It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Forced Sterilization in America: It Inspired the Nazis and Went on Longer

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
culturekitchen.com...


The very first nation to take an official and organized approach to eugenics, involving forced sterilization of "undesirables," was the United States of America. Starting with Michigan in 1897, forced sterilization in the US lasted into the 1960's and was given Supreme Court approval in Buck v. Bell in 1927. More than 60,000 people considered undesirable, including the mentally ill, the "promiscuous," the poor, Native Americans and the physically disabled, were compulsorily sterilized under official policy in the United States. The very last state-sanctioned, forced sterilization program in the US was in Oregon, only ending in 1981.

According to the anthropological study of Judaism called Unsettled (reviewed here), the Nazi eugenics program in 1930's and 1940's Germany was inspired by and specifically modeled on America's eugenics program. Our shame was their inspiration.


news.bbc.co.uk...


"When I was 13, I was raped. I had my beautiful son and when they cut me open, I had a caesarean, they sterilised me at the same time," she said.

"I didn't know anything about it until I was 19. I got married and tried to have a child. The doctor told me I had been butchered."


"It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind…Three generations of imbeciles are enough."
— Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in Buck v. Bell, 1927

www.cfif.org...


Eventually, Social Darwinism gave way to a new philosophy, Progressivism.1

Progressive reformers sought a larger role for government to address the growing inner-city issues of crime, poverty and hunger that Industrialization left in its wake. For these social "visionaries," who looked toward science to solve the problems caused by a rapidly changing world, eugenics was a ready-made tonic — prostitution, alcoholism, ignorance, birth defects, poverty, crime, could all be blamed on defective genes.


Pres. Theodore Roosevelt said in 1914: "I wish very much that the wrong people could be prevented entirely from breeding; and when the evil nature of these people is sufficiently flagrant, this should be done. Criminals should be sterilized and feeble-minded persons forbidden to leave offspring behind them."

www.commondreams.org...
www.eugenicsarchive.org...
ezinearticles.com...








The United States has a very dark history but for some, like me, who have only recently stumbled across this part of our history, it has just gotten a lot darker. The horrors and absolute atrocity of forced sterilization, by the state, is outright unconstitutional, inhumane, and disgusting. Words cannot even begin to describe my fury at this, one of the darkest chapters of American history.

What did the states think gave them the right to forcibly sterilize the “undesirable” and who in the hell did they think they were to make those decisions in the first place? That was most definitely giant erosion, actually a complete rejection, of our natural rights. Rather than trying to find ways to better assist the poor and the helpless to find work, mental assistance, or housing, they decide to just sterilize those who might have even just grew up in a bad home and turned to prostitution or just could not find a job.

Then to learn that we were the first to truly implement this and inspired the Nazis to do this as well, that just infuriates and disgusts me even more! Add to that our President Roosevelt championing the idea and ending up having his face engraved on Mount Rushmore. Roosevelt was the champion and perhaps the founder or leading force of the entire Progressive movement, this does not make Progressives look any better seeing as how they come from a past of eugenics to deal with the poor.

However this is not to say that forced sterilization does not occur within the United States today but it is not legal so if it does occur it is through the back door.




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
this is an excellent post, and a well-done research summary.

it very succinctly summarizes how liberal and "progressive" ideologies are, at their heart and in their core, fascist and evil.

these same types of people man the planned parenthood offices nowadays.

My entreaty to anyone that considers themselves a "progressive": research the roots of the movement, get a good overview of the evil that the early (and many current) progressives, liberals and socialists / NAZIs preached and practiced, and then make a decision.

If you tell a person who is truly educated in political ideologies that you are a progressive, they are likely to believe that you are intentionally aligning yourself with fascists and stalinists, and act accordingly.



P.S. I would add that the "progressive" superman george bernard shaw was quoted as saying the following in print:


I “appeal to the chemists to discover a human gas that will kill instantly and painlessly. Deadly by all means, but humane not cruel…”


and...


“You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence?

“If you can’t justify your existence, if you’re not pulling your weight [garbled], if you’re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we cannot use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can’t be of very much use to yourself.”



edit on 15-2-2011 by MMPI2 because: added info

edit on 15-2-2011 by MMPI2 because:

edit on 15-2-2011 by MMPI2 because:



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MMPI2
 


You may be interested in another thread I created on December 1, 2010.

Black Genocide: Margaret Sanger and Malthusian Eugenics



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
this will help a lot of peoples' arguments, thanks...



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by alaskan
this will help a lot of peoples' arguments, thanks...


Why should I ignore the truth and keep it hidden just because it does not help me?


Not everything that is true is good, suppression helps nothing.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   


So, why isn't it a good idea to stop those who can't take care of themselves from having kids?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Back in the mid-'70s a friend and co-worker of mine's wife was sterilized ubder the guise of a cancer-screening program wherein the BIA doctors would test Native American women and inform them they tested positive for cervical cancer. They would then do "exploratory" surgery, and when the women woke up, they'd be given the "good" news: they were actually cancer-free...."oh, and by the way, while we were in there, we did you a favor and removed your ovaries just in case and now you don't have to worry about getting pregnant".

It wound up ending his marriage, she grew bitter and angry at everyone.

encyclopedia.jrank.org... /Forced-Sterilization-of-Native-Americans.html


During the late 1960s and the early 1970s, a policy of involuntary surgical sterilization was imposed upon Native American women in the United States, usually without their knowledge or consent, by the federally funded Indian Health Service (IHS), then run by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). It is alleged that the existence of the sterilization program was discovered by members of the American Indian Movement (AIM) during its occupation of the BIA headquarters in 1972. A 1974 study by Women of All Red Nations (WARN), concluded that as many as 42 percent of all American Indian women of childbearing age had, by that point, been sterilized without their consent. A subsequent investigation was conducted by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), though it was restricted to only four of the many IHS facilities nationwide and examined only the years 1973 to 1976. The GAO study showed that 3,406 involuntary sterilizations were performed in these four IHS hospitals during this three-year period. Consequently, the IHS was transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services in 1978.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
It is a scary, and tragic history. In my state(georgia) they sterilized mainly african-american women till 1970!! That is not that long ago.

The whole discussion of the current hidden sterilization must be put in context. The endocrine inhibitors in plastics, foods, and water are not some random conspiracy. They are part of a long history of Malthusian inspired attempts to regulate population.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by OnceReturned
 

Maybe it you who is deemed unfit to procreate? Who decides? A board of technocrats who scorn the non-elite as subhuman? You think that you are fit to have children with an attitude like that.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Yeah, I remember it. It was another excellent treatise.

The core of these movements regardless of whatever label you want to assign to it - progressive, NAZI, liberal, socialist, modern democrat, communist, stalinist - is pure unadulterated evil.

People have trouble seeing past the propaganda that's been put out there. Folks believe a simple propagandists' formula:

Progressive/liberal = cool, fashionable, acceptable.

Nothing is farther from the truth. "Progressivism" is the pure distillation of hatred, evil, loathing and narcissism.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Here is an article full of information-Forced Global Eugenics

A Documentary on Eugenics in the US


Perspectives on the Relevance of Eugenics Today



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by stephinrazin
It is a scary, and tragic history. In my state(georgia) they sterilized mainly african-american women till 1970!! That is not that long ago.

The whole discussion of the current hidden sterilization must be put in context. The endocrine inhibitors in plastics, foods, and water are not some random conspiracy. They are part of a long history of Malthusian inspired attempts to regulate population.


I agree, it wasn't that long ago - which is scary.

Who is to say what someone adds to society. A perfectly healthy rich white male may go on to head a large corporation and make millions. But perhaps it turns out to be Enron and helps bring down the entire economy. Or perhaps he is a rotten boss who makes all his employees miserable.

Maybe the disabled low IQ individual actually has to take tax dollars but is kind and teaches people understanding.

As for the current "hidden sterilization", I thought about all the backlash Oprah took when she had doctors tell when if they waited too long they would have a hard time having a baby. Why keep information for women about their own bodies.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by stephinrazin
reply to post by OnceReturned
 

Maybe it you who is deemed unfit to procreate? Who decides? A board of technocrats who scorn the non-elite as subhuman? You think that you are fit to have children with an attitude like that.


Just because there may be some cases that are difficult to decide doesn't mean we should be paralized and do nothing when the decision is obvious. Likewise, just because something is wrong to do in some cases, that doesn't mean it's always wrong. What about homeless prostitutes, for example? It doesn't make me a monster for saying that homeless prostitutes shouldn't be having kids. If you think that allowing the homeless prostitutes to have kids - when we could easy intervene - is somehow noble or in the best interest of human rights, you're living in a fantasy.

It's not as though there aren't enough people. Whether you think it's uncomfortable or not, the time is rapidly approaching that we as a society are going to have to make some tough decisions about who we're willing to take care of. We're not going to have enough resources to do everything we can to keep every old person alive and healthy. We're not going to have enough resources to support a growing population of needy people. Our current policy of providing basic necessities to everyone who can't provide for themselves in not sustainable. How do you deal with that? Pretend like it's not true? Tell yourself that there's plenty to go around, so supporting one more child whose parents can't even support themselves is somehow desirable?

I'm not taking about a board of technocrats sterilizing all who oppose them. I'm saying that if someone can't take care of themselves, and the people who pay taxes are already supporting them, they shouldn't have the right to have a kids that other people will have to support as well. Why should someone be free to increase the burden on a system to which they do not contribute? Everyone starts out with the right to have a child, but if someone doesn't have the ability to care for the child, having it means obligating strangers to care for it, and I don't think people have that right. Shouldn't the strangers have the right to say no in advance?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Please, keep the info coming. Eugenics Policies are making a comeback, repackaged as "genetics" !!! It's such unmitigated crap - based on a complete misapprehension of disease and evolution.

STOP THEM!

(bump) &S&F



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join