4 ms·

"When I learned about Chinese eugenics this summer, I was astonished that its population policies had received so little attention. China makes no secret o

by spitx 13y ago

"When I learned about Chinese eugenics this summer, I was astonished that its population policies had received so little attention. China makes no secret of its eugenic ambitions, in either its cultural history or its government policies." So little attention indeed. Why is this so little known or debated in the West? We make a huge deal of the human rights abuses in the rest of the world every chance we get. Calling the amount of attention that this issue gets in Western public discourse, scant, is indeed overstating it. There is no discussion at all. "The most likely response, given Euro-American ideological biases, would be a bioethical panic that leads to criticism of Chinese population policy with the same self-righteous hypocrisy that we have shown in criticizing various Chinese socio-cultural policies." Why do the Chinese get a pass in the respect that the Germans didn't? American film makers churn out documentaries and feature films about the Third Reich by the dozen every year. Yet I haven't seen even a single Frontline doc cover this. Chinese execute thousands of their "lower classes" every year. This is nothing but the "cleansing" of the intellectually deficient and the ungainful. At the very least Western intellectuals and universities should condemn this and refuse to collaborate or issue professorships and research positions to Chinese academics in a wholesale fashion (since, as the author put it, "there is a unusually close cooperation in China between government, academia, medicine, education, media, parents, and consumerism in promoting a utopian Han ethno-state.") However we see nothing of that sort. Western academics are quick to boycott their Israeli counterparts for the slightest infractions of voicing support for their Zionist state. Where is the uproar here? Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#Global_distribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#Global_distr... http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2012/sep/12/boycott-israeli-academics-justified http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2012/sep/12/boycott-i... Edit: Clean-up

adamauckland 13y ago
I'm guessing because it's not our fight. I don't know your location, but guessing US? American film makers may churn out documentaries about the Third Reich, but many Germans don't really dwell on what happened (and why would they?) In the same way that in Europe, we get a lot more objective news about the wars the US is waging in other countries around the world which probably don't get on Fox News or CNN. I don't know if it's a good thing, but there seems to be an apathy towards human rights in Asia from the West. It's like child-labour-sweatshops are almost a joke.
Swizec 13y ago
It's simple really, Germany was at our doorstep, for many of us it was inside our house. My great grandmother was in a work camp, my friend's father fought in WW2 and was later imprisoned in Germany for a time. Germany was real. China ... well China is over there, they make cheap things for us and in return we don't poke at their internal policies. Imagine a Chinese embargo on the Western world, we'd die.
- dmm 13y ago
  They would die too. They need us as much as we need them. Employment is a huge issue in China. The unemployment that would result from the loss of US demand would cause a breakdown of social order.
- wisty 13y ago
  Also, China was an ally. Some of the worst stuff happened under the old Republic - they pretty much had a policy of genocide against Tibetans in Sichuan. I don't remember if it was actually the KMT (or some of the warlords who allied them), but they were quite brutal. Then the KMT fled to Taiwan, and the CCP became the "bad" guys. While the CCP has a mixed history, they do relax the One Child Policy for ethnic minorities (I think Tibetans are allowed 2 children), so it's hard to suggest they are actually genocidal. Nationalistic, yes, but that nationalism recognises the rights of minorities (as long as they don't try to rebel). They did a lot of dodgy stuff in the Cultural Revolution, but it's not like they are given a free pass on that. I'm not sure about the Great Leap Forward, but that was more an outrageously stupid policy decision than a deliberate crime. It only lasted 3 years. While Mao should have ended it sooner, it's not like he kept it going for 10 years, like the Cultural Revolution. Perhaps it really took 3 years to weed through the false reports of progress, and to realise it wasn't just growing pains, sabotage, or natural disasters. Besides, it wasn't really targeted at any ethnic group - all rural Chinese were hit pretty hard.
- coldtea 13y ago
  No, it's actually simpler. First, Germany invaded other countries. They had to fight it back, else there would be a huge Nazi power state occupying all of Europe which would be a big thread (and contender for the same resources). Second, the German "eugenics" program was not birth control or DNA sequencing but killing people they deemed invalid, inferior etc. By the millions. Not even comparable. Third, China is not a deluded small-ish country in Europe, thinking it can take over the world by itself. It's a huge behemoth superpower.
beachstartup 13y ago
Why do the Chinese get a pass in the respect that the Germans didn't? it might have something to do with starting WW2. just maybe.
ams6110 13y ago
As to why there is no outcry from the intellectuals it's probably because they are sympathetic. Eugenics and the intellectual left have a long history together.
- spitx 13y ago
  I've heard of this cozy relationship before, sporadically at best. Could you elaborate on this? Links to definitive works on this subject by respected scholars and experts would be great.
  - dredmorbius 13y ago
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/17/eugenics-skeleton-rattles-loudest-closet-left http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/17/eugenics... Would seem to support the statement. It's somewhat news to me, and eugenics is certainly associated with the right.
- threeseed 13y ago
  Do all intellectuals act as a single collective ? No ? Then do you mind not peddling such pathetic and baseless nonsense. Actions of few != Actions of all.
scott_s 13y ago
Can you provide sources which discuss your claims on Chinese eugenics?
- spitx 13y ago
  "Although the state has only recently taken an official role in the control of human reproduction, its current policies stem from the age-old concept of the individual's responsibility to the collective. It is this emphasis on the collective good that has driven modern eugenics discourse since the late nineteenth century, when Chinese intellectuals the well-to-do gentry, and government officials explored how to improve the Chinese race after the arrival of the stronger Western imperialist nations. Indeed, nationalism in its many forms remains an important force in eugenics today. Dikötter shows that it is the introduction of modern science in China, particularly after World War I, that opened the real possibility of implementing the eugenic vision. It is in the republican era (1911-1948) that elites called for increased intervention of medical professionals and the state into the sexual lives of citizens." "Government policy on inferior births also increased in severity from the 1950s on, culminating in the 1995 eugenics law, giving rise to many technical and ethical problems. A eugenics policy assumes that all handicaps are irreversible and that education would have no effect. Furthermore, poor definitions of disorders, handicaps, illnesses, and fitness as well as local control of implementation not only erode individual rights but also increase corruption and bureaucratic incompetence. This book shows us the greater problem in post-Mao China- eugenics has been legitimized by medical knowledge that is ever-changing, not to mention packaged and disseminated by those who have a vested interest in the control of human reproduction." Source: http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hapr/summer00_tech/bookreview.html http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hapr/summer00_tech/bookreview.ht... "A national survey on ethical and genetic issues of 402 geneticists from 30 provinces and autonomous regions in China showed that 90% called for ethical guidelines for genetics practice and research; 89% supported current Chinese laws on abortion for genetic abnormalities and non-medical indications; more than half opposed sex selection by any means; 55% thought that gene donors should have a right to share in the profits from commercial tests or treatments developed with the use of their genes; and 50% thought that public education on genetics should be the top priority in the Chinese government health budget." Source: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)60930-0/fulltext http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...
tlogan 13y ago
Actually, before WW2 started we really did not care about Nazis a lot and what they were doing. Hey, we also rejected to accept thousands of Jews from MS St. Louis fleeing persecution in Germany.
- jk4930 13y ago
  Actually many from the US eugenics movement were interested in what Germany did, often finding positive words. And Germany got much of its inspiration from the US. Eugenics fell into disfavor only after WW2, it got a renaming into human genetics and the same persons continued to work on the subject.
threeseed 13y ago
I don't understand what you mean. America executes thousands of their "lower classes" each year as well as part of the criminal justice system. Doesn't mean that it is systemic "cleansing". You need to have better sources if you believe that is what China is doing. And the reason the entire world dislikes Israel as a country (as of the latest world popularity ranking) is due to its one-sided, selfish foreign policy and this ridiculous "anti Israel = anti Jewish" position many Israelis take. When everyone is sick of it you shouldn't be surprised if many academics are too.
- spitx 13y ago
  Perusing the same global distribution list of capital punishment shows 43 American executions. Do not spout falsities here. You will be called out. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#Global_distribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#Global_distr... Meanwhile your "world popularity ranking" index ( whatever and however that is conceived to measure ) and Israel's bottom ranking in it, needs a citation.
  - threeseed 13y ago
    I was looking at the number of people on death row which is in the thousands. So willing to retract that. And this study was widely reported in the BBC and elsewhere: http://www.globescan.com/images/images/pressreleases/bbc2012_country_ratings/BBC2492_M1M2_agg.gif http://www.globescan.com/images/images/pressreleases/bbc2012... As you can see Isarel is down there with North Korea, Pakistan and Iran and with a downward trend in popularity no less.
    - kalms 13y ago
      Okay. More Tel Aviv for me then!
  - wisty 13y ago
    However, the US does prevent many people from reproducing, by locking them up. Its incarceration rate is the highest in the world (0.7%, compared to under 0.2% in China).
coldtea 13y ago
>Why do the Chinese get a pass in the respect that the Germans didn't? American film makers churn out documentaries and feature films about the Third Reich by the dozen every year. Yet I haven't seen even a single Frontline doc cover this. Because the Germans started a world war and killed millions of people? Because the german "eugenics" program included killing millions of Jews, Gypsies, invalids etc? (All of those things that the Chinese do not do). >Chinese execute thousands of their "lower classes" every year. This is nothing but the "cleansing" of the intellectually deficient and the ungainful. No, it's merely keeping the strict rule of the party and having capital punishment for several offences. Nothing to do with eugenics, except if you call the killing of a serial killer or state money embezzler "eugenics". (Not to mention that a number "thousands per year" would be a drop in the bucket compared to the Chinese population to be part of any eugenics program in the first place). And I don't think the US should speak of other countries on those matters (people in glasshouses, etc). First, It's in the top-5 capital punishers in the world (along with China at #1, North Korea, etc), in an era where civilised countries have long since abandoned the practice. And besides capital punishment, the US is the world leader in incarcerations, with an non-proportionate majority being black and poor (their "lower classes"). Second, it dived head-first in it's own "eugenics" program, with DNA sequencing etc. American government and companies invested trillions on genome research. Suddenly China is not allowed to?
- spitx 13y ago
  Have a cookie. You're delirious. United States being in the top five capital punish-er list conveniently masks the fact that the top culprit, China, is in a league all by itself. Its several orders more depraved. Its several orders higher than the rest in the list, combined.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >Have a cookie. You're delirious. And you are very patriotic. Bravo. What exactly was the "delirious" part? That I treated both the same, whereas China is #1 with a difference in capital punishments and the US is "merely" #4 or #5? Sorry, but where I come from, both are abhorable, as we prefer zero (0) capital punishments anyway. I don't find "but we kill far less" an excuse in 2013. Especially since you also kill 15 and 16 year olds (in Texas and elsewhere) or even mentally ill people. >United States being in the top five capital punish-er list conveniently masks the fact that the top culprit, China, is in a league all by itself. Its several orders more depraved. Its several orders higher than the rest in the list, combined. It's also several orders bigger. Like 4 times the population of the US. But I agree, China executes far more people even taking that into account. That said, it kills their own subjects. The US does most of it's killing outside its borders. How many wars have it been involved to, in places it has no damn place to be in? How many innocent millions have it killed directly or helped be killed (by supporting tons of dictatorships all around the globe, from Pinochet to Saddam in the 80s)? Oh, and the recent trend of execution by drones? That's even worst than Chinese execution. No trial, no jury, bombing, killing innocent people along (like a full wedding, with 49 dead, including 9 children), and in sovereign countries, none the less. Seems like the worst offenders (warmonger, dictatorship supporter and enabler, black slavery, atomic bombs) etc, are always the most hypocritical and hollier-than-thou ones.

by spitx 13y ago

adamauckland 13y ago

I'm guessing because it's not our fight. I don't know your location, but guessing US? American film makers may churn out documentaries about the Third Reich, but many Germans don't really dwell on what happened (and why would they?) In the same way that in Europe, we get a lot more objective news about the wars the US is waging in other countries around the world which probably don't get on Fox News or CNN. I don't know if it's a good thing, but there seems to be an apathy towards human rights in Asia from the West. It's like child-labour-sweatshops are almost a joke.

Swizec 13y ago

It's simple really, Germany was at our doorstep, for many of us it was inside our house. My great grandmother was in a work camp, my friend's father fought in WW2 and was later imprisoned in Germany for a time. Germany was real. China ... well China is over there, they make cheap things for us and in return we don't poke at their internal policies. Imagine a Chinese embargo on the Western world, we'd die.

dmm 13y ago
They would die too. They need us as much as we need them. Employment is a huge issue in China. The unemployment that would result from the loss of US demand would cause a breakdown of social order.
wisty 13y ago
Also, China was an ally. Some of the worst stuff happened under the old Republic - they pretty much had a policy of genocide against Tibetans in Sichuan. I don't remember if it was actually the KMT (or some of the warlords who allied them), but they were quite brutal. Then the KMT fled to Taiwan, and the CCP became the "bad" guys. While the CCP has a mixed history, they do relax the One Child Policy for ethnic minorities (I think Tibetans are allowed 2 children), so it's hard to suggest they are actually genocidal. Nationalistic, yes, but that nationalism recognises the rights of minorities (as long as they don't try to rebel). They did a lot of dodgy stuff in the Cultural Revolution, but it's not like they are given a free pass on that. I'm not sure about the Great Leap Forward, but that was more an outrageously stupid policy decision than a deliberate crime. It only lasted 3 years. While Mao should have ended it sooner, it's not like he kept it going for 10 years, like the Cultural Revolution. Perhaps it really took 3 years to weed through the false reports of progress, and to realise it wasn't just growing pains, sabotage, or natural disasters. Besides, it wasn't really targeted at any ethnic group - all rural Chinese were hit pretty hard.
coldtea 13y ago
No, it's actually simpler. First, Germany invaded other countries. They had to fight it back, else there would be a huge Nazi power state occupying all of Europe which would be a big thread (and contender for the same resources). Second, the German "eugenics" program was not birth control or DNA sequencing but killing people they deemed invalid, inferior etc. By the millions. Not even comparable. Third, China is not a deluded small-ish country in Europe, thinking it can take over the world by itself. It's a huge behemoth superpower.

beachstartup 13y ago

Why do the Chinese get a pass in the respect that the Germans didn't? it might have something to do with starting WW2. just maybe.

ams6110 13y ago

As to why there is no outcry from the intellectuals it's probably because they are sympathetic. Eugenics and the intellectual left have a long history together.

spitx 13y ago
I've heard of this cozy relationship before, sporadically at best. Could you elaborate on this? Links to definitive works on this subject by respected scholars and experts would be great.
- dredmorbius 13y ago
  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/17/eugenics-skeleton-rattles-loudest-closet-left http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/17/eugenics... Would seem to support the statement. It's somewhat news to me, and eugenics is certainly associated with the right.
threeseed 13y ago
Do all intellectuals act as a single collective ? No ? Then do you mind not peddling such pathetic and baseless nonsense. Actions of few != Actions of all.

scott_s 13y ago

Can you provide sources which discuss your claims on Chinese eugenics?

spitx 13y ago
"Although the state has only recently taken an official role in the control of human reproduction, its current policies stem from the age-old concept of the individual's responsibility to the collective. It is this emphasis on the collective good that has driven modern eugenics discourse since the late nineteenth century, when Chinese intellectuals the well-to-do gentry, and government officials explored how to improve the Chinese race after the arrival of the stronger Western imperialist nations. Indeed, nationalism in its many forms remains an important force in eugenics today. Dikötter shows that it is the introduction of modern science in China, particularly after World War I, that opened the real possibility of implementing the eugenic vision. It is in the republican era (1911-1948) that elites called for increased intervention of medical professionals and the state into the sexual lives of citizens." "Government policy on inferior births also increased in severity from the 1950s on, culminating in the 1995 eugenics law, giving rise to many technical and ethical problems. A eugenics policy assumes that all handicaps are irreversible and that education would have no effect. Furthermore, poor definitions of disorders, handicaps, illnesses, and fitness as well as local control of implementation not only erode individual rights but also increase corruption and bureaucratic incompetence. This book shows us the greater problem in post-Mao China- eugenics has been legitimized by medical knowledge that is ever-changing, not to mention packaged and disseminated by those who have a vested interest in the control of human reproduction." Source: http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hapr/summer00_tech/bookreview.html http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hapr/summer00_tech/bookreview.ht... "A national survey on ethical and genetic issues of 402 geneticists from 30 provinces and autonomous regions in China showed that 90% called for ethical guidelines for genetics practice and research; 89% supported current Chinese laws on abortion for genetic abnormalities and non-medical indications; more than half opposed sex selection by any means; 55% thought that gene donors should have a right to share in the profits from commercial tests or treatments developed with the use of their genes; and 50% thought that public education on genetics should be the top priority in the Chinese government health budget." Source: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)60930-0/fulltext http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...

tlogan 13y ago

Actually, before WW2 started we really did not care about Nazis a lot and what they were doing. Hey, we also rejected to accept thousands of Jews from MS St. Louis fleeing persecution in Germany.

jk4930 13y ago
Actually many from the US eugenics movement were interested in what Germany did, often finding positive words. And Germany got much of its inspiration from the US. Eugenics fell into disfavor only after WW2, it got a renaming into human genetics and the same persons continued to work on the subject.

threeseed 13y ago

I don't understand what you mean. America executes thousands of their "lower classes" each year as well as part of the criminal justice system. Doesn't mean that it is systemic "cleansing". You need to have better sources if you believe that is what China is doing. And the reason the entire world dislikes Israel as a country (as of the latest world popularity ranking) is due to its one-sided, selfish foreign policy and this ridiculous "anti Israel = anti Jewish" position many Israelis take. When everyone is sick of it you shouldn't be surprised if many academics are too.

spitx 13y ago
Perusing the same global distribution list of capital punishment shows 43 American executions. Do not spout falsities here. You will be called out. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#Global_distribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#Global_distr... Meanwhile your "world popularity ranking" index ( whatever and however that is conceived to measure ) and Israel's bottom ranking in it, needs a citation.
- threeseed 13y ago
  I was looking at the number of people on death row which is in the thousands. So willing to retract that. And this study was widely reported in the BBC and elsewhere: http://www.globescan.com/images/images/pressreleases/bbc2012_country_ratings/BBC2492_M1M2_agg.gif http://www.globescan.com/images/images/pressreleases/bbc2012... As you can see Isarel is down there with North Korea, Pakistan and Iran and with a downward trend in popularity no less.
  - kalms 13y ago
    Okay. More Tel Aviv for me then!
- wisty 13y ago
  However, the US does prevent many people from reproducing, by locking them up. Its incarceration rate is the highest in the world (0.7%, compared to under 0.2% in China).

coldtea 13y ago

>Why do the Chinese get a pass in the respect that the Germans didn't? American film makers churn out documentaries and feature films about the Third Reich by the dozen every year. Yet I haven't seen even a single Frontline doc cover this. Because the Germans started a world war and killed millions of people? Because the german "eugenics" program included killing millions of Jews, Gypsies, invalids etc? (All of those things that the Chinese do not do). >Chinese execute thousands of their "lower classes" every year. This is nothing but the "cleansing" of the intellectually deficient and the ungainful. No, it's merely keeping the strict rule of the party and having capital punishment for several offences. Nothing to do with eugenics, except if you call the killing of a serial killer or state money embezzler "eugenics". (Not to mention that a number "thousands per year" would be a drop in the bucket compared to the Chinese population to be part of any eugenics program in the first place). And I don't think the US should speak of other countries on those matters (people in glasshouses, etc). First, It's in the top-5 capital punishers in the world (along with China at #1, North Korea, etc), in an era where civilised countries have long since abandoned the practice. And besides capital punishment, the US is the world leader in incarcerations, with an non-proportionate majority being black and poor (their "lower classes"). Second, it dived head-first in it's own "eugenics" program, with DNA sequencing etc. American government and companies invested trillions on genome research. Suddenly China is not allowed to?

spitx 13y ago
Have a cookie. You're delirious. United States being in the top five capital punish-er list conveniently masks the fact that the top culprit, China, is in a league all by itself. Its several orders more depraved. Its several orders higher than the rest in the list, combined.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >Have a cookie. You're delirious. And you are very patriotic. Bravo. What exactly was the "delirious" part? That I treated both the same, whereas China is #1 with a difference in capital punishments and the US is "merely" #4 or #5? Sorry, but where I come from, both are abhorable, as we prefer zero (0) capital punishments anyway. I don't find "but we kill far less" an excuse in 2013. Especially since you also kill 15 and 16 year olds (in Texas and elsewhere) or even mentally ill people. >United States being in the top five capital punish-er list conveniently masks the fact that the top culprit, China, is in a league all by itself. Its several orders more depraved. Its several orders higher than the rest in the list, combined. It's also several orders bigger. Like 4 times the population of the US. But I agree, China executes far more people even taking that into account. That said, it kills their own subjects. The US does most of it's killing outside its borders. How many wars have it been involved to, in places it has no damn place to be in? How many innocent millions have it killed directly or helped be killed (by supporting tons of dictatorships all around the globe, from Pinochet to Saddam in the 80s)? Oh, and the recent trend of execution by drones? That's even worst than Chinese execution. No trial, no jury, bombing, killing innocent people along (like a full wedding, with 49 dead, including 9 children), and in sovereign countries, none the less. Seems like the worst offenders (warmonger, dictatorship supporter and enabler, black slavery, atomic bombs) etc, are always the most hypocritical and hollier-than-thou ones.