Discover rusyns people


Eugenics and the Future of the Human Species

"It is clear that modern medicine has createdto active extermination of "inferior" groups
a serious dilemma ... In the past, there werein the general population - can we guarantee
many children who never survived - theythat everyone will? How to prevent eugenics
succumbed to various diseases ... But in afrom being appropriated by an intrusive,
sense modern medicine has put naturalauthoritarian, or even murderous state?Modern
selection out of commission. Something thateugenicists distance themselves from the
has helped one individual over a seriouscrude methods adopted at the beginning of the
illness can in the long run contribute tolast century by 29 countries, including
weakening the resistance of the whole humanGermany, The United States, Canada,
race to certain diseases. If we paySwitzerland, Austria, Venezuela, Estonia,
absolutely no attention to what is calledArgentina, Norway, Denmark, Sweden (until
hereditary hygiene, we could find ourselves1976), Brazil, Italy, Greece, and Spain.They
facing a degeneration of the human race.talk about free contraceptives for low-IQ
Mankind's hereditary potential for resistingwomen, vasectomies or tubal ligations for
serious disease will be weakened."Josteincriminals, sperm banks with contributions
Gaarder in "Sophie's World", a bestsellingfrom high achievers, and incentives for
philosophy textbook for adolescents publishedcollege students to procreate. Modern genetic
in Oslo, Norway, in 1991 and, afterwards,engineering and biotechnology are readily
throughout the world, having been translatedapplicable to eugenic projects. Cloning can
to dozens of languages.The Nazis regarded theserve to preserve the genes of the fittest.
murder of the feeble-minded and the mentallyEmbryo selection and prenatal diagnosis of
insane - intended to purify the race andgenetically diseased embryos can reduce the
maintain hereditary hygiene - as a form ofnumber of the unfit.But even these innocuous
euthanasia. German doctors were enthusiasticvariants of eugenics fly in the face of
proponents of an eugenics movements rooted inliberalism. Inequality, claim the proponents
19th century social Darwinism. Luke Gormallyof hereditary amelioration, is genetic, not
writes, in his essay "Walton, Davies, andenvironmental. All men are created unequal
Boyd" (published in "Euthanasia Examined -and as much subject to the natural laws of
Ethical, Clinical, and Legal Perspectives",heredity as are cows and bees. Inferior
ed. John Keown, Cambridge University Press,people give birth to inferior offspring and,
1995):"When the jurist Karl Binding and thethus, propagate their inferiority.Even if
psychiatrist Alfred Hoche published theirthis were true - which is at best debatable -
tract The Permission to Destroy Life that isthe question is whether the inferior specimen
Not Worth Living in 1920 ... their motive wasof our species possess the inalienable right
to rid society of the 'human ballast andto reproduce? If society is to bear the costs
enormous economic burden' of care for theof over-population - social welfare, medical
mentally ill, the handicapped, retarded andcare, daycare centers - then society has the
deformed children, and the incurably ill. Butright to regulate procreation. But does it
the reason they invoked to justify thehave the right to act discriminately in doing
killing of human beings who fell into theseso?Another dilemma is whether we have the
categories was that the lives of such humanmoral right - let alone the necessary
beings were 'not worth living', were 'devoidknowledge - to interfere with natural as well
of value'"It is this association with theas social and demographic trends. Eugenicists
hideous Nazi regime that gave eugenics - acounter that contraception and indiscriminate
term coined by a relative of Charles Darwin,medicine already do just that. Yet, studies
Sir Francis Galton, in 1883 - its bad name.show that the more affluent and educated a
Richard Lynn, of the University of Ulster ofpopulation becomes - the less fecund it is.
North Ireland, thinks that this recoilBirth rates throughout the world have dropped
resulted in "Dysgenics - the geneticdramatically already.Instead of culling the
deterioration of modern (human) population",great unwashed and the unworthy - wouldn't it
as the title of his controversial tome putsbe a better idea to educate them (or their
it.The crux of the argument for eugenics isoff-spring) and provide them with economic
that a host of technological, cultural, andopportunities (euthenics rather than
social developments conspired to give rise toeugenics)? Human populations seem to
negative selection of the weakest, leastself-regulate. A gentle and persistent nudge
intelligent, sickest, the habituallyin the right direction - of increased
criminal, the sexually deviant, theaffluence and better schooling - might
mentally-ill, and the leastachieve more than a hundred eugenic programs,
adapted.Contraception is more widely used byvoluntary or compulsory.That eugenics
the affluent and the well-educated than bypresents itself not merely as a
the destitute and dull. Birth control asbiological-social agenda, but as a panacea,
practiced in places like China distorted bothought to arouse suspicion. The typical
the sex distribution in the cities - andeugenics text reads more like a catechism
increased the weight of the rural populationthan a reasoned argument. Previous
(rural couples in China are allowed to haveall-encompassing and omnicompetent plans
two children rather than the urbantended to end traumatically - especially when
one).Modern medicine and the welfare statethey contrasted a human elite with a
collaborate in sustaining alive individuals -dispensable underclass of persons.Above all,
mainly the mentally retarded, the mentallyeugenics is about human hubris. To presume to
ill, the sick, and the genetically defectiveknow better than the lottery of life is
- who would otherwise have been culled byhaughty. Modern medicine largely obviates the
natural selection to the betterment of theneed for eugenics in that it allows even
entire species.Eugenics may be based on agenetically defective people to lead pretty
literal understanding of Darwin'snormal lives. Of course, Man himself - being
metaphor.The 2002 edition of the Encyclopediapart of Nature - may be regarded as nothing
Britannica has this to say:"Darwin'smore than an agent of natural selection.
description of the process of naturalStill, many of the arguments advanced in
selection as the survival of the fittest infavor of eugenics can be turned against it
the struggle for life is a metaphor.with embarrassing ease.Consider sick
'Struggle' does not necessarily meanchildren. True, they are a burden to society
contention, strife, or combat; 'survival'and a probable menace to the gene pool of the
does not mean that ravages of death arespecies. But they also inhibit further
needed to make the selection effective; andreproduction in their family by consuming the
'fittest' is virtually never a single optimalfinancial and mental resources of the
genotype but rather an array of genotypesparents. Their genes - however flawed -
that collectively enhance population survivalcontribute to genetic diversity. Even a badly
rather than extinction. All thesemutated phenotype sometimes yields precious
considerations are most apposite toscientific knowledge and an interesting
consideration of natural selection in humans.genotype.The implicit Weltbild of eugenics is
Decreasing infant and childhood mortalitystatic - but the real world is dynamic. There
rates do not necessarily mean that naturalis no such thing as a "correct" genetic
selection in the human species no longermakeup towards which we must all strive. A
operates. Theoretically, natural selectioncombination of genes may be perfectly
could be very effective if all the childrenadaptable to one environment - but woefully
born reached maturity. Two conditions areinadequate in another. It is therefore
needed to make this theoretical possibilityprudent to encourage genetic diversity or
realized: first, variation in the number ofpolymorphism.The more rapidly the world
children per family and, second, variationchanges, the greater the value of mutations
correlated with the genetic properties of theof all sorts. One never knows whether today's
parents. Neither of these conditions ismaladaptation will not prove to be tomorrow's
farfetched."The eugenics debate is only thewinner. Ecosystems are invariably comprised
visible extremity of the Man vs. Natureof niches and different genes - even mutated
conundrum. Have we truly conquered nature andones - may fit different niches.In the 18th
extracted ourselves from its determinism?century most peppered moths in Britain were
Have we graduated from natural to culturalsilvery gray, indistinguishable from
evolution, from natural to artificiallichen-covered trunks of silver birches -
selection, and from genes to memes?Does thetheir habitat. Darker moths were gobbled up
evolutionary process culminate in a beingby rapacious birds. Their mutated genes
that transcends its genetic baggage, thatproved to be lethal. As soot from sprouting
programs and charts its future, and thatfactories blackened these trunks - the very
allows its weakest and sickest to survive?same genes, hitherto fatal, became an
Supplanting the imperative of the survival ofunmitigated blessing. The blacker specimen
the fittest with a culturally-sensitivesurvived while their hitherto perfectly
principle may be the hallmark of a successfuladapted fairer brethren perished ("industrial
evolution, rather than the beginning of anmelanism"). This mode of natural selection is
inexorable decline.The eugenics movementcalled directional.Moreover, "bad" genes are
turns this argument on its head. They acceptoften connected to "desirable genes"
the premise that the contribution of natural(pleitropy). Sickle cell anemia protects
selection to the makeup of future humancertain African tribes against malaria. This
generations is glacial and negligible. Butis called "diversifying or disruptive natural
they reject the conclusion that, havingselection". Artificial selection can thus
ridden ourselves of its tyranny, we can nowfast deteriorate into adverse selection due
let the weak and sick among us survive andto ignorance.Modern eugenics relies on
multiply. Rather, they propose to replacestatistics. It is no longer concerned with
natural selection with eugenics.But who, bycauses - but with phenomena and the likely
which authority, and according to whateffects of intervention. If the adverse
guidelines will administer this man-madetraits of off-spring and parents are strongly
culling and decide who is to live and who iscorrelated - then preventing parents with
to die, who is to breed and who may not? Whycertain undesirable qualities from
select by intelligence and not by courtesy ormultiplying will surely reduce the incidence
altruism or church-going - or al of themof said dispositions in the general
together? It is here that eugenics failspopulation. Yet, correlation does not
miserably. Should the criterion be physical,necessarily imply causation. The manipulation
like in ancient Sparta? Should it be mental?of one parameter of the correlation does not
Should IQ determine one's fate - or socialinevitably alter it - or the incidence of the
status or wealth? Different answers yieldoutcome.Eugenicists often hark back to wisdom
disparate eugenic programs and targetgarnered by generations of breeders and
dissimilar groups in the population.Aren'tfarmers. But the unequivocal lesson of
eugenic criteria liable to be undulythousands of years of artificial selection is
influenced by fashion and cultural bias? Canthat cross-breeding (hybridization) - even of
we agree on a universal eugenic agenda in atwo lines of inferior genetic stock - yields
world as ethnically and culturally diverse asvaluable genotypes. Inter-marriage between
ours? If we do get it wrong - and the chancesraces, groups in the population, ethnic
are overwhelming - will we not damage ourgroups, and clans is thus bound to improve
gene pool irreparably and, with it, thethe species' chances of survival more than
future of our species?And even if many willany eugenic scheme.
avoid a slippery slope leading from eugenics



1 A B 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77