Category Archives: Eugenics

Project Censored's State of the Free Press 2022, edited by Andy Lee Roth and Mickey Huff, is available for preorder now. Published in collaboration with Random Lengths News, this is the second of two parts. Read the first five stories on the list here.

6. Canary Mission Blacklists Pro-Palestinian Activists, Chilling Free-Speech Rights

Before the critical race theory moral panic fueled a nationwide uprising to censor discussions of race in education, there was an opposite moral panic decrying cancel culture stifling certain peopleespecially in education. But even at the peak of the cancel culture panic, perhaps the most canceled people anywhere in Americapro-Palestinian activists and sympathizersgot virtually no attention. Even though a well-funded, secretly run blacklist website, known as Canary Mission, explicitly targeted thousands of individualsoverwhelmingly studentswith dossiers expressly intended to ruin their careers before they even began, and which have been used in interrogations by Israeli security officials, according to the Forward, a Jewish publication. Theyve also been used by the FBI, as reported by The Intercept.

The website, established in 2015, seeks to publicly discredit critics of Israel as terrorists and anti-Semites, Project Censored noted, but its careless style of accusation has caused a backlash, even among pro-Israeli Jews. While some of those listed on the site are prominent activists, others are students who attended a single event, or even student government representatives suspected of voting for resolutions that are critical of Israel, the Forward reported. More than that, it reported three examples when Canary Mission was apparently retaliating against critics, including Jews.

But by far, its main targets are Palestinians, particularly activists involved with the global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions or BDS movement that works to peacefully pressure Israelsimilarly to South Africa in the 1980sto obey international law and respect Palestinians human rights. As the Intercept reported in 2018, While Canary Mission promotes itself as a group working against anti-Semitism, the blacklists effective goal is to clamp down on growing support for Palestine in the United States by intimidating and tarnishing Palestinian rights advocates with the brush of bigotry.

While the FBI told the Intercept that it only investigates activity which may constitute a federal crime or pose a threat to national security, this didnt match up with its actions. If the FBI was concerned about criminal activity among the student activists, its agents made no indication of that in the interviews, the Intercept reported. They did, however, ask questions that echoed far-right propaganda about unproven links between pro-Palestine activist groups and militant groups.

The list itself has had a chilling effect on First Amendment rights, another Intercept story reported. A survey of over 60 people profiled on Canary Mission, conducted by the group Against Canary Mission, found that 43 percent of respondents said they toned down their activism because of the blacklist, while 42 percent said they suffered acute anxiety from being placed on the website. Some have even received death threats.

For many otherwise unknown activists, a Canary Mission profile is their most visible online presence, Project Censored reported, Its the first thing that comes up when you Google my name, the claim that Im a terrorist supporter and an extremist, one former activist on Palestinian issues told the Intercept.

Beyond Canary Mission, Projected Censored noted, a variety of pro-Israel organizations that seek to suppress pro-Palestinian activism have pursued litigation against chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine, as reported in The Nation by Lexi McMenamin. A highlighted example at UCLA demanded the release of the names of speakers at a national conference, whose identities had been protected in order to prevent them from being put on no-fly lists, potentially denied entry to other countries, or contacted by the FBI over their organizing work. In March 2021 a California judge rejected that demand, noting that disclosure of their names would violate their rights to freedom of association, anonymous speech, and privacy.

Project Censored also cited a May 2021 federal court ruling that the state of Georgia cannot compel groups or individuals who contract with public entities to disavow support for the BDS movement against Israel, finding that the states law places an unconstitutional incidental burden on speech. Georgia is one of 35 states with similar anti-BDS laws or executive orders.

Heightened violence in Israel/Palestine in May 2021 has focused attention on powerful pro-Israel media biases in US news coverage, but Canary Mission and legal efforts to suppress pro-Palestinian activism have nonetheless received minimal corporate news coverage, Project Censored summarized, citing a handful of exceptions, a New York Times and a Washington Post opinion, plus two New York Times articles dating back to 2018, [that] made passing mention of Canary Mission, as a shadowy organization, But, Project Censored concluded, Aside from this coverage, major establishment news outlets have provided no substantive reports on the role played by Canary Mission and other pro-Israel organizations in stifling the First Amendment rights of pro-Palestinian activists.

7. Googles Union-Busting Methods Revealed

In 2018, Google dropped its long-time slogan, Dont be evil from its code of conduct. In 2019, Google hired IRI Consultants, a union avoidance firm, amid a wave of unprecedented worker organizing at the company, as Vices Motherboard put it in January 2021, while reporting on leaked files from IRI that provided a disturbing picture of how far Google may have strayed in its willingness sabotage its workers rights. The 1935 National Labor Relations Act makes it illegal for companies to spy on employees and guarantees workers the right to organize and engage in collective bargaining. Nevertheless, Project Censored noted, companies like Google attempt to circumvent the law by hiring union avoidance firms like IRI Consultants as independent contractors to engage in surveillance and intimidation on their behalf.

[E]mployers in the United States spend roughly $340 million on union avoidance consultants each year, Lauren Kaori Gurley reported for Motherboard, but their practices are apparently so disreputable that IRI doesnt identify its clients on its website beyond saying the firm has been hired by universities, renewable energy companies, auto-makers, the nation's largest food manufacturers, and several top ten worldwide retailers, she reported.

Consultants specialize in operating in the grey areas of the law, John Logan, a Professor of Labor and Employment Studies at San Francisco State told Gurley. Theyre not quite illegal but theyre sort of bending the law if theyre not breaking it.

The [leaked] documents show that the firm collected incredibly detailed information on 83 Seattle hospital employees, including their personality, temperament, motivations, ethnicity, family background, spouses employment, finances, health issues, work ethic, job performance, disciplinary history, and involvement in union activity in the lead-up to a union election, Project Censored noted, including descriptions of workers as lazy, impressionable, money oriented, and a single mother.

The documents Motherboard reported on didnt come from Google, but from two Seattle-based hospitals owned by Conifer Health Solutions, who hired IRI on the slya common practice.

Tracking the union avoidance firms behind anti-union campaigns is intentionally made difficult by firms that subcontract out work to other firms that hire independent contractors to avoid federal reporting requirements laid out by the Department of Labor and shield themselves from public scrutiny, Motherboard explained, adding that the union organizing the workers had no idea of IRIs involvement.

Google is not the only Big Tech company to enlist union avoidance consultants in recent years. In fall 2020 and spring 2021, employees at Amazons massive fulfillment center in Bessemer, Alabama launched a much-publicized unionization effort, Project Censored noted. As John Logan detailed in a lengthy article for LaborOnline, Amazon responded to the Bessemer drive by spending at least $3,200 per day on anti-union consultants Russ Brown and Rebecca Smith and by bringing in a second union-busting consulting firm, as well as hiring one of the largest law firms in the country specializing in union avoidance. Employees voted more than 2-1 against joining the union, but the election was overturned for a set of eight labor law violations after Project Censoreds book went to the publishera decision that Amazon is appealing.

There has been some establishment press coverage of large corporations hiring union-avoidance firms to undermine workplace organizing, mostly focusing on tech giants like Google and Amazon, Project Censored noted, including late 2019 stories in the New York Times and Washington Post reporting that Google had hired IRI, and a Feb. 23, 2020 New York Times Magazine cover story entitled the Great Google Revolt, which mentioned in passing the use of anti-union consultants by Google and others in Silicon Valley. However, there has been no corporate news coverage whatsoever of the sensational leaks that Motherboard released in January, and there has been very little in-depth corporate media reporting on the use of union-busting consultants in general, Project Censored summed up, concluding, The documents leaked to Motherboard confirm and greatly elaborate upon what labor organizers and educators have suspected of the specific tactics the union-busting firms employ.

8. Pfizer Bullies South American Governments Over COVID-19 Vaccine

Pfizer has essentially held Latin American governments to ransom for access to its lifesaving COVID-19 vaccine, Project Censored reports, the latest example of how its exerted undue influence to enrich itself at the expense of low- and middle-income nations going back to the 1980s, when it helped shape the intellectual property rules its now taking advantage of.

Pfizer has been accused of bullying Latin American governments in Covid vaccine negotiations and has asked some countries to put up sovereign assets, such as embassy buildings and military bases, as a guarantee against the cost of any future legal cases, according to reporters at the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

In one case it resulted in a three-month delay in reaching a deal. For Argentina and Brazil, no national deals were agreed at all, BIJ reported. Any hold-up in countries receiving vaccines means more people contracting Covid-19 and potentially dying.

Its normal for governments to provide some indemnity. But, Pfizer asked for additional indemnity from civil cases, meaning that the company would not be held liable for rare adverse effects or for its own acts of negligence, fraud or malice, BIJ reported. This includes those linked to company practices say if Pfizer sent the wrong vaccine or made errors during manufacturing.

Some liability protection is warranted, but certainly not for fraud, gross negligence, mismanagement, failure to follow good manufacturing practices, the World Health Organizations director of the Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law, Lawrence Gostin, told BIJ. Companies have no right to ask for indemnity for these things.

During negotiations, which began in June 2020, the Argentinian government believed that, at the least, Pfizer ought to be accountable for acts of negligence on its part in the delivery and distribution of the vaccine, but, instead of offering any compromise, Pfizer demanded more and more, according to one government negotiator, Project Censored summarized. That was when Pfizer called for Argentina to put up sovereign assets as collateral. Argentina broke off negotiations with Pfizer, leaving the nations leaders at that time without a vaccine supply for its people, in December. It was an extreme demand that I had only heard when the foreign debt had to be negotiated, but both in that case and in this one, we rejected it immediately, an Argentine official told BIJ.

That same month, just after the United States approved Pfizers COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use, In These Times Sarah Lazare filed a detailed report on the history of the pharmaceutical giants opposition to expanding vaccine access to poor countries, beginning in the mid-1980s during the negotiations that eventually resulted in the establishment of the WTO in 1995.

Both globally and domestically, Pfizer played an important role in promoting the idea that international trade should be contingent on strong intellectual property rules, while casting countries that do not follow U.S. intellectual property rules as engaging in piracy, a view they promoted to multiple business networks, shielded from wider public debate. It was not a given, at the time, that intellectual property would be included in trade negotiations, she explained. Many Third World countries resisted such inclusion, on the grounds that stronger intellectual property rules would protect the monopoly power of corporations and undermine domestic price controls.

It is difficult to think of a clearer case for suspending intellectual property laws than a global pandemic, and a swath of global activists, mainstream human rights groups and UN human rights experts have added their voices to the demand for a suspension of patent laws, Lazare noted. But Pfizer was joined in its opposition by pharmaceutical trade groups and individual companies, such as Moderna, another COVID-19 vaccinemaker.

As a result, One could make a map of global poverty, lay it over a map of vaccine access, and it would be a virtual one-to-one match, she wrote. Once again majority black and brown countries, by and large, are left to suffer and die.

Pfizers dealings in South America are not exactly secret, Project Censored noted, but As of May 2021, there has been no corporate media coverage of Pfizers actual dealings in South America or how the pharmaceutical giant helped establish the global intellectual property standards it now invokes to protect its control over access to the vaccine.

Nor is this anything new, it concluded: Big Pharma has a long, underreported track record of leaving developing nations medical needs unfulfilled, as Project Censored has previously documented.

9. Police Use Dogs as Instruments of Violence, Targeting People of Color

The use of vicious dogs to control Black people dates back to slavery, but its not ancient history according to an investigative series of 13 linked reports, titled Mauled: When Police Dogs are Weapons, coordinated by the Marshall Project in partnership with AL.com, IndyStar, and the Invisible Institute. They found evidence that the pattern continues to this day, with disproportionate use of police dogs against people of color, often resulting in serious injury, with little or no justification. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, a majority-Black city of 220,000, is the dog-bite capital of America, with a bite rate more than double the next-ranked city, Indianapolis. According to Bryn Stole and Grace Tooheys February 2021 report:

Between 2017 and 2019, Baton Rouge police dogs bit at least 146 people, records show. Of those, 53 were 17 years old or younger; the youngest were just 13. Almost all of the people bitten were Black, and most were unarmed and suspected by police of nonviolent crimes like driving a stolen vehicle or burglary.

But Baton Rouge is hardly alone. Approximately 3,600 Americans annually are sent to the emergency room for severe bite injuries resulting from police dog attacks. These dog bites can be more like shark attacks than nips from a family pet, according to experts and medical researchers, a team of five reporters wrote in October 2020, as part of a summary of the main finding of their research. Other highlights from the series included:

Though the Black Lives Matter movement has significantly raised public awareness of police using disproportionate force against people of color, police K-9 violence has received strikingly little attention from corporate news media. There were exceptions: In October 2020, USA Today published a Marshall Project story simultaneously with the project, and in November 2020, the Washington Post ran a front-page story citing the Marshall Projects reporting. In addition, NBC News covered Salt Lake Citys suspension of its K-9 program, after a video circulated of a police dog biting a Black man who was kneeling on the ground with his hands held up. But aside from these examples, coverage appears to have been limited to local news outlets, Project Censored concluded.

10. Activists Call Out Legacy of Racism and Sexism in Forced Sterilization

Forced sterilization was deemed constitutional in a 1927 Supreme Court decision, Buck v. Bell, after which forced sterilizations increased dramatically, to at least 60,000 forced sterilizations in some 32 states during the 20th Century, predominantly targeting women of color. And while state laws have been changed, its still constitutional, and still going on todaywith at least five cases of women in ICE custody in Georgia in 2019while thousands of victims await restitution, as reports from the Conversation and YES! Magazine has documented.

Organizations such as Project South, California Latinas for Reproductive Justice, and the Sterilization and Social Justice Lab are actively working to document the extent of this underreported problemand to bring an end to it. Project Censored noted. But their work is even more underreported than the problem itself.

During the height of this wave of eugenics by means of sterilization in the U.S., forced hysterectomies were so common in the Deep South that activist Fannie Lou Hamer coined the term Mississippi Appendectomy to describe them, Ray Levy Uyeda wrote in a YES! Magazine article, How Organizers are Fighting an American Legacy of Forced Sterilization, which begins with the story of Kelli Dillon. Dillon was a California prison inmate in 2001 when she underwent a procedure to remove a potentially cancerous growthand the surgeon simultaneously performed an unauthorized hysterectomy, one of 148 forced sterilizations that year in California prisons, and one of 1,400 carried out between 1997 and 2010.

Dillon began organizing inside the womens prison gathering testimonials from other victimized prisoners and provided the personal accounts to staff at Justice Now that was laying the groundwork to petition for legislation that would ban the procedures in prisons, Uyeda reported. She eventually sued the state of California for damages, and helped to shape legislation to compensate victims (finally passed this year) a story told in the 2020 documentary film, Belly of the Beast.

All forced sterilization campaigns, regardless of their time or place, have one thing in common. They involve dehumanizing a particular subset of the population deemed less worthy of reproduction and family formation, Alexandra Minna Stern wrote at the Conversation. Stern directs the Sterilization and Social Justice Lab, where Our interdisciplinary team explores the history of eugenics and sterilization in the U.S. using data and stories35,000 of them so far captured from historical records from North Carolina, California, Iowa and Michigan.

The history was more complicated than one might expect, Stern explained. At first, sterilization programs targeted white men, expanding by the 1920s to affect the same number of women as men. The laws used broad and ever-changing disability labels like feeblemindedness and mental defective. Over time, though, women and people of color increasingly became the target, as eugenics amplified sexism and racism, she wrote. It is no coincidence that sterilization rates for Black women rose as desegregation got underway.

California Latinas for Reproductive Justice is working to secure legislative change for victims of the states sterilization efforts between 1909 and 1979, Uyeda wrote. It was signed into law after Project Censoreds book went to print, making California the third state with such legislation, following the lead of North Carolina and Virginia, in 2013 and 2015, respectively.

The history of eugenics has been thoroughly researched and criticized by scholars and human rights activists, but coverage by the corporate media of the US practice of forced sterilization throughout the 20th century and into the 21st has tended to be limited and narrowly focused, Project Censored noted. There was some corporate news coverage after the ICE forced sterilization stories emerged, but generally without any mention of the activists resisting the practice Some establishment press articles on the topic of forced sterilization include comments from members of these organizations to provide context on the issue, but few spotlight the groups tireless organizing and record of accomplishments. Two exceptions cited were articles from Marie Claire magazine and Refinery29, a website targeted at younger women. This only began to change in July 2021, as Project Censoreds book was going to print, with the Associated Press and other establishment news outlets reporting that California is preparing to approve reparations of up to $25,000 per person to women who had been sterilized without consent.

Read the original:

Project Censored, Part 2: The New Normal Is More Normalized Censorship - The American Prospect

Twins! Twins! Ten-year-old Eva Mozes clung to her mother amidst the chaos of the selection platform at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Before arriving at the death camp, she had been stuffed into a train car on a seemingly endless journey from Hungary. Now, she and her twin sister Miriam pressed close as Nazi guards shouted orders in German.

Suddenly, an SS guard stopped in front of the identical girls. Are they twins? he asked their mother.

Is that good? she replied.

He nodded, and Eva Mozess life changed forever.The SS guard grabbed her and Miriam, whisking them away from their mother as they screamed and called her name. They never saw her again.

Eva and Miriam had just become subjects of a massive, inhumane medical experimentation program at Auschwitz-Birkenaua program aimed solely at thousands of twins, many of them children.

A group of child survivors behind a barbed wire fence at Auschwitz-Birkenau, on the day of the camps liberation on January 27, 1945. Twins Eva and Miriam Mozes are pictured on the far right.

Alexander Vorontsov/Galerie Bilderwelt/Getty Images

Led by physician Josef Mengele, the program turned twins like Eva and Miriam into unwilling medical subjects in experiments that exposed about 3,000 children atAuschwitz-Birkenauto disease, disfigurement and torture under the guise of medical research into illness, human endurance and more.

Twins were separated from the other prisoners during the massive selections that took place at the camps massive train platform, and whisked off to a laboratory to be examined. Mengele usually used one twin as a control and subjected the other to everything from blood transfusions to forced insemination, injections with diseases, amputations, and murder. Those that died were dissected and studied; their surviving twins were killed and subjected to the same scrutiny.

READ MORE:How the Nazis Tried to Cover Up Their Crimes at Auschwitz

Twin studies had helped scientists like Mengeles mentor justify what they saw as necessary discrimination against people with undesirable genetic characteristicsJews, Roma people, LGBTQ people, people with disabilities and others. But the twin experiments that had helped create the eugenics movement would, ironically, lead to the downfall of eugenics itself.

For eugenicists like Mengele, identical twins like the Mozes sisters were the perfect research subjects. Since they share a genome, scientists reasoned, any physical or behavioral differences in twins would be due to behavior, not genetics. Eugenicists held genetics responsible for undesirable characteristics and social conditions like criminality and poverty. They believed that selective breeding could be used to encourage socially acceptable behavior and wipe out undesirable tendencies.

Eva Mozes Kor attending a ceremony to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. She is holding a photograph of herself and her twin sister Miriam taken by the Soviets after the liberation of the camp.

Bjoern Steinz/Panos Pictures/Redux

By the time twin research began at Auschwitz-Birkenau in the 1940s, the use of twins in scientific experimentation was decades old. Though prior twin experiments had produced growing evidence that environment was as important as genetics, eugenics researchers clung to the idea that they could unlock new insights into nature and nurture through studying them.

One of them, Otmar von Verschuer, had significant power and influence in Nazi Germany. He authored texts that influenced Nazi policies toward Jews, Roma people and others, arguing that race had a biological basis and that inferior people could taint the Aryan race. An advocate for forced sterilization and selective breeding, von Verschuer collected genetic information on large numbers of twins, studying the statistics in an attempt to determine whether everything from disease to criminal behavior could be inherited. And he had a protege: a young physician named Josef Mengele.

Like his mentor, Mengele was vehemently racist and a devoted member of the Nazi Party. In 1943, he began working at Auschwitz-Birkenau as a medical officer. At first, Mengele was in charge of the Roma camp there, but in 1944 the entire remaining population of the camp was murdered in the gas chambers. Mengele was promoted to chief camp physician of the entire Birkenau camp, and became known for his brutal selections of incoming prisoners for the gas chambers.

READ MORE:This Midwife at Auschwitz Delivered 3,000 Babies in Unfathomable Conditions

Mengele wanted to continue the twin experiments he had begun withvon Verschuer, and now he had a captive populace on which to do so. Though his earlier experiments had been legitimate, his work in Auschwitz-Birkenau was not. Abandoning medical ethics and research protocols, Mengele began conducting horrific experiments on up to 1,500 sets of twins, many of them children.

German Nazi doctor and war criminal Josef Mengele.

Hulton Archive/Getty Images

The Mengele Twins received nominal protection from some of the ravages of life at Auschwitz-Birkenau. They were not selected for the gas chambers, lived in separate quarters, and were given additional food and medical care. In exchange, though, they became the unwilling subjects of inhumane experiments at the hands of Mengele, who gained a reputation as the Angel of Death for his power, his mercurial temper and his cruelty.

For Eva, life as a Mengele twin meant sitting naked for hours and having her body repeatedly measured and compared to Miriams. She withstood injections of an unknown substance that caused severe reactions. As twins, I knew that we were unique because we were never permitted to interact with anybody in other parts of the camp, she later recalled. But I didn't know I was being used in genetic experiments.

Eugenics itself was rooted in twin research. Frances Galton, a British scientist who coined the term eugenics in 1883, had used twin studies in his earliest eugenic research.Deeply influenced by his half-cousin Charles Darwins book The Origin of Species, Galton became intrigued by how and whether humans passed along traits like intelligence, and preoccupied with the potential of breeding desirable genetic traits into humans.

For Galton and other eugenics researchers, twins held the key to understanding which characteristics were genetic and which ones were environmental. Using data collected via self-reported questionnaires, Galton studied dozens of pairs of twins to determine how they were similar and different. He concluded that similarities between twins were due to their genetics. The one element that varies in different individuals, but is constant in each of them, is the natural tendency, he wrote. It inevitably asserts itself.

Though Galtons twin research was biased and seriously flawed by modern standards, it helped lay the foundation for the eugenics movement. It also convinced other eugenicists that twins were the ideal way to study nature and nurture. But though eugenicists hypothesized that twins could help them create more perfect humans, the results of twin experiments kept confounding scientists. In the 1930s, for example, a group of American researchers who compared twins found a large variance in IQ in twins who had been raised apart but nonetheless shared similar personalities and behavioral traits.

Though twins were the most favorable weapons for the study of the much-debated nature-nurture problem, they wrote, their conclusions suggested that the very qualities eugenicists thought they could encourage by monitoring marriage and eliminating individuals with undesirable traits from the gene pool didnt have to do with genetics at all.

The Nazis defeat ended Mengeles experimentation on twins at Auschwitz. At the end of the war, the Angel of Death" managed to escape prosecution. Shielded by Nazi sympathizers, he lived in South America until his death in Brazil in 1979.

READ MORE:The 7 Most Notorious Nazis Who Escaped to South America

In the aftermath of the war, scientists grappled with the aftermath of Nazi experimentation and the Holocausts use of eugenic principles in the name of genocide. In 1946, a group of German physicians who had carried out euthanasia and conducted medical experimentation in Nazi death camps were tried at Nuremberg during a 140-day-long trial. The trial resulted in seven death sentences and the Nuremberg Code, a set of research ethics that has influenced modern concepts of informed consent and medical experimentation.

Only 200 of the 3,000 twins subjected to medical experiments at Auschwitz survived. Among them were Eva and Miriam. In the 1970s, Eva Mozes Kor began lecturing about her experiences and seeking out other survivors. Eventually, she and Miriam formed a nonprofit called Children of Auschwitz Nazi Deadly Lab Experiments Survivors (CANDLES) and tracked down more than 100 other twin survivors, documenting their experiences and the health ramifications of the often unknown experiments they had been subjected to at Auschwitz.

Most records of experimentation at Auschwitz were destroyed, but the lives of people like Eva Mozes Kor, who died in July 2019 at age 85, bear witness to the twin experiments brutality. Ironically, the very type of experimentation Nazi physicians thought would uphold the pseudoscience they used to justify genocide ended up undermining the field of eugenics. In the face of unconvincing data revealed by twin studies and worldwide condemnation of Nazi medical experiments, scientists abandoned eugenics en masse and the field died out.

Today, the concept of twin studies has been challenged by research that demonstrates genetic variations even among identical twins. Buttwin studies are still used to learn more aboutage-related disease, eating disorders, sexual orientation and more, while a groundbreaking study of twin NASA astronauts is shedding new light on how microgravity affects the human body. But though twins remain invaluable to researchers today, twin studies are still a subject of debate among scientists eager to sidestep their hideous history.

READ MORE: The Jewish Men Forced to Help Run Auschwitz

Go here to see the original:

Why Nazis Performed Horrifying Medical Experiments on ...

One of the most prominent buildings at USC stripped last year of the name of a leading eugenicist and former university president will instead honor Joseph Medicine Crow, a Native American alumnus who authored influential works about Indigenous history and culture, served in the U.S. Army during World War II and was awarded the Medal of Freedom, the nations highest civilian recognition.

In a move to reconcile with a racist chapter in its history, USC banished the name of Rufus B. von KleinSmid from the Center for International and Public Affairs in the heart of campus. Von KleinSmid held a leadership role in the California eugenics movement.

President Obama presents the Medal of Freedom to Joseph Medicine Crow in 2009.

(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

The university is planning a dedication ceremony in the spring to finalize the transition. In addition to the renaming, USC will offer scholarships for Native American students starting next fall, as a way to further Medicine Crows legacy, said USC President Carol L. Folt.

Students urged the university to remove von KleinSmids name after the campus community began confronting his involvement with the Human Betterment Foundation, a Pasadena-based eugenics group that supported a 1909 California law that authorized the forced sterilization of those deemed unfit. Von KleinSmid himself is said to have believed that people with defects should be sterilized.

As the universitys fifth president from 1921 to 1947, von KleinSmid led USC through an expansion that lifted the school to prestige. But his stance on sterilization was at direct odds with the universitys mission of inclusion, Folt said when the university announced the removal. A bust of von KleinSmid was also removed from campus after a unanimous vote from the board of trustees executive committee.

Folt said there was broad consensus to honor an alum who contributed greatly to society and would inspire students.

We wanted to make a very different statement than the name that had been there previously, and we wanted to recognize an alum, a person that has really had a big impact in his community and in the world, Folt said. We thought that every student that walked into that building and learned a bit about [Medicine Crow] is going to feel a bit prouder and a bit stronger about their own convictions and their own potential.

Universities across the nation have in recent years removed the names of campus figures after calls from alumni and students about their controversial or racist legacies. UC Berkeley, UC Hastings College of the Law and CalTech are among those that have stripped buildings or institutions of their titles.

To rename the building, the university put together the Center for International and Public Affairs Naming Committee, consisting of staff, faculty, students and alumni, to identify an alum who reflected the universitys values. After compiling more than 200 names, the committee unanimously agreed Medicine Crow was the right person to honor and the university received the support of his family.

For Native American students and alumni, the decision is meaningful to a group that is often underrepresented in media and academia.

Mato Standing Soldier, a member of the Oglala Lakota tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, graduated from USC in 2020. As a student, it became clear over the years that von KleinSmids role in supporting the eugenics movement needed to be addressed, he said.

As president of the Native American Student Assembly, he was a part of conversations to ensure the university was standing for students in the community. The naming for Medicine Crow shows Native students that a path in higher education is a space they too can occupy, he noted.

On a lot of these predominantly white institutions, Native kids can feel very silenced, and very underrepresented and very marginalized, Standing Soldier said. Seeing a name that is unapologetically Native can go a really long way.

Raegan Kirby, a USC junior and a member of the executive board of the Native American Student Assembly, said she viewed the naming as an example of cultural appreciation and shows how the university is taking the step of appreciation over appropriation. She added that for prospective Native students, it might give them a little bit of peace knowing they are represented at the school.

Medicine Crow, born in 1913 on the Crow Reservation in Montana, served as the last tribal war chief of the Apsaalook (Crow) Nation. He graduated from USC in 1939 with a masters degree in anthropology, the first from his tribe to earn a masters. He was on his way to earning a doctorate when World War II began. While serving, Medicine Crow captured 50 horses from a Nazi camp and engaged in hand-to-hand combat with a German soldier, whom he spared. USC later gave him an honorary doctorate degree.

In 2009, former President Obama awarded Medicine Crow with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. At the White House ceremony, Obama said Medicine Crows life reflects not only the warrior spirit of the Crow people, but Americas highest ideals.

He died in April 2016 at the age of 102.

Ron Medicine Crow, his son, said the family was grateful that the university is honoring his father, who used to recount his days as a student at USC and how he became friends with players on the football team. His father decided to attend USC after learning from his uncle that they offered scholarships for Native Americans, he recalled. When his father and mother got married, they traveled to Los Angeles and stopped by USC to see the campus.

We are very pleased and honored that USC would do this as a memorial and a tribute to Dad, he said, adding that he was looking forward to visiting Los Angeles for the dedication ceremony and retrace my dads footsteps walking the grounds of USC campus.

Continue reading here:

USC building renamed to honor Native American alumnus - Los Angeles Times

Special Report

November 20, 2021 6:00 pm

The field of eugenics a word derived from the Greek for well-born or of good birth was introduced in England in 1883 by a polymath named Francis Galton, a half-cousin of Charles Darwin. He coined the term and wrote a book about selective breeding in humans. Like horses and dogs, he proposed, people could be bred to promote positive characteristics, such as intelligence. (They cant, but animals probably can. These are the smartest dog breeds in America.)

In the United States a movement grew out of Galtons ideas, but with a different twist; eugenics offered an argument for keeping people with unfavored characteristics from having children. The concept gained popularity in the 1920s and 30s, supported by academics, scientists, and the progressive movement. A few states began to pass laws allowing for the compulsory segregation and sterilization of people seen as unfit to reproduce. Advocates argued that this practice was beneficial, not only to society at large, but to the victims, who would be spared the responsibility of raising children.

In 1927, a single sterilization in Virginia changed the course of the eugenics movement, giving it legitimacy and momentum. Carrie Buck, a 17-year-old inmate of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded, had given birth to a child deemed feebleminded at six months of age as a result of rpe by a foster family member. Like her mother and daughter, Buck was considered mentally deficient and authorities ordered that she be sterilized to avoid future pregnancies.

Buck challenged the order and her case went to the Supreme Court, which allowed the sterilization to proceed. The court held that, It is better for all the worldif society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. In the infamous concluding words of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Three generations of imbeciles is enough.

The case won wider acceptance for eugenics, and the number of sterilizations increased dramatically throughout the U.S. into the 1930s and beyond. Some 32 states eventually adopted legally documented eugenics programs involving sterilization, usually forced. (Fortunately, the promotion of eugenics doesnt need to be included in our listing of the worst thing about every state.)

Click here to see 32 states that used to sterilize their citizens

Poor people like Carrie Buck and women in particular were the primary victims. Foreigners and people of color were also targeted. Under the laws of most states, homosexuals, epileptics, criminals, the mentally deficient, and the insane, mostly from institutions and asylums, could be forcibly sterilized. Even when consent was required, it was often a quid pro quo for gaining release from a facility.

While sterilizations were still performed well beyond World War II, the Holocaust and mass forced sterilization in Nazi Germany (a practice influenced by American practices) helped end popular support for sterilization, and the 1960s and 70s saw the repeal of most state eugenics laws. In 2013, North Carolina became the first state to express regret for its eugenics history by setting up a fund to compensate victims still living.

Information on the 32 states with sterilization programs including the number and sex of victims, the years programs were in effect, and specific details about laws and practices in each state is drawn from research conducted by two groups of honors students at the University of Vermont as edited and amended by Lutz Kaelber, an associate professor of sociology at the university.

More here:

The 32 States That Used to Sterilize Their Citizens - 24/7 Wall St.

Average IQ refers to the baseline score of the general population. Therefore, to have an average IQ means that you are within normal intelligence range.

However, don't worry too much about what your IQ score is, whether it's average or not. IQ scores are said to be great predictors of academic success and health, but they are also heavily criticized as poor indicators of overall intelligence because they cannot measure rationality, or the ability to make judgments in real-life situations.

Here's how average IQ varies depending on age, geographic location, and occupation.

The intelligence quotient (IQ) score is a number that attempts to measure an individual's intelligence based on their test performance in the areas of verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, memory, and processing speed.

It does this by measuring your chronological age how old you are in years against your mental age, which is measured by how well you perform on an IQ test.

There are many different kinds of IQ tests that use various equations to calculate IQ, but the fourth edition of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-IV) is considered to be the gold standard in measuring intelligence, which has the following score range:

When interpreted properly, intelligence testing in children can identify specific learning disabilities, helping educators find the most effective teaching methods. However, treating IQ test scores as the end-all of learning may be detrimental.

"Misuse of the IQ test score can promote a channeling effect where an individual with a low score might be assigned to classes that do not expect students to excel. This kind of channeling can compound itself over a course of years," says Louis Matzel, PhD, professor of psychology at Rutgers University-New Brunswick.

It's important to note that many factors affect a person's IQ, including family income, place of residence, and even the amount of physical exercise you get. Therefore, always take IQ scores with a grain of salt.

Culture, philosophy, and a country's overall approach to learning can deeply affect how their citizens perform on intelligence tests. That's why, average IQ can differ dramatically depending on where you're looking on the map.

Here are the countries with the five highest average IQ scores:

Interestingly enough, another variable that may affect IQ scores is rates of infectious disease. Experts predict that infection causes the body to invest more energy into immune function, to the detriment of brain growth.

And it turns out, a 2011 study found that the US states with lower average IQ had higher levels of infectious disease, even after taking wealth and educational variation into account.

Various career paths generally require different skill sets and ways of thinking, so it's no wonder that average IQ for one career will be different from another.

However, research is extremely limited on this point. We were able to find one small 1967 study that used the WAIS to compare the average IQ scores of male scientists at the University of Cambridge:

The researchers noted that IQ does not appear to be related to career success. Seeing as this study was small and conducted over 50 years ago, the results may be different under today's circumstances.

That said, some experts challenge the notion that IQ score is correlated to job performance especially for complex jobs and doubt its ability to predict how well a person will do in their profession.

The Binet-Simon Scale, the first intelligence test, was created in 1905 by Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon. Binet was commissioned by the French government to develop a test that would identify low-aptitude students who can be placed in special schools.

"The IQ tests are about 100+ years old. Their history is problematic on many levels including its use with eugenics," says Daniel Wright, PhD, Dunn Family Endowed Chair and Professor of Educational Assessment at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Note: Eugenics is the attempt to influence the genetic composition of future generations by eliminating or "breeding out" undesired traits.

For example, in the early to mid 1900s, US eugenicists used IQ testing as a tool to promote racist-based segregation.

As a result, since the 1920s, Black scholars, among others, have challenged the validity of IQ tests and the ideology that Black people and certain ethnic groups are naturally mentally inferior. Many also argue that a single number can't stand for everything, says Wright.

At present, existing intelligence tests are constantly refined and improved to take research advances in neuropsychology into account. Even so, many still consider these traditional types of tests as outdated measures of human intelligence.

IQ scores vary from one individual to another and are affected by several factors. Although it can measure your abstract reasoning and logical thinking skills, it may not encompass the entirety of your mental abilities.

"Motivation, opportunity, and access to resources always matter more than a few points on an IQ test. Find out what you're good at, devote yourself to getting better at it, and do the best work that you can, and no one will ever wonder what your IQ score is," says Matzel.

Carla Delgado

Freelance Reporter, Insider Reviews

Read the original here:

Average IQ by geographic location and occupation - INSIDER

Too frequently, the call for decolonisation translates into a call for diversity and inclusion. While the latter is important, LSEs Wendy Willems argues it is crucial to go a step further and ask how the act of including different vantage points disrupts dominant theoretical approaches and concepts, received histories, and canonical texts in the field of media and communication studies.

As Michel-Rolph Trouillot argued, any historical narrative is a particular bundle of silences. This also applies to the way we narrate the history of media institutions and technologies, as well as to how we document the historical emergence of the field of media and communication studies. A key task of media historians should be to unearth the fields multiple silences and to reveal how these are linked to the exercise of power as, in Trouillots words, the ultimate mark of power may be its invisibility; the ultimate challenge, the exposition of its roots.

In a 2014 Communication Theory article entitled Provincializing Hegemonic Histories of Media and Communication Studies: Toward a Genealogy of Epistemic Resistance in Africa, I critiqued how calls for the internationalising or de-Westernising of media and communication studies implicitly silence a much longer history of media and communication studies outside the so-called West. I argued that these calls suggested that scholars in the non-West had somehow not previously engaged in critical knowledge production on media and communication. My article reinscribed the epistemological and historical foundations of media and communication studies in Africa, which hegemonic histories of the field had marginalized. It called for an acknowledgment of the multiple genealogies of media and communication studies in different parts of the world.

Since my articles publication, demands for internationalization and de-Westernization have increasingly been replaced with calls for decolonization in the wake of the 2015 #RhodesMustFall protests at the University of Cape Town and other universities across the globe, as well as following the 2015 and 2020 #BlackLivesMatter protests. Demonstrations have pointed to the need for universities to transform in a number of ways, including teaching more diverse curricula, making higher education more accessible to students from marginalized economic backgrounds, revising teaching methodologies and research ethics to render them more democratic and less hierarchical, hiring a diverse pool of faculty, and addressing how universities have benefited from slavery or fed into colonialism through eugenics and scientific racism, as well as the need for reparations. Again, it is important to acknowledge here the longer genealogy of demands for decolonisation and liberation in the African context, ranging from W. E. B. Du Bois to Frantz Fanon to Ngg wa Thiongo.

These calls for decolonisation have provoked a response in our field, primarily from U.S.-based, African, and Latin American scholars whoif somewhat separatelyhave drawn attention to a multitude of problem areas; the continued marginalisation of scholars of colour in publication rates, citation rates, and editorial journal positions; the need for systemic redress; the silence on the history of European and American imperialism in graduate communication studies syllabi and canonical texts in media and communications; the characterisation of research on media, communication, and race as addressing peripheral rather than core issues; the need to centre Africa in media and communication studies and to problematize claims to universality in much of the work focused on the United States and Europe; the marginalisation of African media studies in the U.S. academy; and the relevance of decolonial approaches in making sense of media and communications in Africa and the Global South.

This body of work has once more highlighted that our field has always been raced, as evidenced by the white vantage points (presumed to be universal) adopted in canonical texts centred in the field, as well as by the longer history of institutionally racist practices in universities, journals, and professional associations. While both the older and newer calls for decolonisation may have different meanings in distinct geographical contexts, they are ultimately connected in their response to the afterlives of shared racialized histories of slavery and colonialism and their contestation of anti-Blackness and anti-Indigeneity in various parts of the world.

These studies offer much food for thought to historians of media and media studies. They point to the need for more inclusive and complicated histories of our field, ones that acknowledge both its multiple global origins and the racialized history of media and media studies. Yet increasingly, the notion of decolonisation runs the risk of turning into an empty metaphor, used to tick boxes or to attract new pools of student customers who can populate a diverse classroom that will enhance the competitiveness of the neoliberal university. Too frequently, the call for decolonisation translates into a call for diversity and inclusion. While the latter is important, it is crucial to go a step further and ask how the act of including different vantage points challenges, disrupts, subverts, and problematizes dominant theoretical approaches and concepts, received histories, and canonical texts in our field.

Armond Towns (2019) offers a good start here in critiquing both the way in which media history has been written and how received histories have become canonized in the field. His work on Marshall McLuhan shows McLuhans failure to acknowledge the crucial role of Black bodies in the emergence of Western media technologies. Relatedly, while media historians might have examined how the BBC promoted the idea of Empire through its overseas service, they have less frequently asked how histories of slavery and colonialism enabled the institutions emergence, and what implications this question might have for debates on reparations.

Similarly, Gurminder K. Bhambra highlights the erasure of slavery and colonialism in the Frankfurt Schools theorisation of modernity. As she argues, modernity did not emerge from separation or rupture, but through the connected and entangled histories of European colonisation (Bhambra 2021: 81). What, for example, would Jrgen Habermass eighteenth-century European public sphere look like if its emergence had been understood in the context of slavery and the slave trade? While the role of media and technology in perpetuating racism is relatively well documented, media and communication studies has yet to acknowledge the constitutive nature of race, recognising how histories of slavery and colonialism made possible particular media institutions and technologies.

The intimate histories extant among Africa, Europe, and the United States do not only relate to the history of media institutions and technologies but also to that of media and communication studies as a field. In his work on McLuhan, Towns highlights how McLuhan appropriated the racist ideas of John Carothers on the African mind. Carothers was a British psychiatristwho worked for the Kenyan colonial government. Other influential scholars in our field built their careers drawing on fieldwork in Africa. For example, Leonard W. Doob, a psychologist at Yale University associated with the field of cognitive psychology and propaganda studies, researched the link between media and modernisation. In his book Communication in Africa: A Search for Boundaries, one of the first academic monographs on communication in Africa, Doob discusses the sociocultural, linguistic, and psychological variables impinging on communication patterns in Africa. In other work, Doob sought to measure the levels of psychological modernisation in Africa and to assess the role of media in the process of modernisation based on empirical research in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, and Somalia.

A number of studies have situated the work of modernisation scholars such as Wilbur Schramm and Daniel Lerner within the political context of the Cold War, but less often have commentators viewed those scholars research through the prism of race or sufficiently examined how their fieldwork in Africa shaped both their individual careers and early formations of media and communications studies on the African continent. Doing so would offer us a better understanding of the racialized and entangled histories of media and communication studies across different continents.

This article was previously published in the first volume of the new journal, History of Media Studies and is reposted with thanks. It givesthe views of the author and does not represent the position of theMedia@LSE blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Featured image: Desmond Bowles published under Creative Commons License CC BY-SA 2.0

View original post here:

Disrupting received histories of media and media studies | Media@LSE - EUROPP - European Politics and Policy

Coercedsterilizationisa shameful part of Americas history, and one doesnt have to go too far back to find examples of it. Used as a means of controlling undesirable populations immigrants, people of color, poor people, unmarried mothers, the disabled, the mentally ill federally-funded sterilization programs took place in 32 states throughout the 20th century. Driven by prejudicednotions of science and social control, these programs informed policies on immigration and segregation.

As historian William Deverell explains in a piece discussing the Asexualization Acts that led to the sterilization of more than 20,000 California men and women,If you are sterilizing someone, you are saying, if not to them directly, Your possible progeny are inassimilable, and we choose not to deal with that.

According toAndrea Estrada at UC Santa Barbara, forced sterilization was particularly rampant in California (the stateseugenics program even inspired the Nazis):

Beginning in 1909 and continuing for 70 years, California led the country in the number of sterilization procedures performed on men and women, often without their full knowledge and consent. Approximately 20,000 sterilizations took place in state institutions, comprising one-third of the total number performed in the 32 states where such action was legal. (from The UC Santa Barbara Current)

There is today one state, wrote Hitler, in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of citizenship] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States. (from The L.A. Times)

Researcher Alex Stern, author of the new bookEugenic Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in America, adds:

In the early 20th century across the country, medical superintendents, legislators, and social reformers affiliated with an emerging eugenics movement joined forces to put sterilization laws on the books. Such legislation was motivated by crude theories of human heredity that posited the wholesale inheritance of traits associated with a panoply of feared conditions such as criminality, feeblemindedness, and sexual deviance. Many sterilization advocates viewed reproductive surgery as a necessary public health intervention that would protect society from deleterious genes and the social and economic costs of managing degenerate stock.

Eugenicswas a commonly accepted means of protecting society from the offspring (and therefore equally suspect) of those individuals deemed inferior or dangerous the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, criminals, and people of color.

More recently, California prisons are said to have authorized sterilizations of nearly 150 female inmates between 2006 and 2010.This article from the Center for Investigative reporting reveals how the state paid doctors $147,460 to perform tubal ligations that former inmates say were done under coercion.

But California is far from being the only state with such troubled practices. For a disturbing history lesson, check outthis comprehensive database for your states eugenics history. You can find out more information on state-by-state sterilization policies, the number of victims, institutions where sterilizations were performed, and leading opponents and proponents.

While Californias eugenics programs were driven in part by anti-Asian and anti-Mexican prejudice, Southern states also employed sterilization as a means of controlling African American populations.Mississippi appendectomies wasanother name for unnecessary hysterectomies performed at teaching hospitals in the South on women of color as practice for medical students. ThisNBC news article discusses North Carolinas eugenics program, including stories from victims of forced sterilization likeElaine Riddick. A third of the sterilizations were done on girls under 18, even as young as 9. The state also targeted individuals seen as delinquent or unwholesome.

For a closer look, see Belle Boggs For the Public Good, withoriginal video by Olympia Stone that features Willis Lynch, who was sterilized at the age of 14 while living in a North Carolina juvenile detention facility.

Gregory W. Rutecki, MD writes about the forced sterilization of Native Americans, which persisted into the 1970s and 1980s, with examples of young women receiving tubal ligations when they were getting appendectomies. Its estimated thatas many as 25-50 percent of Native American women were sterilized between 1970 and 1976.Forced sterilization programs are also a part of history in Puerto Rico,where sterilization rates are said to be the highest in the world.

Landmark Cases

The film No Ms Bebs follows the story of Mexican American women who were sterilized under duresswhile giving birth at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center in the 1960s and 1970s. Madrigal v. Quilligan, the case portrayed in the film, is one of several landmark cases thats affected the reproductive rights of underserved populations, for better or for worse.

Here are some other important cases:

Buck v. Bell: In 1927, Carrie Buck, a poor white woman, was the first person to be sterilized in Virginia under a new law. Carries mother had been involuntarily institutionalized for being feebleminded and promiscuous. Carrie was assumed to have inherited these traits, and was sterilized after giving birth. This Supreme Court case led to the sterilization of 65,000 Americans with mental illness or developmental disabilities from the 1920s to the 70s. (Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in reference to Carrie: Three generations of imbeciles are enough.)The court ruling still stands today. [Note: This story was also the subject of a 1994 made-for-TV movie starring Marlee Matlin.]

Excerpt from the documentary Fixed to Fail: Buck vs. Bell:

Relf v. Weinberger: Mary Alice and Minnie Relf, poor African American sisters from Alabama, were sterilized at the ages of 14 and 12. Their mother, who was illiterate, had signed an X on a piece of paper she believed gave permission for her daughters, who were both mentally disabled, to receive birth control shots. In 1974, the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Relf sisters, revealing that 100,000 to 150,000 poor people were being sterilized each year under federally-funded programs.

Eugenics Compensation Act: In December 2015, theUS Senate voted unanimously to help surviving victims of forced sterilization. North Carolina has paid $35,000 to 220 surviving victims of its eugenics program.Virginia agreed to give surviving victims $25,000 each.

Reproductive Justice Today

While the case in No Ms Bebs occurred forty years ago, issues of reproductive justice are still relevant today, as state laws continue to restrict access to abortion and birth control.Deborah Reid of the National Health Law program writes:

The concept of reproductive justice, which is firmly rooted in a human rights framework that supports the ability of all women to make and direct their own reproductive decisions. These decisions could include obtaining contraception, abortion, sterilization, and/or maternity care. Accompanying that right is the obligation of the government and larger society to create laws, policies, and systems conducive to supporting those decisions.

For organizations such as theNational Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, reproductive justice involves not only access to affordable birth control, abortion, and health care, but also providing access to women who are being held in immigration detention centers.

Its work that connects the dots between power inequities and bodily self-determination somethingthe eugenics movement sought to limit. AsNo Ms Bebsdirector Renee Tajima-Pea says in an interview with Colorlines: The reproductive justice framework is to make sure that people listen to the needs and the voices of poor women, women of color and immigrant women whove been marginalized.

2020 Updates:

The documentary Belly of the Beast tackles a more recent, equally shocking story of forced sterilizations in this case in womens prisons. As the women who investigate these cases discover, despite it being nearly forty years after being banned forced sterilization continued for decades in womens prisons, shielded by prison officials and doctors inside the correctional system. And may even still be happening. Read the interview with Belly of the Beast filmmaker Erika Cohn to learn more.

And as Cohn references in that interview, 2020 saw the revelation that there were forced sterilizations performed in an ICE detention center in Georgia. Learn more in this NPR piece, ICE, A Whistleblower and Forced Sterilization.

For Further Reading:Eugenic Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in Modern America, by Alex SternStates of Delinquency: Race and Science in the Making of Californias Juvenile Justice System, by Miroslava Chavez-GarciaFit to Be Citizens: Public Health and Race in Los Angeles, 1879-1939, by Natalia Molina

Lisa Ko is a New York City-based writer and editor. Her writing has appeared in The Los Angeles Review of Books, Apogee Journal, Narrative, Hyphen, and many other publications.

View original post here:

Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United ...

This timeline gives an overview of scientific racism throughout the world, placing the Eugenics Record Officewithin a broader historical framework extending from Enlightenment-Era Europe to present-day social thought.

1759: Botanist Carl Linnaeus publishes the 10th edition of Systema Naturae, which is the first to fully describe the four races of man.

1770: Dutch naturalist Petrus Camper begins developing his facial angle formula, basing his ideal angle on Grecian statues.

1795: Anthropologist Johann Friedrich Blumenbach namesthe five races of man.

Early 1800s: Franz Joseph Gall develops cranioscopy, which is later renamed phrenology by his disciple Johann Spurzheim.

1810: John Caspar Lavater publishes the foundational text Essays on Physiognomy.

1828: George Combe publishes The Constitution of Man Considered in Relation to External Objects, linking phrenology and racial comparison.

1830s: Orson Fowler opens his Phrenological Cabinet in the heart of downtown Manhattan.

1832: Johann Gaspar Spurzheim invigorates the American phrenology movement with his series of lectures in Boston.

1839: Samuel George Morton introduces his theory of craniometry in Crania Americana.

1844: Scottish publisher Robert Chambers releases his Vestiges of the Natural History of Mankind, the most popular work of natural history prior to Darwins Origin of Species. Chambers argues that each race represents a different stage of human evolution with whites being the most evolved.

1852: American physician James W. Redfield writes Comparative Physiognomy, which equates each type of people with a specific animal.

1853: French thinker Arthur Comte Gobineau publishes An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Race, arguing for the primacy of the Aryan race.

1859: Charles Darwin release the first edition of On the Origin of Species.

1864: Herbert Spencer coins the phrase survival of the fittest in developing his theories of social Darwinism.

1865: French anthropologist Paul Broca develops his table chromatique for classifying skin color.

1866: Physician John Downs defines Mongolian idiocy which he argues is a regression to the Oriental stage of human development.

1869: Francis Galton publishes Hereditary Genius, outlining his theories or human breeding.

1876: Italian psychiatrist Cesare Lombroso releases Criminal Man, which outlines his theory of criminal anthropology.

1877: Richard Dugdale publishes The Jukes, which links crime and heredity.

1882: The Chinese Exclusion Act is passed, excluding Chinese laborers from immigration for ten years.

1883: Galton coins the term eugenics.

1886: Chief of the New York City Detective Bureau Thomas F. Byrnes publishes Professional Criminals of America in which he collects the mug shots of notable criminals.

1892: The Chinese Exclusion Act is renewed for ten more years under the Geary Act.

1893: The Worlds Columbian Exposition opens in Chicago with country pavilions organized according to scientific theories of race.

1889: Andrew Carnegie pens The Gospel of Wealth, justifying the extreme wealth of the robber barrons.

1900: Gregor Mendels theories of inheritance are rediscovered.

1902: The Chinese Exclusion Act is made permanent.

1904: Curator of physical anthropology at the Smithsonian Institute Ales Hrdlicka publishes Brocas table chromatique in the U.S.

1905: The German Society for Racial Hygiene is founded.

1905: Alfred Binet invents the IQ test for measuring intelligence.

1907: The Eugenics Education Society is founded in Britain.

1907: The first American compulsory sterilization law goes into effect in 1907 in Indiana with dozens of states following suit.

1910: Zoologist Charles Davenport founds the Eugenics Record Office at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory with a grant from Mrs. E.H. Harriman.

1911: The Joint-Congressional Dillingham Commission recommends reading and writing tests to slow undesirable immigration.

1911: Franz Boas publishes The Mind of Primitive Man arguing for the role of environmental factors in the apparent differences between races.

1912: The First International Conference of Eugenics is held in London, presided over by Charles Darwins son Leonard.

1913: Eugenicist Henry Goddard introduces the IQ test at Ellis Island.

1916: Madison Grant publishes The Passing of the Great Race, splitting Europe into three racial groups: Nordics, Alpines, and Mediterraneans.

1917: The Immigration Act of 1917 includes the Asiatic Barred Zone, which excludes nearly all immigrants from Asia.

1920: Lothrop Stoddard writes The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy.

1921: The Emergency Quota Act is signed into law, heavily restricting immigration from Eastern & Southern Europe.

1921: The Second International Congress of Eugenics is held at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City.

1923: Carl Bringham publishes A Study of American Intelligence, which uses the IQ testing done by Robert Yerkes to support differences in intelligence between races.

1924: The Immigration Act of 1924 becomes law imposing a quota system that favored Northern & Western Europe and excluding immigration from all of Asia.

1924: U.S. Congressman from New York Emanuel Celler gives his first major speech on the House floor against the Immigration Act of 1924.

1927: The Supreme Court upholds compulsory sterilization in Buck v. Bell.

1932: The Third International Eugenics Conference is held at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. ERO Director Charles B. Davenport presides.

1932: The Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences is released with many of the anthropology articles written by Boasians, not Grantians.

1933: The Third Reich enacts the first German compulsory sterilization law.

1935: The Carnegie Institution of Washington orders an external scientific review of the ERO, and finds its records unsatisfactory for the scientific study of human genetics.

1937: Madison Grant dies.

1937: The Pioneer Fund is founded by Wickliffe Draper to support racial research. ERO superintendent Harry Laughlin serves as its first president.

1939: The Eugenics Record Office shuts down.

1943: Chinese Exclusion is repealed and a quota is given of 105 immigrants per year.

1952: The McCarran-Walter bill is passed, revising but not eliminating the quota system of immigration.

1965: The Hart-Celler Act repeals the immigration quota system and establishes a new system based on skills and family relation.

1994: Richard J. Hernstein and Charles Murray release The Bell Curve which argues for racial difference in IQ.

1998: The American Anthropological Association issues a statement on race, concluding that contemporary science makesclearthat human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups.

2003: North Carolina finally repeals its compulsory sterilization law.

2014: New York Times journalist Nicholas Wade argues for race-based science inA Troublesome Inheritance.

Read more from the original source:

Timeline of Scientific Racism - Haunted Files | A/P/A | NYU

Scientists who fail to address the troubled histories of their disciplines can easily repeat the errors of the past.

That was the central argument of geneticist Adam Rutherford, an honorary senior research fellow at UCL, in a conversation on Why Science Needs History, which formed part of this yearsBeing Humanfestival of the humanities.

His own field of biology, he told festival director Sarah Churchwell, professor of American literature and public understanding of the humanities at the University of Londons School of Advanced Studies, had tainted origins. It did not develop in parallel with European expansionism and colonialismbut in service to themIt starts with [Carl] Linnaeus, who [in 1758] classifies four types of humans:Homo Africanus, Asiaticus, AmericanusandEuropeanus.The first three are describedwith value judgements about being haughty, lazy, unintelligent and sexually capricious, whileEuropeanusis described as white, blond, beautiful, governed by laws and elegant and inventiveLinnaeus taxonomic system is what biologists use to classify all organisms and the roots of that are fundamentally in the service of white supremacy.

Another classic case of how science or pseudoscience can be used serve political goals came in the 19th century when Charles Darwins half-cousin, Francis Galton, developed eugenics as a way to mould human populations to be better, to purge the weak and enhance the characteristics deemed positive.

All this remained highly relevant in an age of DNA testing.

DNA analysis had certainly proved crucial, Dr Rutherford pointed out, in demonstrating that Neanderthals are not our evolutionary cousins, they were our ancestors and in identifying the bones found in a car park in Leicester as those of Richard III. Yet it was still just one tool which needed to sit alongside all the traditional forms of knowing the past in a complementary way. When it began to emerge as plausible way of understanding history, people got overexcited and some geneticists started behaving badly in assuming our evidence is better than yours.

This had sometimes led, Dr Rutherford suggested, to a fetishisation of what DNA is and what it can doI spend a lot of time hanging around racist, neo-Nazi and white supremacist forums online and they are obsessed with DNA tests, racial purity and race mixing, because their whole ideology depends on a notion of white purity.

Asked by Professor Churchwell how we can reframe the narrative, Dr Rutherford replied that scientists have to be better at historythere is a tendency among my brethren to regard our evidence base and academic standards for the pursuit of truth to be somehow higher. A lot of scientists think that history is easy.

Yet many scientific researchers, he went on, were very rigorous in assessing evidence from their labs but really, really casual about reading Wikipedia or one book and thinking that they understand the cultural context of an idea related to their fieldA lot of scientists dont go into science to learn about the histories of their field, but maybe thats not a choice. Otherwise we just do the same shit over and over again.

matthew.reisz@timeshighereducation.com

Go here to read the rest:

Adam Rutherford: scientists have to be better at history - Times Higher Education (THE)

Kamden Strunk, associate professor in the College of Educations Department of Educational Foundations, Leadership and Technology, recently published an article in Inside Higher Ed. Entitled Equity and Justice in Teaching Quantitative Methods, the article states that while methods are often considered value-free and unbiased, instructors must recognize how classroom practices can reinforce oppressive ideologies and narratives. He documents the historical entanglements of quantitative methods (and the people who created them) with oppressive and discriminatory intellectual traditions like eugenics. Given those entanglements, Strunk presents some practical suggestions for instructors teaching quantitative methods to engage with and work through the histories of these methods and their contemporary applications.

This is a short essay that arises from my writings on equity and justice in quantitative methods, Strunk said. The focus is on some basic moves that all quantitative methods instructors can make in the way of harm reduction, as well as more advanced moves to center equity and justice work in their teaching.

In the essay, Strunk writes that quantitative methods and the courses in which they are taught often come across as if they are neutral, value-free and unbiased.

However, the history of quantitative methods demonstrates an entanglement with eugenics, sexism, heterosexism, ableism and colonialism, Strunk said. Researchers have begun to grapple with those issues and propose ways forward in quantitative methods. But what about the courses? How might quantitative methods courses and their instructors possibly unintentionally contribute to and reify oppressive ideologies?

The goal is to help instructors move toward equity in their teaching and course designs.

Strunk is the author of two research methods textbooks (one focused on SPSS software, and the other on jamovi software) as well as a free online supplement designed to help instructors incorporate research on racism into their methods coursework.

The article in its entirety is available online.

More:

COE prof Kamden Strunk publishes article on harm reduction in teaching quantitative methods - College of Education - Auburn's College of Education