Last Sunday, our ubiquitous 'Aunty' (ABC's, Radio National) were discussing matters associated with the hitherto scholarship of Eugenics.

Probably one of the most memorable proponents for the examination and development of eugenics, was A.Hitler and his various minions. For the purpose of addressing the 'Jewish question', and to further purify and advance the Arian master race, ostensibly for the benefit of a 'thousand year Reich'?

After the war the very mention of the word would've had you denounced as a nazi collaborator, or labelled a racist.

Today, there've been the odd academic or two, who are prepared to discuss the history, even the ideology or credo of the process of eugenics. Ever mindful, in this politically correct world, to merely 'tip toe' around the subject and then, only in the broadest possible terms...?

OK, so does eugenics ('methods of improving the human race'), in itself equate to racism ? If it does, is it practised by anyone, or any group, even by nation(s) perhaps ?

I believe it is ! Not eugenics precisely, rather a refashioned rendering of it ?

An example, though not exclusive, is Japan. The list of prohibitions to become a Japanese citizen, purchase a company, own land etc. The list goes on.

Sure, as far as I know, the precise practise of pure eugenics, does not extend to medical intervention ? Rather they engage in a discerning, even discriminatory process of keeping the Japanese race as pure and as flawless as possible, and within the law.

By not actively encouraging any serious amalgamation or unification, of mixed ethnicities, either by marriage or any other long term committment.

Therefore, inhibiting any adulteration to either their culture, or mixing other descent ethnicities, with their own idiosyncratic (Japanese), ethnology.

And in so doing, are they being racist ? Or, are they just selfish ? Is it an ethical posture ? Or are they simply engaging in a form of Eugenics, solely in a Japanese way ?

Cheers & thank you.

Morning o sung wo, I heard and saw this , and read about it extensively.
It always will be seen as racist.
I well know of Americas use of this many years before Hitler.
And will be damned for it, want no murder or such,not even sure I agree with it, but is it racism?
Some warn this world needs mass deaths.
If not now soon, just to remain viable.
I would bet a day will come, that sees this awful subject, awful but maybe right, openly debated.
We will see some very anti the thought posts, but if I knew I was to father children who could not live a full life I would chose not to have them.
Last? I see it as for every race , in fact applying only to things unrelated to race, so maybe it is not racism.

It always amazes me that eugenic programs are regarded with horror yet dysgenic programs are applauded, why would anyone even be remotely critical of methods of improving the fitness of a population? Madison Grant, Goddard et al were worried about the formation of a mixed race underclass in the U.S.A, what happened in the end? The U.S.A has an underclass of millions of poor, mixed race people living in ghettos.
I won't labour the point but how is something that prevents the appearance of a class of materially inferior people possibly bad?
For example, a Eugenic measure such as alchohol restrictions on Aboriginal settlements will (obviously) alleviate the effects of Foetal Alchohol Syndrome and improve the fitness of succeeding generations, unless you believe FAS sufferers to be equal or even superior to healthy people how could you oppose the restrictions?
By the same logic restricting sexual contact between Black and White Americans was intended to avert a crisis for both races, now are today's bi-racial ghettos a crisis for both Black and White Americans or not?

JOM your own contribution gos a long way to answering your question.
I lean toward your view but not quite with the enthusiasm I see there.
Most of us can report on the issue of birth control, we know of true war on that subject.
This one too will invoke what you warn of.
May I ask do you see birth control as the method to use this.
Or are we talking about culling the living?
See much more than words this one.
Some, all over 6the world,UNTRAINED, pay to sterilize people.
It is not the idea that I fear but the method that may be used to implement it.

Hi there BELLY & JAY of MELBOURNE...

Fantastic points from you both, thank you. Interestingly, as I'm typing this little piece, I'm listening to the Radio, where the continuing furore continues to rumble along, unabated apropos the broadcaster Alan JONES's remarks about the PM's father dying of shame because of her alleged lying.

Of course I'm well off the Topic. Nevertheless, there are some matters, seemingly we can no longer speak off, discuss and even think, lest it not be considered political correct. In doing so, we run perilously close of having the 'thought police' pursue us ad infinitum !

Both of you are correct. What is wrong with 'openly' discussing eugenics - the benefits (if any) and the pitfalls. Without being accused of racism ?

And, if someone is a racist, what's wrong with that ? Provided that individual obeys the law, obeys it in it's entirety. So what ?

Most of us (me included), would 'tremble in fear' at the very thought of being identified as a racist ! Yet, as a veteran, I thought amongst other things, I and others, fought for 'free speech' ?

I reckon you're 'on the money' too JAY, what is wrong with trying to improve the human race ? Is it a case of selective breeding ? Trying to eliminate or revise many of the bad features of humanity, or is it an attempt to create another form of (abriged) master race of humans.

Doesn't our very own Institute of Sports practice a greatly modified form of eugenics, by using various medical strategies to increase power, endurance and strength ?

Would it be morally wrong, if we managed to 'breed-out' some of the most deleterious human complications, like Diabetes or Down's Syndrome, or similar ? Or are we playing God ? And what would our moral custodians, the medical ethicist say ?

I'll tell you one thing folks. Until we do-away with this damn PC nonsense, we'll always be inhibited in our ability to (freely) discuss ANY issue that approaches political correctness. And that cannot be good for progress, can it ?

Actually, recent genetic studies have shown that, just like everyone else pretty much, Japanese are a product of a lot of mixing: "a Central Asian origin of Jomonese ancestors [around 12,00 yrs ago], and a Southeast Asian origin of the ancestors of the Yayoi [around 2,300 yrs ago]", overlaying the original Ainu in the north of Japan, and, over the last ten thousand years, waves of Austronesians along the southern coasts and islands.

I guess many of us would like to think we are special, unique, unmixed with any 'impurities'. But it just ain't so. We've been moving around, and mixing, for the best part of sixty thousand years.

Maybe it's about time we got used to it. In any case, as Charles Darwin wrote (I think somewhere in 'Descent of Man') mixing, or hybridisation as he called it, produces health, beautiful offpring, which seems to be borne out by observation: if you see someone who is especially beautiful or handsome, chances are that they are of recently-mixed biological origins.

Welcome to the world :)