Archive for the ‘Eugenics’ Category
M. Catharine Evans - February 28, 2011
Reverend Al Sharpton called a press conference this past week to denounce an anti-abortion billboard overlooking New York City’s Soho district. The sign depicting a young black girl read “The Most Dangerous Place for an African-American is in the Womb.” Sharpton’s spokesman characterized the message as “classic racial profiling.”
The pro-life non-profits responsible for the billboard positioned it in close proximity to three Planned Parenthood facilities who reported performing 17,000 abortions between them for the year 2010.
Sharpton’s charge of racial profiling prompted Lifealways to remove the sign before the Friday press conference. The fact that for every 1000 African-American births there are 1,489 aborted black babies in New York City did not convince the Reverend that something is going on in his community besides racism.
There’s an old African proverb that states “if you want to know the end, look at the beginning.” The adage is good advice for African-Americans like Sharpton who still defend Planned Parenthood. The billion dollar international organization has never been a friend to people of color, so it’s devastating that civil rights activists as well as the first black president would not do their homework. When confronted with pro-life activist Lila Rose’s undercover videos of PP personnel condoning underage sex trafficking, Obama stated that “in the past they did good work.”
Shira Schoenberg - 03/11/2011
A 91-year-old state representative told a constituent that he believes in eugenics and that the world would be better off without “defective people.”
Barrington Republican Martin Harty told Sharon Omand, a Strafford resident who manages a community mental health program, that “the world is too populated” and there are “too many defective people,” according to an e-mail account of the conversation by Omand. Asked what he meant, she said Harty clarified, “You know the mentally ill, the retarded, people with physical disabilities and drug addictions - the defective people society would be better off without.”
Harty confirmed to the Monitor that he made the comments to Omand. Harty told the Monitor the world population has increased dramatically, and “it’s a very dangerous situation if it doubles again.” Asked about people who are mentally ill, he asked, apparently referring to a lack of financial resources, “Can we afford to bring them through?”
Harty said nature has a way of “getting rid of stupid people,” and “now we’re saving everyone who gets born.”
In a 1926 article in American Anthropologist, E.A. Hooten reviews the brand new journal Annals of Eugenics, a publication devoted to “racial problems” that “every anthropologist will welcome.”
Martin Robbins - 23 February 2011
Eugenics is, for good reason, a neglected part of the history of science. It is often associated with genocidal dictatorships such as the Nazi regime, but it’s easy to forget the uncomfortable truth that this was a well-established field in America and Britain too, only a few generations ago.
The following is a look at a PDF I stumbled across a few years ago; anthropologist E.A. Hooten’s 1926 review (pdf) of the first issue of a new journal called “Annals of Eugenics: A Journal for the Scientific Study of Racial Problems.”
The journal was issued by the Francis Galton Laboratory for National Eugenics, University of London, and this was no fringe publication - the Institute for Scientific Information listed it as one of the “262 journals published between 1900-1944 … identified as providing the most relevant significant and useful information of that era to today’s researcher”. Hooten was a “U.S. physical anthropologist known for his work on racial classification”, so what did he make of this new journal?
Abortionists perform a 104 year old tradition of Sterilization on Women of Color
Contact: Catherine Davis, 678-894-0445
WASHINGTON, Feb. 2, 2011 /Christian Newswire/ — Leaders of the National Black Pro-Life Coalition are outraged and horrified that women could be treated by Kermit Gosnell for over a decade without government oversight and accountability in Pennsylvania. A recent grand jury investigation shows that state health care officials did not act on reports of botched abortions, involuntary sterilizations and deplorable facilities run by Gosnell for low-income women, mostly minorities.
Gosnell, an African-American, was recently arrested for killing a woman in a botched abortion and for seven counts of murder related to the infanticide deaths of babies, allegedly purposefully birthing then killing them with medical scissors. Gosnell was allowed to continue performing late-term abortions even after being denied admittance to the National Abortion Federation (NAF). NAF rendered their decision after a site visit showed deplorable conditions at his facility yet the NAF did not report the conditions.
Psychology has a fascinating and rich history, filled with amazing advances. But it wasn’t all progress. Psychology has a painful past — with many victims.
One of the most devastating times in psychology was a movement called eugenics, a name coined by Sir Francis Galton in 1883. The goal of eugenics was to improve the genetic composition of the population: to encourage healthy, smart individuals to reproduce (called positive eugenics) and to discourage the poor, who were considered unintelligent and unfit, from reproducing (negative eugenics).
One of the main methods to discourage reproduction was through sterilization. While it seems ludicrous now, many people, both abroad and in the U.S., agreed with the principles of eugenics.
In fact, state governments soon started establishing sterilization laws. In 1907, Indiana was the first state to legalize sterilization.
Jennifer Weiss - Nov 17th, 2010
Jersey City filmmaker Justin Strawhand explores eugenics in America in his latest film, War Against the Weak. Strawhand directed the film, which outlines the connection between the United States’ push to create a master race by eliminating the “unfit” and the Holocaust.
We caught up with Strawhand in advance of the film’s Thursday night screening at New Jersey City University, his alma mater.
Could you give us a quick primer on eugenics in America — how it started and how it ultimately ended?
The American eugenics movement really starts at the beginning of the 20th century on Long Island, in Cold Spring Harbor. It’s funded by some of the wealthiest families in the country, Rockefeller and Carnegie, and it really takes off like wildfire. Eugenics becomes taught in schools, it’s legislated all over the country, and the Supreme Court decides that eugenics sterilization is okay in 1927.
There’s really two things that kill American eugenics. One is that as the atrocities in Germany [are uncovered] — and more specifically, as America goes to war with Germany — eugenics gets a really bad name. Secondly, the very people that eugenicists were so terrified of, which were the waves of immigrants who were coming in from all over the place, but specifically from Eastern Europe, become a very powerful voting bloc, and so the politicians who had supported eugenics really run scared from it. That isn’t to say the ideas of eugenics don’t transform after the war because I think that they do, but they change names and they change tactics.
Eamonn Keane - November 11, 2010
The so-called science of eugenics refers to the application of animal breeding techniques to control human population in order to raise its quality. Eugenicists assert that certain groups of people are of a superior strain and that the human race can be improved by breeding selectively from them. A eugenicist mentality is often present in those pushing for greater access to contraception, sterilization, abortion and euthanasia as means of solving human problems or of ridding society of those considered burdensome.
Recently The Australian newspaper reported on a homily given by Bishop Peter Elliott, Auxiliary Bishop of the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne, in which he stated that the “warped practice of eugenics is rising from its Nazi tomb” in Australia. He said that “a seek-and-destroy policy kills little human beings in the womb because they are ‘guilty’ of Down Syndrome, dwarfism or other imperfection,” adding that “they are deemed to be unfit to live for they do not come up to the standard of the ‘designer baby’ and a healthy, sport-loving race.”
Bishop Elliott continued by saying: “It is no surprise that euthanasia is being strongly promoted today. Nor should it be a surprise that this is the policy of a political and ideological force that puts more value on wattle and wombats than people.” Pointing to the main force driving Australian society in the direction of this new savagery, Bishop Elliott said: “Resurgent aggressive secularism resorts to killing as it strives to engineer, direct and control not only society, but your life and mine.”
Richard Gale & Gary Null, PhD - September 22, 2010
While lecturing at the elitist TED 2010 conference in Long Beach, CA, Bill Gates slipped a statement while speaking on the dangers of climate change and over population: “Vaccines? I love them.” His admission was made in the context of his philanthropic strategy and, as we will see, vaccines play a dominant role in his firm conviction that population reduction is an urgent priority for the survival of humanity. Then the question is, who should be eliminated from the population? Who is elected from the public to make such decisions? The short answer is no one. Hence it is being done quietly thru foundations, international agencies and private industry.
Today the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is “the most powerful charity in the world, and one of the most quietly influential international organizations of any sort.” The Foundation is funded to the tune of $34.6 billion plus an additional $30 billion from Warren Buffet’s investments. This is almost the entire budget of the World Health Organization (WHO).
Gates has followed in the footsteps of the Rockefellers’ lead to usher the New Green Revolution, an aggressive onslaught of genetically modified seeds (GMOs) to increase large scale corporate-influenced agriculture in Africa, India and elsewhere. The international GMO initiatives have devastated small cooperative farms that have served as the lifeline of food for centuries and as resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of farmers. Of course nobody among the oligarchic elite, such as Gates, Rockefeller and Monsanto execs, will suffer from the consequences of this failed revolution.
Robin Phillips - September 12, 2010
Professor David Marsland (pictured right) made news last month when he suggested that the mentally and morally “unfit” should be sterilized. The sociologist and health expert made the remarks on the BBC radio program Iconoclasts and urged that “permanent sterilization” was the answer to many of society’s problems.
Though Professor Marsland’s remarks produced outrage, his basic ideas are nothing new. I have had occasion to mention before on this blog that during the 1920’s and 30’s, permanent sterilization and social engineering were commonly accepted practices among the liberal intelligencia.
This was the dark secret behind Fernald school in Waltham Massachusetts. On the outside it looked like any other educational institution. Few passers-by would have guessed the dark secret lurking behind the brick walls – a secret penetrating to the heart of American liberalism.
Fernald was no ordinary school. Set up in 1848 with funds from the Massachusetts State Legislature, the institution was designed for the incarceration of “feeble-minded” children. Throughout the early 1900s, hundreds of thousands of low-intelligence (though not necessarily retarded) children were warehoused at Fernald in unspeakable conditions. Treated like animals and denied any affection, these “human weeds” were considered genetically inferior from the rest of society.
In his book The State Boys Rebellion, Michael D’Antonio shows that one of the purposes behind the Fernald school was to prevent these “idiots” from reproducing and diluting the gene pool. Margaret Sanger, icon of the American left and founder of Planned Parenthood, put it even more succinctly: “The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind.”
DON BUTLER - AUGUST 23, 2010
OTTAWA — At least a dozen Canadians who’ve been formally recognized for their historic significance — including a past prime minister — harboured racial attitudes that would be deemed unacceptable today.
A review of Parks Canada’s roster of 648 persons of national historic significance turned up several outspoken anti-Semites, others who championed a type of scientific racism known as eugenics and a politician despised in Quebec for his anti-Catholic bigotry.
Earlier this month, the Canadian Jewish Congress declared it will oppose official recognition of former Ottawa mayor Charlotte Whitton because of her role in keeping Jewish children out of Canada during the Second World War.
Whitton, the first woman to serve as mayor of a Canadian city, was nominated last year for her pioneering work as a politician, feminist and social worker.
Rebecca R. Messall - 06/03/201
On a Sunday dedicated to honoring motherhood, May 11, 2010, the Denver Post chose to celebrate everything glaringly responsible for preventing or terminating motherhood. And, to someone like me who is slightly older than the “Pill” and who was 18 at the time of Roe v. Wade, the appearance of the Post’s Mother’s Day article was curious because there is much more that people should know about the threesome of Margaret Sanger, the “Pill” and Planned Parenthood, the nations’ largest abortion provider.
Margaret Sanger belonged to an organization called the American Eugenics Society, organized in the early 1900’s. Members from the American Eugenics Society actually formed Sanger’s original group whose name was changed to Planned Parenthood, but even the latter’s first three presidents were officers or members in the AES, including Alan Guttmacher. Sanger is listed as a member in 1956 under her then-married name, Mrs. Noah Slee.
Later called social biology, genetics, and population control, eugenics was a “scientific” endeavor born from evolutionary biology. It was never confined to state-sponsorship under Communists and Socialist dictators. Eugenics operated quite openly in the United States, England and around the world. The efforts of the American Eugenics Society resulted in many states passing laws to sterilize more than 63,000 Americans. Several states passed official apologies in the 1990’s. The eugenics movement, particularly Margaret Sanger, ranted against the Catholic Church for opposing eugenic legislation and ideology.
The so-called ‘progressive greens’ challenging the idea that the planet is overpopulated are actually only interested in making Malthusian thinking more palatable and PC.
by Brendan O’Neill
In recent years, a few environmentalist thinkers have started to criticise the narrow Malthusianism of their fellow contemporary greens. Peoplequake by Fred Pearce is the latest attack by a greenie on the Reverend Thomas Malthus, the original population scaremonger, and his slavish followers in today’s population-control lobby. With its quips about the weird, harelipped reverend’s hatred of poor people, its critique of the deeply misanthropic eugenics movement, and its challenge to the idea that Africa is overpopulated, Pearce’s book might even look to some like a refreshing defence of rational thinking against the hysteria of the human-hating, womb-fearing lobby. It is no such thing. Pearce, like other influential green thinkers, is burying Malthus only to save Malthusianism.
Peoplequake is the literary equivalent of reaching into the steaming pile of historic bullshit that is Malthusian thought in a bid to salvage some pellets of prejudice that might be applied to today’s world. Pearce, like the Guardian’s George Monbiot, Andrew Simms of the New Economics Forum and other leading proponents of climate-change alarmism, is simply made deeply uncomfortable by the fact that so many contemporary greens have been inspired by Malthus, a man who, not to put too fine a point on it, was the scum of the Earth, who thought poor people should be deprived charity and healthcare and if they died as a result, well good, since they have ‘no claim of right to the smallest portion of food’. Disconcerted about being associated with such foul elitism, and conscious of the fact that the scaremongering claims of every single Malthusian since Malthus himself have been contradicted by humanity’s leaps forward, Pearce and others are keen to create a new kind of outlook: what we might call post-Malthus Malthusianism.
Chris Ford - 5 March, 2010
The pronouncement by Act MP David Garrett that he would like to see abusive mothers paid an incentive to sterilise themselves has exposed the New Right’s hidden agenda towards the poorest sections of our society.
While the Act Party have publicly distanced themselves from Garrett’s comments, I would go so far as to say that this exposes the real eugenics agenda on the part of some prominent individuals on the New Right. Indeed it was during the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century that eugenics caught on as a means of exerting control over the ability of so-called ‘undesirable’ people, namely, the poor, disabled people, people with mental illness, sex workers and those experiencing drug and alcohol addiction, etc, to reproduce children.
The first person to espouse eugenic theories at great length was the British scientist Sir Francis Galton who drew on the work of his half-cousin Charles Darwin (the father of modern evolutionary theory). Eugenic theories caught the attention of both neo-classical theorists on the right and (sadly) some early socialists on the left. Therefore, eugenics attracted the support of people across the ideological spectrum during that period including Sydney and Beatrice Webb (early Fabian socialists), Peter Fraser (Labour Prime Minister of New Zealand), John Maynard Keynes (liberal economist), Marie Stopes (one of the world’s first family planning advocates) and most notoriously Adolf Hitler (Nazi German dictator).
Saynsumthn’s Blog - February 2, 2010
Planned Parenthood invites the Director of the American Eugenics Society to speak at it’s luncheon. Robert C. Cook was invited to speak at the meeting. The meeting was held to discuss the objectives of Planned Parenthood…but…don’t take my word for it: Read the article yourself here:
(Source: Schenectady Gazette – Oct 20, 1958)
Professor Henry P. Fairchild: Former Past President of the American Eugenics Society was also a Vice President of Planned Parenthood….but…don’t take my word for it: Read the article yourself – here
(SOURCE: Schenectady Gazette – Dec 5, 1951)