Category Archives: Uncategorized

Eugenicist Posters

Posted on by

apsimg1480_slide-9f7e9c97590f19ee0f7ecee058898954e098e7fa-s6-c30eugenics

 

 

I found this image very interesting as it presents a chart of all the possible “blood” combinations imaginable.

According to the eugenicists, each person belonged to a very specific racial category, one that completely determined every aspect of their life, from intelligence to physical appearance. As we can tell from the bottom picture, the eugenicists perceived themselves as humanists, advocating the best policies for the development of human civilization, even while advising states to adopt the most horrific and invasive social policies, ranging from sterilization to laws forbidding interracial marriage.  Most tragic of all, these eugenicists never appear to doubt the goodness of their cause. As we saw in the article on eugenics and class, while they saw how some might confuse their agenda with that of the Nazis, they remained incapable of questioning their own motives and logic. As in the poster featuring the tree, the writing of eugenicists abounds with positive imagery of strength, health, and social harmony, reflecting a deep-seated fear of anything filthy or foreign.

I decided to include a poster made by American advocates of eugenics in order to better illustrate the nefarious aims of eugenicist groups. We now take it for granted that Americans can marry whomever they choose, regardless of their background. This poster’s denigration of “blind sentiment” stands in complete contradiction to this extremely important component of American society, and challenges the typically American idea that anyone can move beyond their roots, if they so choose. Looking at this poster, we see that the reactionary mentalities nurturing fascism did not remain confined to Europe, but contaminated the entire world. Perhaps the use of the word ‘contaminated’ obscures the true character of eugenics and its fascistic outlook. Could they stem from some inherent human nature we must seek to overcome?

Eugenics and Citizenship

Posted on by

In Leora Auslander’s ‘National Taste’? she explains how the German and French populations addressed questions about the conceptions of citizenship by examining the tastes and preferences of various citizens within specific regions and also the nation-state as a whole. Although each country had its own unique concept of citizenship; the French interpreted citizenship using a just soli policy (citizenship determined by region of birth), whereas in Germany citizenship was determined by ancestral lineage and blood lines, both cultures developed their own “language of goods.” This “language of goods” enabled citizens to look beyond the mere race or appearance of a person and instead focus on their material possessions to gain a cohesiveness between distinct social groups and form a national identity. The Jewish populations were oftentimes ostracized and blamed for many of the misfortunes that proceeded WWI without just cause. In reality they were not culturally different from the non-jewish citizens, they were incorporated into either German or French societies, forming a part of the nation-state and adopting the accepted customs.  

In chapter four of Dan Stone’s Breeding Superman he examines the relationship between race and social class that existed in British eugenic theory throughout the interwar period. The racial component of eugenics has always existed, however Britain has been traditionally viewed as a government that focused primarily on the social components of eugenics while disregarding that of race. Stone explains how this is a misconception because the reality is that the racial and social components are inseparable. Many British officials believed in a racial hierarchy that saw white Europeans at the top and black Africans at the bottom. While policy makers sought to boost their respective populations, they wished to do so in a manner that limited the reproduction of the unproductive and parasitic social classes, and the ‘inferior races’ as well. The Nazi government of the Third Reich is singled out for their racist policies, and although they implemented these policies to an extreme degree, they were by no means the only country to do so. It was a common practice throughout most of Europe.

 

 

Posted on by

Leora Auslander wrote, in “National Taste? Citizenship Law, State Form, and Everyday Aesthetics in Modern France and Germany, 1920 – 1940,” how the concept of European national citizenship developed in the years between the world wars. She theorizes that the concept of citizenship is inextricably linked to the cultural understanding an individual’s everyday life, and that this link is traceable through the evidence of not political but anthropologic sources. Specifically she examines how the French and German citizens developed from regional to national citizens focusing on cultural norms and uniformity. She further divides the research into two group, the Jews and Gentiles, who lived on either side of the Rhine River.

She finds that citizenship is a concept already well developed by the twentieth century. Looking back to the French Revolution and German Unification, the idea of the larger national identity is a growing force of the centralized state. Her conclusion, drawn on detailed evidence and sound logic, discovers that the cultural similarities between the French population’s Jewish are strikingly consistent. That, juxtaposed to the German population of a similarly diverse Jewish and non Jewish body, are comparably also unified, but distinctly separate from that of the French nation.

Overall, the article seeks out a meaningful comparison through abstract means of developing an individual citizen. It deeply resonates with “The Lost Children” accounts of nationalism. The product of the French national education discussed in Zahar’s work is culminated in the uniformity of French society viewed in Auslander’s article. Therefore, in a sense singing “La Marseillaise” as a child in the French educational system had an affect proven by the homogeny of the French interwar population in comparison to the Germans or other states.

Eugenics and National Identity

Posted on by

In Breeding Superman, Dan Stone aims to describe and resolve the confusion that still surrounds eugenics in inter-war Britain.  Many people are under the impression that the study of eugenics in Britain was based primarily on class, and was less focused on race.  However, Stone argues vehemently against this belief, stating that race and class eugenics were virtually interchangeable in Britain.

Stone notes several influential British eugenicists, including Robert Reid Rentoul, Charles Armstrong, and C.P. Blacker, all of whom advocated on behalf of racist eugenics.  The racist opinions of these men greatly impacted Britain’s overwhelming fear of miscegenation.  When describing the extremist eugenicists, Stone states, “Although these were extremists, there were too many of them, and their views were not so far removed from those of the mainstream ideas on race” (99).  Eugenicists also upheld the belief that Britain was not concerned with race, but only class eugenics.  This ideal was promoted to ameliorate Britain’s image in terms of the eugenics.  Contrary to popular belief, the history of inter-war Britain was far more racist than many people care to realize, and this is due in large part to various racist eugenicists.

In “National Taste? Citizenship Law, State Form, and Everyday Aesthetics in Modern France and Germany, 1920-1940,” Leora Auslander addresses the nation-state from various viewpoints, and how citizens and groups are impacted by state policies—specifically pertaining to Jews in France and Germany.

While France aimed to create a more central government, and encouraged all its citizens to emulate French culture, Germany allowed its citizens to have much more independence, as it had recently merged twenty-two monarchies and three republics.  In response to these cultural guidelines, French and German Jews responded appropriately; French Jews chose to adhere “to a common, distinctively French culture,” while German Jews focused less on remaining civilized (123).  This is significant, because both the French Jews and the German Jews felt obligated to accurately represent their country, as a means of national identity.

Both Stone and Auslander describe the issue of national identity, through eugenics and everyday cultural expectations.  However, both arguments are similar because they depict the hysteria that can surround one nation’s self-image.

Eugenics Post

Posted on by

The theory of eugenics can be described as a battle of survival of the fittest between human beings. It’s origins are Darwinist in nature, and they came to fruition in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. It took the first world war to make many of the leading intellectuals in both Western Europe and USA believe in such a ideal. With the loss of population after world war one it was theorized that the only way to develop into a strong powerful country would be by artificially modifying a certain population to make sure that it was as strong and healthy as possible. Also at this time many nationalistic parties such as the Nazis sought to use eugenics so they could build a super human race that would eliminate “undesirables” from the population.

As a result of eugenics connection to both racism and nationalism many peoples including jews felt the desire to “assimilate” into the culture of which they were living in. In the selected readings of Leora Auslanders we read of the attempted assimilation of both french and german jews. There desire for acceptance by their “native” peers caused the jews to throw away there collective heritage in a desire to become the “perfect” german or frenchman. This desire for assimilation can be directly related to eugenics. Many jews wanted to gain employment in both the government and private sector, and to do this they had to look like they were part of the larger machine, not as a interloper in society. This is why many of them became more german then a typical german, and with that he lost some of his personality. Eugenics and all the theories connected to it take away a mans freedom and individually. It then replace it will a idea for only furthering the “common” goal at all costs. This practice had a rather adverse effect on the history of the world.

 

 

National Identity: the Role of Eugenics and Culture

Posted on by

Leora Auslander’s “’National Taste?’ Citizenship Law, State Form, and Everyday Aesthetics in Modern France and Germany, 1920-1940” described the way in which the French and German nations had dealt with the issue of identity and citizenship, specifically in terms of the Jewish populations. This text illustrated the similarities between Parisian and Berliner Jews and the larger French and German populations. These groups were marginalized in various and different ways in each country, but, through analyzing personal belongs and furnishings, Auslander discovered a cultural cohesion throughout the groups. Because the Jews and the non-Jewish French and German populations decorated their houses in much the same way (the French decorated similarly, but their style was different from that of the German populations), indicating that these populations (German or French versus Jewish) were not fundamentally different as many eugenicists had argued during this same era.

Throughout the Interwar Period especially, eugenics evolved and advanced as an area of study that gained more and more influence in politics. In Chapter Four of Breeding Superman, the author, Dan Stone argues that eugenics held a key place in British politics throughout the beginning of the 20th Century, as the Empire fought to preserve its strength. This same argument can be applied to France and Germany during this period. Both countries became more concerned with the strength of their populations, especially in light of the massive loses caused by World War I. Each of these three countries defined citizenship differently, though each definition inherently placed some groups above others. The Jews in each case were understood to be inferior to the “native” population. In France, however, this argument became more complex as there was a hierarchy between French Jews and foreign Jews. (This distinction would prove to be very important as both the Occupied and Non-occupied Zones began to deport Jews in 1942.)

Eugenics was not the sole factor in this hierarchy. Auslander explains in “’National Taste?’” that culture was another very important aspect in determining national identity. Citizenship in France became directly linked to culture as the law changed to jus soli (citizenship determined by territory of birth). That is not to say, however, that eugenics did not influence the French during this period. Eugenics shaped politics or political thought throughout most of Europe. While many aspects of eugenics were racist, as Stone acknowledges, this was not forcibly the case; today, people across the world view eugenics in a very negative light due to the policies and actions of Nazi Germany during the war.

A Countries’ True Agenda

Posted on by

The introduction and first chapter of The Lost Children by Tara Zahra and the first chapter of Cultivating the Masses by David Hoffman both explore the concept of the welfare state. Although these works focus on different groups, Zarah focusing on children and Hoffman focusing on the population as a whole, both authors have come to the same conclusion; a country’s welfare programs are implemented to benefit the country as whole, not necessarily for an individual’s gain.

From the start of reading The Lost Children Zahra writes that programs were implemented to increase the productivity of the country. Mrs. Roch, and American social worker, was assigned to Ruth-Karin Dadowic’s case. Roch described Ruth-Karin as “well built for her age with a strong and firm handshake.” Ruth-Karin was chosen to participate in the Displaced Persons Act, and from this description it is implied she is chosen because of her health and capabilities. She is more likely to be a contributing member of society, and thus increase the productivity of the country. Another example of the true goals of social welfare programs is exemplified through the Spanish Civil War refugees. The social welfare programs only saved children to secure their political, social, and religious loyalties and to transform them into the republican or nationalist militants of the future (Zahar, 16). This was also true of the campaign to rehabilitate Europe’s lost children; it was merely for the future of Europe’s well being (Zahar, 23). In the St. Goin colony, J. M. Alvarez would use his position as director to instill Republican and nationalist values in the wards he was in charge of educating and looking after (Zahar, 26). All of this was to benefit the country, not the individual.

Hoffman’s writing in Cultivating the Masses is directly related to these examples from Zahar’s text. Hoffman wrote that a country was concerned with social welfare to increase productivity of the country. By implementing social welfare programs, it increased the standard of living of the citizens, increasing the productivity of the country (Hoffman, 18-20).

From Hoffman and Zarah, the reader learns that the citizen is merely a pawn for the country. Although it may appear that social welfare is implemented because the country cares about the individual, it is simply not true. A country is merely concerned with it’s well being as a whole, and the benefits trickle down to the individual.

Social and Psychological issues surrounding the “Lost Children”

Posted on by

Tara Zahra’s book, The Lost Children: Reconstructing Europe’s Families after World War II, describes the psychological impacts and social problems of war on displaced children. The psychological problems that occurred with children being separated from their families arose after the First World War, but became more of an issue after World War II. There was complete chaos in Europe with the children being in the center of social and political upheaval.

After World War I, families were separated and there were a lack of resources. Campaigns were created to protect children. These campaigns focused on getting enough food and water, and having shelter for the children to rest in. Many children, during the war, were sent to live with a foster family in a neighboring country where they were well nourished and supported by their foster parents. After the war there was a movement to reunite families, but this created an issue. Children were sent to their home state to be reunited with their families, but their families lacked adequate resources, including food, housing, and income. Another issue that arose was that families had been separated for such a long period of time that they didn’t reconnect, so children wanted to be sent home to their host families. “Children were central objects of population politics, nation building projects, and new forms of humanitarian intervention in the twentieth century, as they represented the biological and political future of national communities.” (Zahra 20).

After World War II, Germany divided into four zones by the Allies. Many organizations, including social workers, German foster parents, and Jewish agencies, fought for the “lost children” to determine their fates.  This became the social problem: “The lost identity of individual children is the Social Problem of the day on the continent of Europe.” (Zahra 3). The psychological problems came about because of Europe being in ruins after World War II.  “They linked the physical ruin of European cities to the psychological disorientation of their residents.” (Zahra 3).

The psychological problem with the children being uprooted all of the time was that they would never forget what happened to them during the war. During war, children were starving, put in concentration camps, and forced into labor. The government believed that it was better when the children were reunited with their families because it was in their best interest and their psychological problems would diminish if they were safe and sound.

Much of what is stated in Zahra’s book can be compared to Hoffman’s articles on social welfare and the modern state. In Hoffman’s modern state article, he argues that using social science is key to eradicate problems that are occurring in a nation. The social science will tell the public statistics about a certain issue, such as how many children were displaced during and after the war. These statistics helped the government to see how many children were reunited with their families after being displaced. Hoffman’s social welfare article is extremely relevant to Zahra’s introduction and first chapter of her book. His thesis in this article is that social welfare is for the betterment of the country and not the people. In Zahra’s article she refers that the governments force children to return to their families, when in actuality their host family was a better psychological environment for them. The government is more concerned about the state because it wants maximum production, so sending a child back to his or her home country will help the output of that country.

The Shift From Material to Psychological Humanitarian Efforts in Post-war Europe.

Posted on by

Tara Zahra’s book, The Lost Children: Reconstructing Europe’s Families after World War II is a heartbreaking account of displaced and impoverished children lacking national identities. In the introduction and first chapter, parallels are drawn between both the physical reconstruction of post-war Europe and the reconstruction of childhood identity. These children were at the center of political conflicts and were the social problem that dominated Europe from the onset of World War I. The state of Europe’s children represented the civilization itself in chaos. Organizations after World War 1 sought to supply these children with immediate material needs. After the Spanish Civil War and World War II, however, humanitarian efforts were ideologically transformed. While some intense nationalistic and political goals still lay underneath the surface, the primary function of these social organizations were now to serve the psychological needs of a child with an incomplete family, empty stomach, and no national identity.

The responses to World War 1 and the Armenian Genocide set the stage for future humanitarian endeavors. These interwar campaigns focused on the obvious immediate needs to a child. Food, shelter, water, and so on. However, they also largely focused on reuniting parents with their children that were sent away for their safety. With this came a larger issue; the denationalization of children. Children that were sent away during the Armenian Genocide were largely sent to to Turkey and learned Muslim practices. Efforts to reclaim these children and to “renationalize” them were crucial to these international organizations. After World War 1, children were exiled and then reclaimed again for “their own good”. However, “all the improvements in a child’s life may dwindle down to nothing when faced with the fact that it has to leave the family to get to them”. (18) This was the major issue governments were missing. People believed that the memories and possible psychological traumas would be minimal as long as the were physically safe and healthy, but we know today that that is not true.

This idea changed dramatically after the Spanish Civil War. While the aftermath left the Spaniards wanting their children back from exile in France to be reassimilated back into Spanish culture, the individual’s psyche was beginning to be taken into account. These loyalist approaches to repatriation wouldn’t go away until well after World War 2 when identities were no longer defined by where they came from, but rather where they called home. Still, strides were being made to get these “lost” children psychological help along with their material needs. Light was now shedding on the moral and social risks of a divided family and after World War II, in an effort to move forward from the depths of depravity found in the Nazi Regime, and to reclaim democracy, the child’s individual welfare was now being focused on far more than the countries desire for a unified nation. Each war and genocide set the the foundation for new improvements in humanitarian efforts.

Much of this content relates to Hoffman’s ideas on social welfare and the modern state. Children were the objects of popular politics all throughout the first half of the 20th century. After they were exiled for their safety, the children were sought after to become assimilated members of a homogenous society. Hoffman’s main idea is that social welfare is for the good of country far more than for the good of individual. The countries wanted a healthy person to increase economic output in an industrial society. Industrial society was the modern state. In the book the reader learns that the countries sent away their children and then brought them back for family stability which was a core value of Europe at this time. Leaders believed that children wouldn’t grow up to be functioning members of society if they don’t have a normal family upbringing. Eventually, they moved to a practice in which these agencies and governments did what was psychologically best for the child. This reconstruction of childhoods mimicked the reconstruction of Europe itself.

Lost Children in Post War Europe

Posted on by

In Lost Children : Reconstructing Europe’s Families after World War II, Tara Zahra explains the changes in attitudes towards the rehabilitation of children in Europe after the two major world wars. Millions of children were displaced as a result of the Armenian Genocide, World War I, and the Mexican Revolution, and World War II. In order to combat the mass orphanage, organizations such as the ARA (American Relief Association) and the IRO (International Refugee Organization) were created to feed, house, psychologically rehabilitate, and provide welfare to the displaced, wandering new “wolf children” of Europe. (4)

The welfare systems that were implemented to save children in Lost Children: Recontructing Europe’s Families after World War II revolved around psychological rehabilitation. According to Zahra, the social workers worked in the “best interest of the child, rather than any particular agenda”. (17) There is a stark contrast between the European post war welfare system than the one in an industrializing Russia, which was described by Hoffman as “a set of reciprocal obligations between the state and its citizens, rather than as a means to protect the dignity of the individuals”. (Hoffman, 19)

While programs such as the ARA and the IRO sought to bring stability to the individual emotionally and provide them with proper homes to rebuild European family life, the Russian welfare system was to serve as a catalyst for industrialization to catapult the nation into a modern era.