Tag Archives: genetics

North Korea is Murdering People With Disabilities North Korean Defector Says

6 Replies

On 30 November I published a post entitled “Lets Talk About Eugenics”, (http://newauthoronline.com/2014/11/30/lets-talk-about-eugenics/). In that piece I wrote about how eugenics has been embraced by people with divergent political views, including leading socialists, conservatives, liberals and, in the most extreme manifestation of eugenic measures Nazi Germany.

Eugenics lead, in it’s most virulent form to the Action T-4 Programme (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/t4.html) under which the Third Reich sterilised and murdered thousands of disabled people. One would hope that the attitudes which lead to Action T-4 perished with the defeat of Hitler’s Germany. However according to defectors from North Korea the killing of people with disabilities continues apace, (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2869792/Dwarfs-castrated-babies-left-suffer-horrific-deaths-Defector-claims-North-Korea-purging-disabled-population-humiliate-regime.html), with the disabled being used as guinea pigs in medical experiments and being forceably removed from their parents. Words such as horrific can not do justice to the barbarity of what the North Korean regime is inflicting on people with disabilities and the populace in general.

Pages: 1 2 3

Lets Talk About Eugenics

3 Replies

In 1913 the British Parliament enacted The Mental Incapacity Act. The legislation had it’s origins in the Eugenic idea that the poor, the mentally incapacitated and other marginal groups where placing an intolerable burden on the state and should be sterilised and/or confined to secure facilities (hospitals for “the mentally defective” as they where then frequently termed). Eugenics was predicated on the belief that defective genes where responsible for poverty, unmarried motherhood and other things which the eugenicists wished to eradicate. As a consequence of the Act 40,000 individuals where confined to institutions, those imprisoned ranging from those with learning disabilities through to petty criminals and unmarried mothers.

Eugenic measures where widespread with America being particularly zealous in their promotion via the Eugenics Society (a similar organisation existed in the UK). As a consequence of the murder of people with disabilities under the Nazi’s Action T-4 Programme eugenics, not surprisingly became a dirty word but as late as the 1970’s eugenic measures where being employed in Sweden against people with certain disabilities.

Support for eugenics has come from people with divergent political views. The Socialist Fabians (Sidney and Beartrice Webb) where strong proponents of Eugenics and the Labour MP Will Crooks described the poor as “almost like human vermin”. The Liberal Beveridge (the man responsible for drawing up the modern welfare state) advocated for Eugenics while Winston Churchill (a Liberal and, later a Conservative politician) advocated for Eugenics.

In “An Act of Mercy” I imagine a UK in which eugenics has been adopted as official government policy. Individuals are tasked by the government to visit families and identify those with disabilities. Anyone so identified is removed from their family and subjected to special measures. Such an idea was, in fact proposed by Leonard Darwin in the early 20th century although he did not support the killing of so-called “defectives” but their separation from the rest of society.

 

For an interesting article on the support for Eugenics by people on the Left please see the following piece in The Spectator, http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/5571423/how-eugenics-poisoned-the-welfare-state/. (The article is skewed as it fails to mention that many non-socialists also advocated strongly for eugenics, a fact mentioned in the comments following on from the piece. It is, none the less worth reading).

The New Statesman has a good article on Eugenics which can be found here, http://www.newstatesman.com/society/2010/12/british-eugenics-disabled.

For information on Will Crooks please see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Crooks.

For my collection of short stories, An Act Of Mercy And Other Stories please see, http://www.amazon.com/An-act-mercy-other-stories-ebook/dp/B00EHS74CS. An Act Of Mercy is free in the Kindle Store until Monday 1 December.

Young Offender Part 2

Leave a reply

Below is part 2 of my story, Young Offender. For Part 1 please visit (http://newauthoronline.com/2014/11/07/young-offender-part-1/).

 

Jenny stood in front of the bathroom mirror.

“Little bitch”, Jenny said examining the deep scratch above her right eye. God it stung like hell. Why did she put up with her cousin’s violent outbursts? Casting her mind back Jenny remembered a conversation with her former boyfriend, Rob,

“That kid will end up in jail”, Robert had said.

“Rob, can you put down that bloody paper and have a proper conversation about Luan?” Jenny had said her voice sharp with exasperation.

“You know what I think Jen”, Robert had said, throwing his copy of a leading national tabloid on to the dining table. “The kid’s a no hoper. Bring her here and you saddle us with a delinquent teenage criminal. There’s a piece in the paper saying that criminality is largely genetic”, Robert had said picking up the newspaper and opening it at an article on page 3 entitled, “Scientist says criminals are born, not made by society”.

“So Luan’s behaviour is all down to genetics, it has nothing whatever to do with the fact that her mother is a drug addict and feeds her addiction by prostituting herself? That poor kid, ever since she was a toddler there have been men visiting Grace’s flat for sex. Its no wonder that Luan went off the rails growing up with a mother like that”, Jenny had said, her face flushing with anger.

“It’s bad jenes. Grace has them and the kid’s inherited her mother’s criminal genetic make-up. It’s the pig that makes the sty, not the sty that makes the pig”, Robert had said, reaching for his cigarettes.

“How dare you call my cousin a pig. How dare you do that! You sit in our comfortable home, coming, as you do from a middle-class family and you dare to judge people who have been brought up in an environment which you can barely imagine, and don’t you dare to light up”, Jenny said glaring at Robert’s cigarettes, “you know how I hate smoking. Oh, by the way is your cigarette habit genetic?”

“Don’t be bloody ridiculous”, Robert had said.

“Well its just as ridiculous as you saying that Luan’s behaviour is caused by genetics and we should give up on her. Your mother and father smoked so, obviously smoking, like criminality is genetic isn’t it?”, Jenny had said, twisting the tissue in her hand into a tiny ball.

“If that kid comes here then I’m leaving”, Rob had said.

“When we met Rob I fell in love with you for your forthright opinions. I liked the way you weren’t afraid to express yourself irrespective of what others might think of your point of view but, having lived with you for the last 2 months I find you haven’t got a single original thought in that head of yours. All your opinions are parroted from the tabloids”, Jenny had said.

“You know who you remind me of? Rob had said.

“No but I’m sure you are going to tell me”, Jenny had said.

“You remind me of that joke about the social worker who finds an elderly lady lying in a pool of blood on the street. She is, quite obviously the victim of a vicious mugging.

“My god”, says the social worker, “whoever did this to you needs my help”, Rob had said.

“You are pathetic Rob. A pathetic narrow minded bigot who rights off a young teenager because he is to pig ignorant to understand that the environment affects people, that we are not created bad but our shaped by our upbringing. Just pack your things and get out”, Jenny had said.

 

Downstairs the clock struck 10:30. The sound brought Jenny back to the present with a jolt. Turning from the mirror she exited the bathroom and crossing the landing entered her bedroom.

Jenny dressed in jeans and a t-shirt. Should she put on that necklace her mother had given her for Christmas? Why not, it was a beautiful piece of jewellery and she felt good wearing it. Jenny reached for the necklace on her dressing table. It wasn’t there. Frantically she searched under the dressing table, in every drawer, under the bed, in fact Jenny looked in any place, however unlikely the necklace might be.

“Not Luan. Surely Luan wouldn’t do that to me?” Jenny thought, her eyes hot with unshed tears.

Brave New World, By Aldous Huxley – A Review

3 Replies

Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (http://www.huxley.net/bnw/one.html) is one of those novels which have left a lasting impression on me. Published in 1932 Brave New World describes a global society in which genetic engineering and social conditioning rule supreme. Society is rigidly stratified with those at the bottom of the pyramid being only of sufficient intelligence so as to enable them to perform the most basic of functions, such as operating machinery, while those at the top are endowed with great intellects permitting the elite to govern the lower social classes. Due to genetic engineering, coupled with social conditioning the overwhelming majority of the population is content and lacks the capacity (or desire) to challenge the system.

Child baring has been outlawed with all children being created in facilities such as The Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre. The only exception to this state of affairs are “the reservations” in which “savages” continue to bring forth children in the traditional manner.

Sexual promiscuity is almost universal in Brave New World with lasting relationships being discouraged as they lead, in the view of the world controllers to the evils of attachment which breeds murder and other vices.

A “savage”, John is introduced into Brave New World. At first he is thrilled by the new civilisation and remarks,

“Oh brave new world that has such people in it”.

However, on discovering that his beloved Shakespeare (along with all literature) is prohibited he begins to question the foundations on which Brave New World is built. John’s disenchantment with Brave New World is heightened by his love for a girl who, despite being attracted to him is incapable of showing John the exclusive love which he craves. Lanena is conditioned to desire many sexual partners and can not comprehend John’s desire to have an exclusive relationship with her.

Things come to ahead when John’s mother (a woman from Brave New World who had a baby by traditional means and was abandoned by her then partner, the Director of Hatcheries in the Savage Reservation) is taken into hospital. John is incensed when a group of children undergoing “death conditioning”, to prevent them from grieving when people die, laugh and point at John’s dying mother. John boxes the ears of the children which leads to a full-scale riot requiring the use of Soma (the drug of choice) in Brave New World to quell the disturbance.

On being taken to the controller for Western Europ John begs to be allowed to return to the reservation. However he is told that the experiment to ascertain whether savages can be integrated into society must continue.

Fleeing into the countryside to live the simple life John is pursued by Brave New Worlders. In a fit of anger he whips a girl to death and, the following morning is found hanging in the warehouse in which he has been living.

For me one of the most interesting (albeit minor characters) in the novel is the resident controller for Western Europe. Tasked with upholding the system he admits to John and his 2 friends, to loving literature. He opens a safe showing banned books, his attitude being that as he makes the laws he can break them. The Controller says that he serves happiness, not his own but that of other people. Society is stable now and to allow books and ideas from the past would only unsettle matters leading to the return of jealousy, war and other evils banished by the introduction of Fordism (the philosophy/religion in Brave New World). Art, beauty, all must be sacrificed for the common good. I suspect that behind his smiling exterior the resident Controller for Western Europe is not a happy man.

 

Brave New World raises a number of troubling questions, notable among them being whether the Resident Controller for Western Europe is right in his contention that the sacrifice of high culture is worthwhile as it promotes universal happiness. With a few exceptions, for example John’s friend, Bernard Marx and, of course John himself, all the people in Brave New World are happy. One can argue, as John does that their happiness is meaningless but perhaps, to the observer everyone else’s contentment is vapid. Undoubtedly the inhabitants of Brave New World are genetically predisposed and socially conditioned to like what they do which leads to almost universal contentment, however almost all crime has vanished from society which, on the whole functions like clockwork.

 

On reading Brave New World I am revolted by much of what Huxley describes. The crushing of the individual (not through ruthless violence but via genetic and social conditioning, is abhorrent to my liberal sensabilities). Yet I am left feeling uneasy that I have no killer argument to advance against that of the Controller for Western Europe when he states that society is stable, disease has been eliminated and people are content with their lot. How many of us in such a world (assuming we could see beyond our genetic and social conditioning) can say, hand on heart that we would join with John, the “savage” to upturn the apple cart even if by so doing we would loose the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse (my words not those of Huxley).

Having posed the above question I suspect that a society such as Brave New World would be supremely ill equipped to deal with a crisis due to the narrow tramlines which conditioning compels people to traverse. Individuals possess the ability to think for themselves and the lack of this capacity would, I suspect, sooner or later lead to disaster in Brave New World. When Lynda (John’s mother) faces her own personal crisis, death she is ill prepared for it and can only cope by taking copious amounts of Soma. Despite the laughter, the “Feelies” (virtual reality films), at the end the Brave New Worlders come face to face “with that fell sergeant death” who, as Shakespeare says, “is swift in his arrest”. At the end there is no poetry, no family and friends to comfort the dying, only Soma, Soma and more Soma.

 

(I was prompted to revisit Brave New World by a series of articles in The Daily Telegraph concerning the predictions of Karl Djerassi (the inventor of the contraceptive pill) that by 2050 most sex in the west will be for recreational purposes. Babies will be born from frozen eggs and sperm implanted in women who will, when young arrange for the freezing of eggs and sperm enabling them to pursue careers and give birth at a time of their choosing. This is not Brave New World as there is no state impelling men and women to act thus. Again Djerassi does not point to the destruction of culture. However Djerassi’s predictions have obvious echoes of Huxley’s Brave New World. For the articles please see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/11219735/Well-defy-all-logic-to-make-babies-in-the-traditional-way.html

Richard Dawkins: Immoral Not To Abort If A Foetus Has Downs Syndrome

5 Replies

Scientist and author Professor Richard Dawkins has caused considerable controversy by stating that it is immoral not to abort a foetus with Down’s Syndrome, http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/aug/21/richard-dawkins-immoral-not-to-abort-a-downs-syndrome-foetus. I have scant knowledge of Down’s Syndrome. I am, however disabled so have a highly personal interest in Dawkin’s comments. Having been born fully sighted I lost the majority of my vision at around 18-months-old as a result of a blood clot on the brain. I have gained a MA in Political Theory and live independently although I must confess to employing a cleaner which stems from my dislike of cleaning rather than the inability to perform household tasks.

As stated earlier, I have scant knowledge of Down’s Syndrome. Due to my lack of understanding I wouldn’t dream of advising women carrying a foetus with Down’s regarding whether the pregnancy should proceed. I most certainly wouldn’t advise a lady facing such a difficult and highly personal decision that they should opt for an abortion as to carry the foetus to term would, in the words of Dawkin’s be “immoral”. The fact is that many parents with Down’s Syndrome children love and cherish them and the danger with Professor Dawkin’s comments is that they can be construed as devaluing people with Down’s Syndrome.

A civilised society should value all people irrespective of disability. Individuals with Down’s will not become leading scientists or world leaders but they are non the less human because of this.

As a disabled person I am used to people making erroneous assumptions regarding my life. I well recollect passing by 2 elderly ladies and hearing one remark “He’s blind” to which I aught to have responded, had I been on the ball “but he isn’t deaf”.

The above comment demonstrates the “pity” which many in society feel towards people with disabilities. In effect such people are putting their own fear of becoming disabled onto people with disabilities. I have, on several occasions had individuals say words to the effect of “I admire you. I don’t know how I would cope in your situation”, failing to realise that I and many other disabled people cope extremely well.

The fear of disability causes people to believe that the lives of Down’s Syndrome individuals and other disabled persons are a constant trial rather than realising that, in many instances our lives are fulfilling.

As stated above I am not an expert on Down’s Syndrome and I am sure that parents of children with Down’s face many issues. However I wouldn’t be arrogant enough to presume to tell potential parents of a Down’s child that they aught (or aught not) to give birth to a baby with the condition. I most certainly wouldn’t tell potential parents that they should abort a foetus with Down’s on the grounds that to carry the pregnancy to term would be “immoral”. Professor Dawkins is a great scientist but ethics and science do not necessarily meet.

Darwin Day Lecture 2014 – How To Make A Human

4 Replies

On Tuesday evening I received a call from my friend John. It was good news as he had managed to obtain 2 tickets for the Darwin Day Lecture, How To Make A Human which takes place on 12 February 2014, https://humanism.org.uk/civi/?page=CiviCRM&q=civicrm/event/info&page=CiviCRM&id=41&snippet=2. I have some issues with Humanism (the lecture is hosted by The British Humanist Association) but, none the less the event promises to be an interesting one.

As an aside, for anyone who is interested, my issue with Humanism is that many Humanists are, in my experience just as dogmatic in their assertions regarding the non-existence of God as religious people are in their’s that he exists. I am, in contrast an agnostic, one who sits on the fence. The only problem with sitting on the fence is, of course that I risk getting splinters in a rather delicate place!

 

Kevin

Book Review: Eugenics And Other Evils By G K Chesterton

Leave a reply

I recently read Eugenics And Other Evils by G K Chesterton, http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0082XCCNK?ie=UTF8&ref_=oce_digital_UK. Chesterton wrote at a time when eugenics was gaining ground. Politicians ranging from Will Crooks on the left (Crooks was a member of the British Labour Party) and Winston Churchill (at one time a Liberal but later a Conservative) advocated eugenic measures while intellectuals such as the Webbs joined in championing such ideas.

In essence Chesterton argues that old-style capitalists/individualists such as Cobden and Bright had believed that the capitalist system would in time uplift the condition of the poor through increased prosperity. As time went on it became apparent that the condition of the mass of the population was not improving. The wealthy members of society became alarmed by what they saw as the deteriation in the quality of the population and the stubborn problem of pauperism so became receptive to the arguments of the advocates of eugenics. Likewise many on the left embraced eugenic measures out of a belief that social planning of which eugenics should form an integral part could improve the condition of the working classes.

While Chesterton rejected capitalism as it existed at the time of writing he was no fan of socialism either. He saw both systems as seeking to control people. In his view capitalism denyed the poor property by paying them insufficient wages thereby preventing the accumulation of property. Socialism on the other hand saw property as the cause of social evils and actively saught to limit or prevent it’s accumulation. Chesterton advocates a middle course in which property is widely distributed thereby enhancing the independence of the population and uplifting the condition of the poor. Widely distributed property rather than eugenic measures are, in Chesterton’s view the answer to the widespread pauperism which he condemns in Eugenics and other Evils.

So what where the eugenic measures which Chesterton attacks?

In 1912 the British Parliament passed a bill allowing for the separation of “the feeble minded” from the rest of the population. The term feeble minded was not well defined and led to the confinement in institutions of everyone from the genuinely mentally ill to those with minor learning difficulties and unmarried mothers. Pauperism was seen by many eugenicists as a disease the cure for which was to prevent so far as was possible the breeding of those afflicted by it.

In the UK there was no mass sterilisation programme despite it’s advocacy by many eugenicists. However in the United States organisations such as the Eugenics Records Office under the leadership of Charles Davenport and Harry Laughlin played a leading role in persuading American states to introduce sterilisation programmes under which those with various forms of disabilities and unmarried mothers (among others) where sterilised. Nazi eugenicists modelled the German eugenics law on the law drawn up by Laughlin although in Germany, unlike America sterilisation lead on to mass killing of disabled people under the Action T4 Programme.

After World War II eugenics fell out of fashion as a consequence of the atrocities committed under the Nazis but also due to advances in science which showed flaws in eugenics (E.G. few now believe that the poor are poor due to genetic defects).

Chesterton wrote Eugenics and other Evils in 1922. Given the abuses committed in the name of eugenics his book was remarkably prescient.

Victims of Circumstance

Leave a reply

The causes of human action are a source of endless fascination to me. There is a tendency inherent in much discourse to ascribe simple explanations to why humans act as they do. Marxists argue that it is the economic base (the wealth of individuals and their status in society) which largely determines why persons behave in specific ways, for example people living in poverty are more likely to turn to criminality while the rich are likely to vote for parties which will sustain the capitalist status-quo. Others argue that it is genetics which explains human motivation and that of other animals. Thus the individual possessing “good” genetic material is likely to do well academically, attain a well paying job and be less likely to turn to criminality than the individual who has “inferior” genetic material.

Both positions are reductionist in that they attempt to ascribe simple explanations to the behaviour of highly complex living organisms. While it is undoubtedly the case that many people filling our jails are from deprived backgrounds most of those from “the wrong side of the tracks” do not become criminals. Again individuals from apparently loving and well-to-do backgrounds do, on occasions turn to crime for reasons which are difficult to fathom.

All of the above brings me to the point of this post, why do educated middle class girls turn to the world’s oldest profession? The prostitute is often portrayed as a victim of circumstance by the media and in literature, a poor down trodden drug addicted person possessing little (if any) autonomy). There are of course women and men who fit into this stereotype, however many sex workers are not drug addicts and by no means all of them are ill educated. I will explore in a future story why a lady from an affluent background turns to sex work of her own volition. While I have ideas for my story they are far from being set in concrete. The longer I live the more I come to realise that reductionist approaches contain at best only partial explanations to complex issues. Yes social and economic forces do help to shape the lives of humanity but humans are not mere feathers blown hither and thither by them. The ideas emanating from human brains and the actions flowing from them also shape our lives and those of others for better or worse.