Talk:Eugenics

"Fixed To Fail" on YouTube

This recent addition seems to link to a copyright movie, which makes it subject to deletion: see WP:ELNEVER. Although it incorporates old footage which may or may not be in copyright, it is itself a recent work. Views? --Old Moonraker (talk) 11:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there is a copyright issue or not. But aside from that, this appears to be the wrong place to put the link per WP:ELNO #13. This would belong at Buck v. Bell if it can be linked at all. Jesanj (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Sexual selection?

I note a number of references (such as [1] and [2]) to conscious (and possibly unconscious) sexual selection as a form of eugenics. If there are no objections, I will accordingly put in a link with the above citations. Allens (talk) 15:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Judaism?

Which variety of Judaism? Even in Israel, there are multiple varieties of Judaism; no evidence is presented that all varieties of Judaism oppose abortion except to save the life/health of the mother, and I don't believe this is the case (other abortions do happen in Israel). Allens (talk) 15:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Just a hint: There are people who will be granted convenient housing very quickly by the state while others that look different and have to wait. 139.139.67.70 (talk) 12:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

If you're referring to the dominance of Orthodox (and frequently Ultra-Orthodox) viewpoints in Israel, yes, I'm aware of this (problem, IMO). If you're claiming there's, say, encouragement of racial minorities to get abortions, I know someone whose mother had more than one abortion (for reasons other than the mother's life/health) - and she's (basically) white. Allens (talk) 19:55, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Ideology to promote colonial crimes?

Why is the section about Great Britan so short - and what about the colonial aspects: racism and eugenics? 139.139.67.70 (talk) 12:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome to find reliable sources and improve it. As for racism, what I've seen indicates that was an American approach to eugenics: the British version was more class based. . dave souza, talk 13:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Anglo-American social problems, in a nutshell?--Tznkai (talk) 22:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Russia and China are missing... Why so?

Soviet Russia and Maoist China have committed an enormous amount of crimes related to eugenics, but are missing completely. Was this article translated from versions in other languages which are related and accordingly incomplete? 139.139.67.70 (talk) 12:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Verification required . . . dave souza, talk 13:19, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

With regard to China, see One-child policy and sources linked from it. Allens (talk) 20:01, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

A one-child policy is not eugenic. It, like its opposite (natalist policies such as the one practiced in France in the late C19), is aimed at changing the overall size of the population, not changing the differential reproductive rate of subsections of the population. See natalism and antinatalism. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 20:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Umm... try taking a look at the section linked to, regarding human rights. It specifically mentions a number of areas in which China was (at least formerly - they've now committed to not doing it... whether this will actually happen is another matter) engaging in eugenics. No, the one-child policy in and of itself isn't eugenics, I agree - but related policies have been. Allens (talk) 21:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I looked up the scholarly literature on the USSR and eugenics, and it seems that the Soviets quite definitely distanced themselves from eugenics as practised in the USA and Germany. The OP probably has in mind oppression of non-Russian ethnic groups, arguably amounting to genocide. Would that normally be considered to be eugenics? There is discussion of the question in relation to Nazi Germany. As is well known, the Nazis practised eugenics in the normal definition and also implemented the Final Solution. But many scholars think those were only contingently related. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:16, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Ethical re-assessment: "less-obviously coercive" is not neutral

Calling the results of voluntary actions "less-obviously coercive" is rather obviously a viewpoint - that such are actually coercive. Not only is this view without citations (as noted below), even if it were cited it would need to be made clear that this is only a viewpoint - that others certainly disagree (see liberal eugenics, for instance), not stated as a fact. Allens (talk) 19:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Dysgenics section needs to be rethought or removed

Right now it just seems to be an oblique reference to Idiocracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foobard (talk • contribs) 21:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

New edits on German colonies

A really important topic, but I'm concerned that there is far too much detail of German colonisation generally, not directly relating to eugenics. Also, a confusion of eugenic research and practices. These may well have gone hand in hand, but we need to establish that with references. What do others think? Itsmejudith (talk) 19:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Fully agree, there seems to be a confusion between racism and eugenics, which are actually separate issues. Ideas of "racial hygiene" clearly predate eugenics, and while eugenics in some countries was used as an excuse for racism, that doesn't mean that racism is eugenics. A lot of it seems to be unsourced, and a careful check of sourcing is needed. . dave souza, talk 19:18, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, racism and Eugenics (even genetics) are often confused. The best way to clear up the confusion is NOT by censorship (as our Neo-Nazi friends would have us believe - ask Wikipedia editors about this one), but by exposing the facts. Don't like racism confused with eugenics, then your argument is with history.Virago250 (talk) 15:00, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Saying there is too much detail isn't censorship. Please see WP:V for the need to have good secondary sources. There are several good recent histories of eugenics, so if you want to include any other material the onus is on you to show you have good sources for it. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Virago250, you have brought to our attention some excellent sources, but they've got to be summarised accurately. Schmul makes no connection between Hauschild's research and the 1902-1903 German-American war in Venezuela, so we can't either. If you can find another historian making the link, then please re-add the point. Itsmejudith (talk) 17:41, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Virago, there is some really relevant and important stuff out there, and you are bringing it to our attention, but it will all be obscured if you don't take the right material from the right sources and add it to the right articles. Look for a minute about what is said about eugenics in other countries. There is no way that this article can include a simple listing of which parts of the world were colonised by Germany. That has to go elsewhere. What is positively known about eugenics in German colonies. There is reliably sourced knowledge, and it is so frustrating to see the wrong stuff dumped in here without sufficient thought. Itsmejudith (talk) 23:45, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The eugenics work of Rita Hauschild, associated with the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Genetics in the area of Bastard studies (miscegenation) at the early German community of Tovar, Venezuela, has already been cited. To exclude this work on eugenics under the topic of eugenics sounds biased and without justification. The Venezuela Crisis of 1902-1903, also a Wikilink (and inserted by someone else), that itsmejudith suggested be used, shows the attempt of Germany to establish itself as colonies in the New World. The countries in the Caribbean, Central America and South America where Germany has its influence have already been established in the Wikilinks German colonization of the Americas and Colonia Tovar. Is there a reason why these links should not be used to show why Germany actually threatened war with the United States, as noted in Venezuela crisis of 1902-1903? It appears that itsmejudith is saying I should use this Wikilink to take out information, then saying when I add it to another place, that I shouldn't use the Wikilink.

Indeed, Eugenics is related to genetics (a subject I don't discuss for the most part), as well as racism. The fact that this is true, isn't a reason to exclude the information. The fact that German history is so closely tied up with both racism and eugenics is a historical fact not amenable to making believe it isn't so by saying that new information should not be added because there is so much information.

To summarize, it appears as though itsmejudith doesn't want information added and, furthermore, seems not to like the use of Wikilinks written by other people, to support the information being provided. If there is any question of citations, they have been given. For example, when referring to the Wikilink about Bartolomé de las Casas, this was written originally in Spanish, then abridged to the Summary version in Spanish, then translated into various languages (the version I used, in fact, being written in Middle English and published in London in 1587). If itsmejudith does not accept the citation, she should feel free to give her own, whether it be in Latin, Spanish or Middle English. If itsmejudith disputes what has been written in the various Wikilinks referred to, she should feel free to say why, rather than simply eliminating information. Bartolomé de las Casas is cited in reference to the Caribbean island (Isla Margarita), as Venezuela did not yet exist in de las Casas' time.Virago250 (talk) 00:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Umm... you have yet to provide evidence for the relevance of, for instance, the Venezuela Crisis of 1902–1903, nor for that matter of any publication from 1587, well before the invention of the concept of eugenics, nor for German colonization attempts that were before the invention of eugenics. The possible fact (uncited) that Brazil almost went with the Axis is also not relevant. This is not an article about, for instance, the history of racism; perhaps the Racism article's History section should be split off and expanded with the cited information you have located? Allens (talk) 02:44, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

One of the subcategories under the Eugenics page deals with eugenics in different countries. I am primarily responding (adding information) to these questions with respect to eugenics and its relationship with German colonies. The relationship of eugenics to German South West Africa (GSWA) is obvious and direct. (For example, one of the leading eugenicists, Eugen Fischer, did medical research related to eugenics in both GSWA under the Second Reich, and in Germany under the Third Reich.) Eugen Fischer as well as many other eugenicists worked with American eugenicists such as Charles Davenport, and also did work for the IFEO. Much of this work has been reviewed in Bastard studies ("bastard" being commonly used to refer to mixed-race people or miscegenation). The wikiarticle on Bastard studies lists eugenicists who did work in various German colonies. Other German colonies were in the south Pacific as well as in the New World. It is important to show that this racist-oriented version of eugenics was not an isolated event that took place only in Germany or in one particular German colony. In fact, eugenics research took place in several colonies. For example, Rita Hauschild did research in Tovar, Venezuela. Eugenics research was also done in some of the south Pacific islands, as well as in one of the most famous locations, German Reichsgau Wartheland under the Third Reich (Auschwitz). One might think there was a disconnect between the Second and Third Reichs, yet people such as Hannah Arendt have written books about this connection. Thus, it becomes very important to show the historical connection between Germany's colonies and eugenics research that took place there. By "historical connection", it is important to show that what Germany was doing was not something that just suddenly happened without any historical precedence. In fact, Germany's claim to have colonies in the New World was based upon not only the past history but its proto-colony in Tovar. It is to be noted that I used Wikilinks already written by others, to show that Germany's history runs back several centuries and that the Venezuela Crisis of 1902-1903 was based on Colonia Tovar. (Germany entertained the idea of going to war with the United States; hence, this was viewed as a significant issue not only by Germany but by the United States as well.)

Regarding your idea of this material being more properly placed in the Racism article: this isn't simply racism, but was classified as eugenics. I think it's proper to deal with the subject matter under the appropriate heading. In the 21st century there is a clear distinction between genetics, eugenics and racism; however, this was not always the case. We cannot rely upon readers of Wikipedia to know the history before they look it up in Wikipedia; that's why I placed that material here.Virago250 (talk) 17:30, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Are you essentially stating that one reason for German colonies was to carry on eugenics research? This is going to need to be made considerably clearer (with citations, of course) in the article. That Germany's history on colonies, racism, etc ran back several centuries, I still have difficulty seeing the relevance of; please clarify. (I've taken a look at the Bastard studies article, and have noted a couple places where references are needed plus added a couple of WikiProjects - note that I don't feel that articles should be rated above Start-class except based on a consensus of multiple users.) Allens (talk) 21:48, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Fischer's and Hauschild's research is very much on-topic for Eugenics. We need more detail on both, as a priority. Also in respect to Fischer's connections to the American and international eugenics movement. Can you help find more sources on this stuff, can be in any language? Itsmejudith (talk) 17:27, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

This article may be of help in resolving this controversy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism (UTC)