3 - Eugenic Anxieties
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2014
Summary
The word “eugenics” derives from the Greek and denotes “good in birth” or “noble in heredity.” Francis Galton understood by it the science of improving the human gene pool by granting “the more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable.” His American counterpart, Charles Davenport, put it slightly differently: “Eugenics may be defined as the science and art of social advancement by better breeding, or of improving the population by increasing the number of those with valuable racial (heredity) traits.” What distinguished eugenics from many existing academic branches of science was that it was a program with a set of prescriptions for law- makers – it was science with an agenda. Eugenicists in fact liked to compare this policy implication to the application of a newly discovered vaccination. But, in contrast to a medically prescribed preventive vaccination, eugenics demanded political action.
Heredity and Mental Illness:
Eugenics depended on two principles: heredity and differential fertility. Absent these two precepts, a eugenic program would be pointless. From the eugenicists’ point of view, eugenics was not only policy-relevant but was urgently so. This resulted from the assumption that the majority of mental illnesses were hereditary, increasingly pervasive, and degenerative of a society’s overall human stock.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Sterilized by the StateEugenics, Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth-Century North America, pp. 49 - 62Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2013
References
, “Eugenics,” in Body Build: Its Development and Inheritance (Bulletin No. 24), February 1924, BD 27 CD, APSA.Google Scholar
, The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2001), 163.Google Scholar
Selective Sterilization in Primer Form (Princeton: Birthright, Inc., 1937), 26
, Measuring Minds: Henry Herbert Goddard and the Origins of American Intelligence Testing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 92.Google Scholar
, The Kallikak Family, a Study of the Heredity of Feeblemindedness (New York: Macmillan, 1912), 101–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, White Trash: The Eugenic Family Studies, 1877–1919 (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1988), 3n5.Google Scholar
, Mental Illness and American Society, 1875–1940 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1983)Google Scholar
et al., “Sexual Sterilization: Four Years Experience in Alberta,” American Journal of Psychiatry 91, no. 5 (1935): 909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Racism and Sexism in Nazi Germany: Motherhood, Compulsory Sterilization and the State,” Journal of Women in Culture and Society 8, no. 3 (1983): 405–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Decline of Fertility in Germany, 1871–1939 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1974)Google Scholar
, The Politics of Fertility in Twentieth-Century Berlin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).Google Scholar
, “Über die idioplasmatischen Ursachen der physiologischen und pathologischen Sexualcharaktere des Menschen,” Archiv für Rassen- und Gesellschaftsbiologie (ARGB), Bd. 9, Heft 5 (1912): 545–603Google Scholar
, Geburten-Rückgang und Geburten-Regelung im Lichte der individuellen und der sozialen Hygiene, 2nd ed. (Berlin: Colblentz, 1921), 153.Google Scholar
, Quality and Quantity: The Quest for Biological Regeneration in Twentieth-Century France (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Demography and Degeneration; “Minutes of the 6th meeting of the Brock Committee [into sterilization],” November 14, 1932, 3
, “Was kosten die schlechten Rassenelemente den Staat und die Gesellschaft?” Archiv für Soziale Hygiene 8 (1913): 213–37Google Scholar
, , and , Grundriss der menschlichen Erblichkeitslehre und Rassenhygiene, Menschliche Auslese und Rassenhygiene (Munich: J. F. Lehmanns Verlag, 1923), 2:8–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Aufgaben der Anthropologie, menschlichen Erblehre und Eugenik,” Die Naturwissenschaften 14, no. 32 (1926): 753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Fortpflanzung verschieden begabter Familien,” ARGB Bd. 17, Heft 4 (1925): 353–9Google Scholar
, Die Hygiene der menschlichen Fortpflanzung. Versuch einer praktischen Eugenik (Berlin: Urban & Schwarzenberg, 1926), 113.Google Scholar
, “Sozialanthropologie,” in et al., eds., Handwörterbuch der Naturwissenschaften, Bd. 9 (Jena: Fischer, 1913), 172–88Google Scholar
, “Individualistische Hemmnisse der Bevölkerungspolitik,” ARGB Bd. 12, Heft 1 (1916–18): 124Google Scholar
, “Vorschläge zur Bevölkerungspolitik mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Wirtschaftslage nach dem Kriege,” ARGB Bd. 12, Heft V (1916–18): 440–68.Google Scholar
, Frauenbefreiung und Rassenideologie. Rassenhygiene und Eugenik im politischen Programm der “Radikalen Frauenbewegung” (1900–1933) (Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag, 1995), 58.Google Scholar
, ARGB Bd. 11, Heft 5 (1914–15): 680–2.
The Letters of Theodore Roosevelt, ed. , , and (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1951), 2:1053.
, Die biologischen Grundlagen der Rassenhygiene und der Bevölkerungspolitik. Für Gebildete aller Berufe (Munich: J. F. Lehmanns Verlag, 1917), 62n and 92.Google Scholar
, Grundzüge der Vererbungslehre, Rassenhygiene, und Bevölkerungspolitik, 8th ed. (Munich: J. F. Lehmann, 1937), 92.Google Scholar
, “Die Unfruchtbarmachung geistig Minderwertiger,” Wissenschaftliche Beilage zur Leipziger Lehrerzeitung 28–9 (1924), 217Google Scholar
et al., Von der Verhütung unwerten Lebens – ein Zyklus in 5 Vorträgen (Bremen: G. A. v. Halem, 1933), especially 15–62Google Scholar
, “An die deutschen Universitäten [Aufruf des Gesamtvorstandes der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte],” Korrespondenz-Blatt der Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 50 (1919): 23–4Google Scholar
, “The Relationship between Eugenics and the So-called ‘Euthanasia Action’ in Nazi Germany,” in Science in the Third Reich, ed. (Oxford: Berg Publishers, 2001), 185–211Google Scholar
, Body Build: Its Development and Inheritance, Bulletin No. 24, February 1924, BD 27 CD, APSA.Google Scholar
People v. Harley Blankenship, 16 Cal. App. 2d 606, 610 (1936).
, “Narratives of Nation and Anti-Nation: The Media and the Construction of Latinos as a Threat to the United States,” in ed. Narrating Peoplehood Amidst Diversity: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives (Aarhus: University of Aarhus Press, 2011).Google Scholar
, “A Decade of Progress in Eugenics,” Address to the Third International Congress of Eugenics, New York, August 21–23, 1932Google Scholar
, “The Architecture of Race in American Immigration Law: A Reexamination of the Immigration Act of 1924,” Journal of American History 86, no. 1 (1999): 67–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Report of the Departmental Committee on Sterilisation (“Brock Report”) (London: HMSO, Cmd 4485, 1934), 21.
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.