Saturday, May 27, 2006

Liberal, Progressive and Socialist Support for Eugenics

In the early years of the twentieth century, the political left was a strong supporter of eugenics, birth control, and forced sterilization. In this topic, they explain in their own words the close connection between their beliefs and the need for government to control who has children.

Malthus and Darwin Create Problems

For those who regard themselves as uniquely gifted to guide humanity into a more enlightened age, Thomas Malthus had defined the first of two problems they must overcome. A much improved society, he warned, would also be a society with a much lowered death rate. Since the human race was unlikely to give up its interest in sex and (at that time) birth control techniques were ineffective, that meant that eventually the population would grow to the point where no form of government, however well managed, could produce enough food for its people. Those who thought they held the key to an ideal society had no answer to the logic of his arguments.

A little over half a century later, however, Charles Darwin managed to put a progressive spin on Malthus' high death rates. Probably with the Irish famine of a decade earlier in mind, at the very end of The Origin of Species he excused nature's cruelty by describing a system of natural selection where "from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows."

At a time when the birthrates of the more privileged classes in Britain and the United States were high, those were reassuring words. A steady political evolution into a more progressive civilization was being accompanied by a parallel biological evolution in the nature of man. This meant that the "New Civilization" that H. G. Wells discussed in his introduction to Margaret Sanger's The Pivot of Civilization (covered in Topic 11) would be populated by a New Man, so enlightened that he would not longer be troubled by Malthusian difficulties.

Unfortunately for such people, the last decades of the nineteenth century brought a second problem, one born from two social changes. The first was a dramatic decline in death rates in all classes due, in part, to easy-to-implement public health measures such as clean water supplies. The second was a rapid decline in the birthrates of the well-established, wealthier and better educated classes. The fact that the poor no longer died like flies was alarming for those who believed that, in the evolutionary scheme, such people were closer to the flies than they were. Evolution, it seemed, had gone into reverse.

Four Scenarios

The problem is easier to understand if the various options for birth and death rates is simplified into four scenarios.

1. High Birthrate--High Death Rate

2. High Birthrate--Low Death Rate

3. Low Birthrate--High Death Rate

4. Low Birthrate--Low Death Rate

For most of human history, Scenario 1 dominated, and the human population had grown only slowly. Malthus had warned that, by lowering death rates without changing birthrates, an ideal society would enter Scenario 2 and eventually face over overpopulation and famine.

Darwin looked at the matter differently. Implicitly, he recognized that while (in his day) birthrates were high among all classes, the Irish and English poor remained in Scenario 1, while his social class (the country gentry) was in Scenario 2. In evolutionary terms that meant that the 'fit,' were reproducing faster than the 'unfit.' For Darwin and his followers that meant progress.

But in the late nineteenth century, even the poor in crowded cities entered Scenario 2 at the very time when the 'better' classes in Britain and America entered Scenario 4. In Darwinian terms, the collective abilities of the human race (in warding off disease and famine) had reached the point were the death rates of everyone in modern societies, 'fit' and 'unfit' alike, was relatively low. Which group would populate the future would be determined almost solely by differences in birthrates.

Since the entire political left, from liberal to socialist and communist, thought in Darwinian terms, that was disturbing. While a few cranky Social Darwinians wanted to take measures to see that the high death rates of the poor returned, advocating that was not usually acceptable to those who regarded themselves as progressive. For them, the only answer was to lower the birthrates of those they regarded as 'unfit' (Scenario 4). That is why those on the left never debated whether they should force down the birthrates of those they did not like, only the timing and techniques to be used. They assume without question that they have the right to decide who can have children with the same confidence that they assume they have the right to control the government and run the economy. And they assume that they have to right to conceal this agenda behind lies.

The problem of differing birthrates was compounded by other changes taking place at the same time. Increasingly complex means of production required more intelligent and better educated workers. Traditional societies had been rather callous toward those who did not measure up. There were, after all, lots of back-breaking jobs that required little intelligence. But with machines replacing manual labor, more was required to be a productive worker. What would happen to those who could not meet the increased demands.

Liberalism, socialism and communism promised to take care of everyone, irrespective of their ability to work, along with their children. (Marxism had the slogan, "From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs.") That raised a distinct possibility that, once it gained power, their government would be overwhelmed not merely by too great a quantity of people (Malthus), but all by too many people of too low a quality to be useful to society (the eugenic application of Darwin). Their ideal society would be swamped by millions who would live off others and do little more than breed yet more people as incompetent as themselves. The result would be a eugenic disaster as terrible as any in the warnings of Malthus. In their advocacy of eugenics, birth control and sterilization, that disaster was what those on the left were trying to prevent.

A Cross Section of Opinion

In the reading for this topic, we include a cross section of opinions from those on the political left about how best to deal with the problems described above. The number of writers who could be quoted on this topic is enormous, so the chapters below concentrate on those with close ties to Margaret Sanger. H. G. Wells, for instance wrote the Introduction to her The Pivot of Civilization and her initial interest in birth control was stimulated by the British Fabians. The others were people who knew and supported Sanger, including Lothrop Stoddard, a writer who was on the Board of Directors of her American Birth Control League.

Notice that, while these writers do not agree in every detail, their underlying beliefs are quite similar. If you take into account Sanger's greater use of coded language and contrived concern for poor and immigrant women, Lothrop Stoddard's 1922 The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace of the Underman is quite similar in theme to her The Pivot of Civilization, which was published that same year.

Friday, May 19, 2006

How Has Islam Enriched Your Life?

Have any of you noticed over the past few years that page after page in your daily newspapers is filled with the latest dysfunctional happenings caused by - or as a result of - the seemingly maniacal Muslim world? Honestly, I cannot open a paper or turn on the television without seeing mobs of Muslim savages celebrating in front of burning embassies, a school, a restaurant or those stupid tires they seem to think are so impressive to burn . And, don't you just love those scenes of men in black ski masks, racing through the streets, shooting guns in the air or standing behind some terrified captive getting ready to be-head him or her?

Lord, did we have a life before the Taliban? I wonder. Is this an improvement from a few of years ago when we saw Western dignitaries sitting in yucky caves in Afghanistan, wearing Armani suits and Bally shoes; at the table sitting with them, a dirty rag-towel wearing ‘War Lords ' (tell me, isn't that an 7th century concept ?), eating road kill for din-din and making plans to stop the Al Qaeda. Come to think of it, before 9/11, we never heard of words like Al Qaeda, Taliban, Jihad, Homeland Security or any other of the new vocabulary that they've taught us.

I long for the old days when I turned on stupid comedy shows and the news would have reported the latest fashion shows, which Hollywood star was coming out of the closet and when people were learning to dance the Macarena . Homicide bombers? Never heard of them. Today, I wish I could see less glorification of anti-democratic fanatics. I had become accustomed to the sympathetic posters of Che Guevara, famous for helping Fidel Castro shape and export the failed Cuban revolution. But, I’m not ready for films like “Munich” , recently created by Stephen Spielberg and self-hater Tony Kushner, that give Muslims a platform for justification of their terrorism.

If I had even a remnant of a sense of humor left, I might find something funny in the fact that these Arab murderers are now killing their own ‘brothers’ in yet another of their frenzied, holy wars against their own. The Shiites and Sunnis are going at each other full force while the Kurds, also Muslims but not Arabs, sit safely on the sideline, watching the slaughter. The so-called 'Palestinians,' who now have territory of their own, are killing one another on a daily basis. And, don't forget those wonderful new politicians from Hamas unleashing terror against Fatah and others; reveling in the blood, terror and mayhem they hold so dear.

In between they somehow manage to find time to kill and injure scores of Israelis using homicide bombers. The Los Angeles Times headline reports: "Israel Opts for Restraint in Response to Bombing." The timing and theme of George Orwell's book, 1984 has come and gone while the world has gone mad. Love is Hate...and " Israel Opts for Restraint in Response to Bombing! " The only question that should be asked right now is which to bomb first, Mecca or Medina! At the very least, consider transfer as the only alternative. Unfortunately, the powers that be in Israel can't bring themselves to do that.

The time is long past to do something! I think it a good thing that they target and are able to pulverize the leaders of the terrorist groups while driving to place their latest bomb. How much more effective, though, would it be if they were to fly into the headquarters of the new government of Hamas and blow up everything in sight? Nothing, but nothing should be left standing! That, folks, just might get their attention!

Hamas, however, has made it very plain that their goal is total annihilation of the State of Israel and to fly the Palestinian flag atop the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Without a doubt, they would desecrate that just as they did Joseph's Tomb, the Tomb of the Matriarchs and even the Church of the Nativity given the chance. We must read the writing on the wall, while we still have The Wall...transfer the enemy out of Israel, NOW!

Is it really tacky of me to smile at the nightly scenes on TV showing Arab, Afghani and Pakistani Muslims bombing mosques and killing their Muslim brothers, sisters and children at a brisk pace because that's all they know how to do? Even more ironic is what I read recently in my evening paper, that Muslim leaders are seeking help from the Dalai Lama to "quell extremism." I question whether the Dalai Lama needs to be tested for dementia when he responded with: "These few mischievous ones do not represent the whole Muslim community." Oh really, how "few?" Who 's next for a consultation, The Pope, Billy Graham, Jimmy Carter or one of the Chief Rabbis of Israel? "Mischievous?" Cute. Misguided, foolish, but cute.

Then, there are the letters that I get from faraway readers who remind me that it’s not just the Jews who are currently longing for the "normal" days of just a few years ago.

One of my favorite readers, an Australian, recently e-mailed me:

“Damn, I can’t believe I am writing sentences with words like “Grand Mufti of Australia” in them. What the hell happened to my country? How did words like fatwa, Mufti, Imam, jihad, burqah, Koran etc. become part of our lexicon? I'll tell you, Arlene, that there is a huge growing anger here…and it is going to blow. I am what you would call a ‘moderate’ voice, I suppose, but I know people who aren’t. The number is growing rapidly on a daily basis."

But you get the idea. This, from a friend who is not Jewish...and certainly not an Israeli.

Here is a 'new' isn’t a Jewish problem! It never was. I have been writing, for more years than I care to count, about the world-wide threat to our Western civilization from these 7th century savages who actually believe that they are in a Crusade. Israel is only the "canary in the coal mine." It's an entirely new situation now that most of Europe has caved in and the influence and power of the World of Islam is growing at an alarming rate. Mainly because it is common for the men to have multiple wives, and harvest many children with each of his wives to train for martyrdom.

Remember the question, " Are you better off today than you were five years ago? " Hasn't all of this new information enhanced your life, just as it has mine?

The above article appeared here but has been reproduced above in case it gets taken down

Monday, May 15, 2006

Police alarm on hate books

Books of hate promoting suicide bombings, anti-Australian conspiracies and racism can be freely sold in the Muslim community after a ruling that they don't breach sedition laws. The material, found by The Daily Telegraph in Lakemba and Auburn bookstores last year, was judged by federal authorities not to incite violence in the first known test of anti-terrorism laws.

Police Commissioner Ken Moroney said last night he felt uneasy about the continuing threat posed by such material remaining on the streets. But he said NSW Police would abide by the "qualified and considered legal opinion" offered by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions and Australian Federal Police.

The ruling comes despite British police establishing strong links between three of the suicide bombers involved in the July 7 London blasts and an Islamic bookstore in Leeds. There have also been links in Australia between the suburbs where these books were on sale and alleged terrorist plots here.

One of the books, Defence of the Muslim Lands, carried an endorsement from Osama bin Laden on its back cover and promoted "wiring up one's body" with explosives for "martyrdom or self-sacrifice operations". The Criminal West, written by Australian Muslim Omar Hassan, claimed to be called Australian was something to be ashamed of and Western culture is the culture of wolves, injustice and racism. It also claims Australian police are rapists who bash young boys and spoke of a conspiracy involving politicians to turn young Muslims into drug addicts. The Ideological Attack claims there was a barbaric onslaught against Muslims by Jews, Christians and atheists.

AFP spokeswoman Rebecca Goddard said the Commonwealth DPP found no offence had been committed under last year's anti-terrorism Bill. Ms Goddard also said the AFP judged the books are not in breach of either the Commonwealth Criminal Code or NSW Crimes Acts 1900. The AFP analysed the material in context "relative to the time the books were written and the fact that some of the material could be described as descriptive, rather than inciting any type of violence", she said. "No action will be taken by the AFP against individuals who possess copies of the 'books of hate' or sell them," she added yesterday.

A spokeswoman for Federal Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock said the minister was aware of the ruling. She said the material was hardly "inclusive" but the minister accepted the judgment of the AFP. The spokeswoman said the books did not meet the strict test of inciting violence – and offered this as proof that the laws were not a threat to freedom of speech. "The test is, does it advocate the use of force or violence, and on this occasion the AFP and NSW Police with the DPP have deemed the material does not," she said.

Other material analysed included the video Jihad or Terrorism by firebrand cleric Khalid Yasin. Another item, an audio cassette called Da'Wah in The West, includes a speech by Ali al-Tamimi, who was sentenced to life in prison in the US last year for soliciting others to wage war.

NSW Jewish Board of Deputies chief Vic Alhadeff said: "While freedom of speech is one of the cornerstones of our society, so is the right to live in peace."

The Islamic Bookstore at Lakemba, which sold Defence of the Muslim Lands, would not say whether it would sell the books again.

The above article is taken from here but is reproduced above because "Daily Telegraph" articles usually do not stay up for more than a few days