Eugenics

Post Reply New Topic

Eugenics has been very popular in the early 20th century. The idea was to intervene scientifically in the betterment of the human species, through selective breeding, sterilization of the unfit and insulation of freaks. It was popular in the US even more than in Germany and Europe. Nazi Germany made it one pillar of their program, beginning with the extermination of the “unfit” and gradually developing a sweeping program of “liquidation” of what they considered inferior races, gypsies, Jews, eastern populations.

While this horrors have made hard to talk now about eugenics, I wonder if all efforts to manipulate the human genome are not, in the last resort, sophisticated ways to pursue programs of eugenics. The acceptance of the existence of freaks and their integration in society has something to do with the acceptance and integration of those spiritual freaks that we autistic people are. Can a policy of cultural appreciation of spiritual “difference” be advanced without a parallel program of acceptance of physical difference and the other way around? Our advertisement culture, which, after all is our culture for the great majority of people (physical beauty as a supreme goal) is a culture of physical normality and normalization. Is it a good thing and does it bode well for a policy of acceptance of spiritual diversity?

It's possible to practice Eugenics without being bad. I carry the gene for cystic fibrosis although I don't suffer from the disease. By deciding not to have any kids I've decreased the gene pool just a little bit and if every CF carrier did this the disease would be gone in two generations. This could be called selective breeding if you want to give it a scientific name.

AS may be genetically based, in which case I've helped twice.

Ed Almos

There was the space age, then the information age, and soon, if not now, the genetic engineering age. We have the ability to consciously intervene in our own evolution. The question is do we have the consciousness to do so, and if so, how will we do so. I suspect that the self-centered who accumulate wealth will be the first to have the opportunity to choose to produce more beautiful, more perfect, more self-centered...

Putting supreme value on wealth, power, and conventional beauty ain't exactly a new idea. The advertizing industry is merely reflecting values, maybe reinforcing them a bit, hell I don't know, but accepting spiritual freaks ain't the same as accepting people with other differences.

I don't have a wheelchair or a white cane that everybody can see. Hell of a lot of people have disliked me, and none of them ever heard of aspergers.

Brings to mind the line from Alice in Wonderland: "I'm glad I don't like asparagus, because if I did, I would eat it, and I cannot stand it."

I'm not holding my breath waiting for people to change their mind about asparagus.

Breeders use and are prey to Eugenics all the time. I think it's okay when the individual decides what to promote or what to discourage. Where Eugenics crosses the line of ethics is when there is a Bloc that decides for the individual, literally (sterilization, execution, education). There were state-enforced Eugenics in this country until the 70's, I believe. I think Indiana just officially apologized for it.
Like someone mentioned, the deciders were not only incorrect in their presumption of authority, they also used subjective gauges to sterilize people. Women were diagnosed with mental illness to justify sterilization.

Without knowing about Asperger's or autism, my husband and I selected each other to breed. To each other, we are fit and healthy. To others, we are weird and incompatible. I'd call that selective breeding.

One of the reasons is brought forth in favor of genetic manipulation is that it's just what farmers have been doing since agriculture exists, that is taming nature and trasform living things like objects. I am in favor of Tao, let things as they are.

Chuang-tzu, 400 hundred years AC:
"Horses have hooves to carry them over frost and snow, and hair to protect them from wind and cold. They eat grass and drink water, and fling up their tails and gallop. Such is the real nature of horses. Ceremonial halls and big dwellings are of no use to them. One day Polo (famous horse-trainer), {44} appeared, saying, "I am good at managing horses." So he burned their hair and clipped them, and pared their hooves and branded them. He put halters around their necks and shackles around their legs and numbered them according to their stables. The result was that two or three in every ten died. Then he kept them hungry and thirsty, trotting them and galloping them, and taught them to run in formations, with the misery of the tasselled bridle in front and the fear of the knotted whip behind, until more than half of them died."

I believe that doing as little as possible ( while not causing harm , falling ill , creating work for others, etc) is a great ( and largely lost,) art.

Last night the Missus and I went to the most amazing dance performance. It was regards DNA. There was bits of propaganda about eviloution, but there was the most amazing dance.

An older woman danced and spoke about the history of the apple, and how it was found in Kazatstan, then brought to the western world and tamed. While she was dancing, and telling the history of the apple, a dwarf lady in a wheelchair did the most amazing dance. She did all these moves, and you could see how thrilled she was to be part of the performance. The older woman helped her out of her wheelchair, and they danced. Finally the older woman concluded that the apples you get in the grocery these days are tasteless and soft. Not at all like the wild apples she picked as a child.

The metaphor was: we can allow scientists and politicians to muck about with eugenics, but remember where that road leads, to a tasteless sameness that defeats the variety and marvelous mistakes that nature makes. Typing this almost moves me to tears ....

Eugenics.