Skip to main content

GK Chesterton, Churchill, eugenics and "feeble mindedness"

While listening to GKC's book on Eugenics, I learned that some British MPs introduced eugenic legislation that sought to limit the procreativity of the "feeble minded."

***

Later I learned that Churchill himself was quite in favor of such legislation:
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support/the-churchill-centre/publications/finest-hour-online/594-churchill-and-eugenics

Also worth noting is that this movement was much more successful in the US than in the UK, in part because scientists successfully used their expertize as political capital:
http://www.jstor.org/pss/4027015

Comments

Lisa said…
In the United States, famous proponents of eugenic legislation ranged from Margaret Sanger (founder of planned parenthood) and Alexander Graham Bell, John D. Rockerfeller, and the State governments of California, Virginia, North Carolina, and some 30 others. Around 20,000 individuals were subjected to compulsory sterilization surgeries to prevent them from procreating their "kind." Some of them were as young as ten years old, and the basis for sterilization were as trivial as truancy. When Nazi Germans were going through their post-war Nuremburg trials, they specifically cited the U.S. eugenics programs and legislation as their inspiration for a cleaner race.
9:58 AM
Leo White said…
Wow! The Nazis learned from the U.S. eugenics program--that's shocking! But then again, it makes sense. Thanks for the info!
10:01 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

response to friend who suggested that the self is a democracy of neural parts

This is a nice way to try to avoid being cornered re the irreality of the self if you're a reductionist, for you can assert that a pattern obtains at the microscopic level that is not all that unlike the pattern found at the societal level.  No need for the one self that does it all: instead, you have many sub-selfs that compete for dominance or take turns guiding the whole. The problem with this is, however, that the voters/officials are all zombies.  None of them thinks about the whole as such.  And perhaps none of them thinks even about themselves (unless one is a panzoist).  None of them makes a comparison of alternatives. The more this proposed democracy seems like a zombocracy, the more consciousness will be seem to be epiphenomenal. Furthermore, if the oneness of the self is less real than the multiplicity of explanatory neural parts, then why can't each of these neural parts be conceived of as democracy as well?  And why not parts of these parts, et...
6 comments
Read more

what is an organism?

How about defining it as an instance of functional complexity? And treating the list of properties as following necessarily from this definition? Okay, this is very diamond-in-the-rough (or perhaps zirconium...) but here goes my thoughts on the matter: (Complexity) Many diverse parts (functional) acting for the sake of the whole I think I need to add something like "not as the instrument of another" or something like that. Given that they act together as one whole and given entropy, etc., the organism will need to posses more order than its surroundings (homeostasis). It will therefore need to take in energy (nutrition), which it will use to sustain its readiness to interact with its environment so as to preserve its own being (homeostasis again?), but which will eventually break down (death), so that in order for that life form to continue it will need to duplicate itself (reproduction), which, upon occurring, will involve both development (growth) to maturity and...
13 comments
Read more