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.

 

What are your thoughts on Eugenics in the Modern World?

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   
What is Eugenics?


Eugenics is the "applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population", usually a human population.


Eugenics


The term ‘eugenics’ was conceived by Sir Francis Galton (Charles
Darwin’s cousin and the inventor of composite photography) in the 19th
century.




To put it simply, Eugenics is the ideology to monitor and or police the quality of humans that habitat the Earth. This thread is not so much to understand or study the history behind the concept as much as it is to survey the landscape of opinions to see if people on this forum understand, and or would agree that the implementations behind Eugenics will be good for the planet and humanity.

Most Eugenicists use over population as a premise to justify their affinities to Eugenics, however, I find that many others wish to cut out the bad eggs (so to speak) and try and replenish the Earth with viable Humans that can live and execute the human nature at the highest degree. It was very common in the earlier parts of the 20th Century also to have governmental “Forced” sterilizations.


Compulsory sterilization, also known as forced sterilization, programs are government policies which attempt to force people to undergo surgical sterilization. In the first half of the 20th century, several such programs were instituted in countries around the world, usually as part of eugenics programs intended to prevent the reproduction and multiplication of members of the population considered to be carriers of defective genetic traits. Widespread or systematic forced sterilization has been recognized as a crime against humanity by the Rome Statute in the Explanatory Memorandum. This memorandum also defines the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.[1][2] Despite international agreement concerning the inhumanity and illegality of forced sterilization, it has been suggested that Government of Uzbekistan continues to pursue such programs


Compulsory Sterilization

Hitler was a famous Eugenicist. We understand he wanted to rid the world of the contaminated species of humans so that his perfect race of humans could inherit the Earth. Not only that, but many Eugenicists actively support the experimental medical studies on lower class humans (sub-humans they are often referred by Eugenicists). In 1939, the American Birth Control Federation designs a “Negro Project,” whose aim is to control the “breeding” of Blacks in the South.

Many of you are aware of the Tuskegee Experiment...

Tuskegee Experiment


It was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama by the U.S. Public Health Service to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis in poor, rural black men who thought they were receiving free health care from the U.S. government.


While it is true that Eugenics has been swept surreptitiously under the proverbial rug in our modern world, in the earlier parts of the 20th Century it was very rampant through institutional academia (Just as Communism was). That said, we still have the finger print of Eugenics in our modern world (i.e. Planned Parenthood, Prenatal Down Syndrome testing, etc.)

Many Eugenicists were strongly against cultural integration through mixing of races. So much so, that in 1924 the House of Representatives passed a law effectively forbidding all immigration from southern Europeans (who were considered non-white or degenerate).

In 1928 75% of all colleges and Universities offered courses in Eugenics. Today not so much. Why? The reasons are different depending on who you ask, but to me, I believe it is the pro-life movement that effectively killed the ideology. Not only that, but the very idea of someone deciding who is fit or unfit to live amongst society is sadistically arbitrary. Now that I’m thinking about it, the Third Reich’s atrocities after the war probably dealt a major blow to the movement.


In the 1980’s sperm banks that select donors according to intelligence, looks and success are founded. One of these sperm banks prohibits artists from being donors. [One scientist] founds a sperm bank exclusively for Nobel Prize winners . In this explicitly eugenicist project, only women who were members of
MENSA could receive the sperm.


Although eugenic practices are commonly seen as applications of Darwinism, they may be better termed as meta-darwinism. Natural selection in a strict sense implies that selection is natural and that whoever survives is fit. In sharp contrast, eugenics requires that natural selection be replaced by intentional human control, Survival in a eugenics-based milieu is artificially manipulated according to some judgment or consensus on what constitutes fitness.

There were also very famous Eugenicists, here is a list... psychology.wikia.com...]Eugenicists

Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller to name a couple. These two guys are synonymous with New World Order concepts and use Eugenics as a guise to justify a population control ideology. Here is a video of John Rockefeller speaking on the ideas of population control.



In conclusion, and to the point of my thread, I would like to ask the forum a question to gage the response of the masses.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON EUGENICS AS A MEAN TO REDUCE, AND MAINTAIN A VIABLE HUMAN EXISTENCE?

First you must understand that over-population could be the end of all of us. Then, if given a position of power, how would you deal with the idea of arbitrarily policing the population through the following:

1). Forced Sterilization
2). Applying for a permit to birth a child with your lover.
3). Segregation of lower level humans.
4). Killing off of the undesirables.
5). More comprehensive Genetic testing of human potential prior to birth.

I myself will wait to give my opinions in an effort not to influence this opening thread of information.
I appreciate all of you taking the time to read this, and I hope you all learned something from the thread. I look forward to debating some of the history and futures of Eugenics.

AAC




posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation
 



People should love each other.

They should love their offspring.


Sometimes the most physically gifted, are also the ugliest people you will ever meet......



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
I don`t like the sound of this at all.
our ideas of what makes a good human change from generation to generation,from religion to religion,from economic class to economic class.
Who is qualified to sit on the decision making panel to decide who can or can not have children?

our government isn`t even qualified or able to balance a budget, so they certainly can`t be trusted to make the decision.

There are just too many things wrong with this idea to even consider trying it even on an experimental basis.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
I guess I should chime in sooner than later.

I do not condone such a tactic. However, it's implementations are obvious in our culture. Moreover, I must admit that there are some factions of government that would love to impose their ideologies on our population.

The question remains, if population was set to destroy the Earth by 2100 AD. What would world leaders do to prevent such a catastrophe? Any Ideas other than Eugenic fundamentals?

I wanted this thread to be about countering such radical ideas with some not-so radical preventative ideas.

Because one thing is certain, the way we are going, we need to find a amicable solution.

AAC



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation
 


I read somewhere on ATS that the entire human population could fit and function in an area the size of Texas.


The idea that the earth cannot support the population is a myth.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation
 


i have always thought about eugenics as possibly something good if done humanly, but i don't see how that can be done. I originally started thinking of this at a young age when i would see my school mates bullying stealing from and terrifying mentally challenged students. so despite being mentally challenged they were targeted by others and treated badly, so i thought maybe if there was a way to stop people from being mentally challenged it would help everybody. the only thing i could think of to achieve this was eugenics. I then started doing research on eugenics and realized that it would still bring pain to those kids and there parents, so eugenics in the end is bad, but in the end if there was no challenged kids at least we all be on a level playing field against bully's and d*dickheads, but our society would have to be boarder line evil in order to implement eugenics into are society. there is no way to do it nicely.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by dusty1
 


Would love to read that article if you could find it. However, I doubt food, water, and economic structure could support 7 billion people within that space. But I'd love to be wrong.


AAC



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by DocHolidaze
 


Agreed. I think they would rather do it subversively. I doubt if its tentacles were able to succeed in their idea, the common human would know little about it. They would just wake up one day and go, Where did all the mentally challenged, handicap, and imbeciles go?

They say that sometimes a barbaric act must happen to prevent an even bigger barbaric act. I wonder how much of this idea is human nature that gets caught up in the empathetic consciousness?

It is interesting to consider the idea of ugliness to get to an idea of prettiness.

AAC



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   


This thread is not so much to understand or study the history behind the concept as much as it is to survey the landscape of opinions to see if people on this forum understand, and or would agree that the implementations behind Eugenics will be good for the planet and humanity.


I think overpopulation is meant to happen as part of the natural evolutionary cycle of a race. The scenario is survival as we advance we consume more resources, and the available resources become more scarce. Since we cant stop progress and consumption then inevtiably the human race will reach a cross road that will require it to cull back its population or at least freeze ist expansion of numbers. The only real other viable option it has is to reach out into space, and move people to off world locations such as Mars. I dont think anyone country can alone set up colonies off world. It has to be acomplished as a collective, coordinated and cooperative project carried out by worlld, every country contributing to the building of the space exploration craft with a primary goal to set up human habitats on Mars.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Great Thread. I dislike how natural law is flaunted without consideration of the consequences. I am disgusted when terrible conditions are knowingly passed on to children.

Read this,
www.nytimes.com...

Humans are the only species on Earth that are no longer purifying (safeguarding) the gene pool. This is outside of design spec. However I think the subject has advanced much further than its origins. Modern eugenicists want genetic engineering of the human race. Now that is a scary concept.

It seems we are at a great crossroads. 7 billion humans. The earth at max capacity. Humanity unfolding without rules. The case for reforming the chaos becomes stronger by the day.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:23 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SteveR
 


I could barely believe this when I read it from your linked article. I had to reread twice.


“A hearing baby would be a blessing,” Ms. Duchesneau was quoted as saying. “A deaf baby would be a special blessing.”


No real consideration of the life that child will have from the perspective of that child. What a selfish parent.


AAC



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by dusty1
 


Now that's funny.


AAC



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I agree with it in certain areas. The world is now breeding for ideals that aren't really beneficial to the long term of the species. Beauty, wealth, and athletic traits are the most sought after now, intelligence, morality, and general civility are shunned. Sure society plays a role, but if you keep breeding an animal to be dumb and vicious you're gonna get that.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SteveR
 


the earth is not even close to max capacity.

go to alaska or any part of northern canada.

northern russia, the pampas of south america, the jungles of the amazon are barely populated.

when the earth looks like coruscant of star wars; revenge of the sith, then i'll agree earth is maxed out.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
Modern Eugenics is called libertarianism.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation
 


I have some friends, they're a married couple.

They could have been models. I kid you not, he looks a little like George Clooney and she looks like Katie Holmes.

They have two children that are autistic.


They're nice people.

I am convinced that my friend is a better man because of his kids.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
no, no, no dysgenics is the way to go!




posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation
 


Fantastic post, but you missed the hundreds of thousands of mentally ill Americans that were forcibly sterilized in mental institutions.

Eugenics, too me is the perfect example of why we can never let science artificially constrict policy choices in democratic societies. There are many right to life issues, both for the born and unborn as well as stem cell issues, other medical regulations that represent modern challenges in this arena.

Universal Rights have to trump the false choices that scientific mindsets sometime present us with. Genetics, medical treatments, etc - these are all means to an end , but our means and knowledge are changing all the time. Unless you have a solid bedrock of principles to build on, you're just asking for tragedy.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join