits, from how tall you are to your susceptibility to schizophrenia, are far more tangled. In fact, they may be so complex that almost the entire genome may be involved in some way.
One very early genetic mapping study in 1999 suggested that “a large number of loci (perhaps > than 15)” might contribute to autism risk, recalled Jonathan Pritchard, now a geneticist at Stanford University. “That’s a lot!” he remembered thinking when the paper came out.
Over the years, however, what scientists might consider “a lot” in this context has quietly inflated. Last June, Pritchard and his Stanford colleagues Evan Boyle and Yang Li (now at the University of Chicago) published a paper about this in Cell that immediately sparked controversy, although it also had many people nodding in cautious agreement. The authors described what they called the “omnigenic” model of complex traits. Drawing on GWAS analyses of three diseases, they concluded that in the cell types that are relevant to a disease, it appears that not 15, not 100, but essentially all genes contribute to the condition. The authors suggested that for some traits, “multiple” loci could mean more than 100,000.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/omnigenic-model-suggests-that-all-genes-affect-every-complex-trait-20180620/

Thus, directlly contrary to Dawkins’ ‘selfish gene’ concept, that is more of less directly based on Darwin’s own ‘survival of the fittest’ thinking about competition, genes are instead best thought of as existing in a holistic web of mutual interdependence and cooperation.
Which is, obviously, the exact polar opposite of being ‘selfish’.


Kyk die video: GESKIEDENIS GRAAD 11: 15 Junie 2020 - periode 4 15114 (Junie 2022).


Kommentaar:

  1. Teris

    I congratulate you, the simply magnificent thought has visited you

  2. Tukasa

    It completely agree with told all above.

  3. Jacqueleen

    Ja jy die storieverteller

  4. Shaddoc

    Iets by my persoonlike boodskappe stuur nie, 'n fout ....

  5. Samum

    I squint slyly, comparing the facts ... *



Skryf 'n boodskap