Eugenics and the Science Czar, cont.

eugenics-treePreviously I blogged about the abortion as eugenics statement from Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg recently, the one where she said she thought the reason people were in favor of abortion was to reduce the surplus population of undesirable groups. She realized that wasn’t the motivation when, in 1980, the court upheld the ban on Medicaid funding of abortion. William Grigg at Reason makes one of the same points I made, only more succinctly:

there was an interval of roughly seven years during which Ginsburg, a well-informed and influential academic, believed that America was creating a eugenicist system in which abortion would help reduce “undesirable” populations — however those populations would be defined. This was what Roe had wrought, Ginsburg believed for several years, and if she ever experienced misgivings about it, she managed to keep them private.

Exactly- and I find that immensely disturbing, creepy, even. Reason’s Grigg asks another question- WHY did she think that the purpose of abortion support was to recreate a eugenicist system in America?

Where did Ginsburg — a rising star in academe long before being tapped to fill the Rosa Klebb seat on the Supreme Court — get the impression that American policy-making elites were discussing the use of welfare subsidies to bring about the attrition of “undesirable” populations?

In 1968 Holden, now Obama’s Science Czar, co-authored a nasty little book advocating forced abortion, sterilization and other Nazi like procedures on a public guilty of no greater crime than precreating. I blogged about it here. He co-authored it with Paul Ehrlich, who had published The Population Bomb in 1968. No doubt Bader-Ginsburg was familiar with it, and, at the very least, it offered extremely totalitarian methods of birth control- including forced abortion and sterilization, as possible solutions to the dreadful problem of overpopulation (“Compulsory control of family size is an unpalatable idea, but the alternatives may be much more horrifying.“). You can read quotes and entire pages from Holden’s book over at Zombietime. Please read it all.

Grigg notes that connection, and also this:

In 1967, sociologist, demographer, and population control heavyweight Kingsley Davis published an essay in Science magazine observing that “the social structure and economy must be changed before a deliberate reduction in the birthrate can be achieved” in the West. He urged governments to subsidize voluntary abortion and sterilization and restructure their tax systems to discourage both marriage and childbirth.

Davis’s recommendations apparently inspired Frederick Jaffe, Vice President of Planned Parenthood, when he composed a 1969 memorandum intended for use as a template for anti-natalist efforts.

Ehrich and Jafee both liked the idea of putting sterilization agents in the water supply, compulsory abortion for out of wedlock pregnancies, and requiring governmental permission to give birth. Other sources for Bader-Ginsburg’s understanding that her pro-choice peers were in it for the eugenics:


Kingsley Davis, Margaret Mead, Paul Ehrlich, and sundry Planned Parenthood leaders – who endorsed the 1971 manifesto The Case for Compulsory Birth Controlby Edgar R. Chasteen. That book offered one-stop shopping for policy-makers seeking draconian population management methods.

Just how far were the pro-choice eugenicists willing to go?

Arguably the most astonishing variant on this approach was proposed in 1994, just prior to the UN’s International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, Egypt.


In a book entitled Too Many People, Sir Roy Calne, a noted British physician, proposed a universal minimum childbearing age of 25, and a strict two-child quota. Those seeking the government-dispensed “privilege” of having children would have to pass a state-mandated parenting class and receive the appropriate “reproduction license.” Those who violate those restrictions would lose their children and face Chinese-style economic sanctions and criminal punishments.


Calne also suggested the development of an engineered sterility pathogen — he called it the “O virus” — that could be administered to women world-wide as a vaccine.

Here’s a slightly edited repost of something I wrote about Ehrlich a few years ago: IN his book The Population Bomb, Ehrlich describes his epiphany, that moment when he was suddenly blinded by the light of his knowledge that overpopulation was a cancer and realized the need to take drastic steps to treat individual humans as cancer cells on the earth. Here’s what he wrote:

`I have understood the population explosion intellectually for a long time. I came to understand it emotionally one stinking hot night in Delhi a few years ago. My wife and daughter and I were returning to our hotel in an ancient taxi. The seats were hopping with fleas. The only functional gear was third. As we crawled through the city, we entered a crowded slum area. The temperature was well over 100, and the air was a haze of dust and smoke. The streets seemed alive with people. People eating, people washing, people sleeping. People visiting, arguing, and screaming. People thrusting their hands through the taxi window, begging. People defecating and urinating. People clinging to buses. People herding animals. People, people, people, people. As we moved slowly through the mob, hand horn squawking, the dust, noise, heat and cooking fires gave the scene a hellish aspect. Would we ever get to our hotel? All three of us were, frankly, frightened. It seemed that anything could happen – but, of course, nothing did. …….Perhaps, but since that night I’ve known the feel of overpopulation. ‘

As more than one of his readers and reviewers has noted, the population density is just as great (or greater) in New York, London, and Tokyo as it is in Delhi. Population density was not the problem in India. The problem was poverty. I’m not so sure, however, that an equal amount of poverty in the apartments in New York would not have resulted in such an emotional reaction from Ehrlich.

It seems to be the very ‘otherness’ of the darker skinned Indians that made their teeming proximity so disturbing to him.

Here’s what the Ehrlichs think of their book now:
Perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future.

Part One
Part Two
Part Three
Part Four
Ehrlich Quotes

Posted in overpopulation | 1 Response

Oh. Right.

So, about that home-school co-op the one where I mysteriously have found myself volunteering to serve on the board- I was teaching two or three classes, had shanghaied my mother and two oldest daughters to teach three other classes (the older girls for second semester, as they thought themselves rather too busy to take it up this September), and was just starting lesson prep when I got a reprieve- the building that was hosting us wants us to wait until next year.

Well, not the building, you understand. While some buildings are endowed with a very obvious personality and quite capable of having wishes and making them know, this building is an impersonal structure which has no wishes.* The caretakers and board in charge of the building expressed the desire that we wait.

“Are you okay with that?” asked the HG’s future Mama-in-law as we rode together on the way to the five acre discount store to look for things for our young couple’s cozy first apartment together. “Does that timing work better for you, or is it hard to put it off so much further in the distance?”

“Oh, much, much better,” I said. For one thing, I was having to start a co-op, and start teaching classes the same month I am expecting a grandbaby and then having a wedding the next month. That was a little insane. That won’t be happening in September of 2010.”

There was a long and very pregnant pause in the vehicle as a certain realization struck us both at exactly the same time, and we blurted out together: “But that’s what I/you would have assumed around this time last year!!”

Chronologically, Jenny should be next (and that’s what all the little old ladies are telling her), but I absolutely cross my heart pinky swear promise you that there are no young men in our lives whom we suspect have designs on our Jenny.

Of course, this time last year, Strider didn’t have designs on our HG, either, or if he did, he wasn’t sharing them or making them obvious. We certainly didn’t suspect (we had suspected a couple years previously, but then nothing came of it, supposedly because somebody thought we’d swat him off faster than toad eats flies).

Still, Jenny has plans. When the HG moves out, she is moving her craft room to the HG’s room, which is considerably larger and possesses two, yes, count them two, closets useful for storing crafts, dresses in progress, and other such domestic and couture related goodnesses. She says it doesn’t matter who asks her anything, she absolutely cannot possibly leave the parental home until she has had time to make good use of the new craft room. She has Plans and she means to use them in that craft room.

So did the HG have plans, you know. She was going to move to Spain.

And we know what the poet/philosopher Burns says about plans.

*Of course we think buildings have personalities. We are people who name our refrigerator.

Posted in Strider loves the HG, Who We Are | Leave a comment

Health Care Research

Betsy recommends a health care post by Cliff Asness of Stumbling On Truth

Here’s a point I’d not thought of:

He goes on to refute the arguments about Canadians paying less for medicine than we do by explaining the differences between the fixed costs of researching a new medicine and the variable costs of producing more pills. From there it’s on to looking at costs in countries with socialized medicine and reminding us that the United States, by providing the economic benefits of medical research is, in a sense, subsidizing their health care. If they had to depend just on what it was profitable for innovators to develop in their own countries, they wouldn’t have any access to all the wonderful developments we’ve seen in medical care in our lifetimes. And if we “reform” our system as the Democrats are proposing, we won’t have anywhere to look to for providing the next generation’s medical breakthroughs. And we will all pay in the cures not yet discovered.

Is he right? How much medical research do companies in other countries do? I really don’t know.

Posted in government, health | Leave a comment

I Think Obama Was Right About the Gates Case

Betsy’s Page has a round-up of responses. On this point (which I’ve seen made elsewhere), I don’t fully agree:

even though Obama has no idea of what really went on in Professor Gates’ house, he stated that the police acted stupidly and pondered the possibility of racism. It’s always helpful to have the President of the United States offer a criticism of a local police matter about which he admits he doesn’t know what went on in the house. Since Gates was arrested for disorderly conduct and not for breaking into the house, it might be pertinent to know actually how Gates behaved when confronted by the police – just what Obama admits that he doesn’t know.

It’s true that he said he didn’t know all the details, but he did say Professor Gates was his friend. If the police arrested a friend of mine on a possible burglary call where they found that my friend was actually ‘breaking’ into his own house because the door was jammed or he’d lost the key, then I’d call the police names, too. Yes, Gates was arrested for disorderly conduct. He was in his own home and the police were there and he didn’t want them. He showed them I.D. Yes, he was probably rude and belligerent. I don’t really think stupid is the word the President wanted here- I suspect more accurate words would include terms like these: arrogant, bullying, and chip on their shoulders.

I don’t particularly care if Gates was rude and called them names. He may well have over-reacted and been unfair to them. I don’t care. The power to arrest somebody should not be used because a police officer is huffy about having his personal dignity somehow impugned by an otherwise innocent man clearly having a frustrating evening (the reason he had to break into his home in the first place).

Once they confirmed that he was legitimately in the house, they should have just been grown ups and shrugged off any name-calling and left quickly, since it would now be obvious to them they were bothering a man who was inside his own castle, where they no longer had legitimate business. They arrested him because they could. It’s a perfect illustration of how power goes to men’s heads and makes them act like petty tyrants- a perfect illustration of why I don’t want the government amassing more power to itself.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Response

The Science Czar and Eugenics

eugenics-treeIn a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who “contribute to social deterioration” (i.e. undesirables) “can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility” — in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational “Planetary Regime” should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans’ lives — using an armed international police force.

Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. No one in their right mind would say such things.

Well, I hate to break the news to you, but it is no hoax, no exaggeration. John Holdren really did say those things, and this report contains the proof. Below you will find photographs, scans, and transcriptions of pages in the book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977 by John Holdren and his close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich. The scans and photos are provided to supply conclusive evidence that the words attributed to Holdren are unaltered and accurately transcribed.

Here’s a specific quote from the book:

One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.

Scarlet letter, anyone? It’s a nightmarish combinatin of the worst attitudes in The Scarlet Letter with a soupcon of Nazi-ism, and a dash of the sort of attitudes that led to the government sanctioned kidnapping of hundreds of Indian children who were then adopted out.

Be sure to read it all. In point of fact, HOlden hasn’t actually recanted any of this, but even if he had, I don’t think these positions were ever excusable or acceptable and they mark him as unfit for any sort of offical position in the White House.

Posted in government, overpopulation | Leave a comment

  • The Common Room on Facebook

  • Amazon: Buy our Kindle Books

  • Search Amazon

    Try Audible and Get Two Free Audiobooks

  • Brainy Fridays Recommends: