I was reading (skimming really) this book about the Nordic sterilisation programme which went on for a large part of the 20th century. Nazi eugenics and sterilisation are often talked about in the same context as Nordic programmes but this book argues that they had very different aims and social contexts. Essentially the Nazi programmes were based on ideas of Aryan superiority and a paranoia about dilution of this precious blood-stock. It was also used to identify undersireables like Jews and Romani. It was a very racially motivated programme. However the history of Nordic eugenics is far more State focused. It comes from a social and political context that was one of a paternalistic welfare state that was dedicated to the 'best' for society. The sterilisation of those deemed mentally unfit, or of women released from prison, was done to iron out the kinks in society. The Nazi ideology however was far more committed to the perverted idea of a Nietzschean Superman (check Zarathustra's prolouge). Also the Nordic system relied far more on consent, especially after the 40's and 50's.
But is a sterilisation programme based on a utilitarian Welfare State cost-benefit analysis of what does the most good/least harm to society (or the State to be cynical) any better than one based on lunatic ideas of racial superiority? Seems like potatoes/potartoes.
I don't know too much about this, but I have heard of this before. The other major state which had forced sterilisation at this time was the USA. I'm not sure how many people Sweden and the USA forcibly sterilised, but I believe it to have been very close to the number that Nazi Germany carried out. This is not to mention the fact that state-sanctioned sterilisation existed in those two states far earlier than it did in Germany, and continued afterwards as well.
ReplyDeleteMost people don't realize, but eugenics and sterlisation were very popular throughout mainstream Europe and North America during the 19th and first half of the 20th century. It was only after the two ideas became associated with Nazi Germany that the ideas lost favour and were stopped.
Very interesting post there. Whilst the Nazi party and the Nordics gave different reasons for steralisation, in the end, the goal was the same for both, to iron out the 'kinks' in a society, nation or race.
ReplyDeleteEugenics is about improving the quality of the human species by discouragement of breeding by those deemed to be inferior i.e. certain racial groups, mentally disabled, and especially those with genetic defects which they didn't want inherited through generations. One of the findings of eugenics is that those they deem 'quality' human beings do not breed as much as those deemed "less desirable" and one of their fears is that "quality" beings will be outbred by "undesirables" which was the reason for steralisation of Jews, Romani, Gays, disabled etc in Nazi Germany, with the "quality" breed being Aryans.
In the Nordic society, the dedication by the paternalistic welfare state to what was 'best' for society evidentally was about ensuring that only those humans they deemed to be of the "best" breed were allowed to continue to reproduce and interestingly that did not include women released from prison...
So really, I would say no, Nazi Germany and Nordic society eugenics and justification for steralisation were no better than the other in the end. Both essentially violated basic human rights due to their fears of being outbred by so-called "undesirables" and "deviants".