Abortion: The Left’s Modern Eugenics

Johnathan Freedland explains that eugenics is the left’s dirty secret, especially among British socialists in the 1930s and 40s.  I go one step further with an extrapolated meaning to the modern left in America.

From Guardian UK:

It is eugenics, the belief that society’s fate rested on its ability to breed more of the strong and fewer of the weak. So-called positive eugenics meant encouraging those of greater intellectual ability and “moral worth” to have more children, while negative eugenics sought to urge, or even force, those deemed inferior to reproduce less often or not at all. The aim was to increase the overall quality of the national herd, multiplying the thoroughbreds and weeding out the runts.

George Bernard Shaw could insist that “the only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man”, even suggesting, in a phrase that chills the blood, that defectives be dealt with by means of a “lethal chamber”.

Such thinking was not alien to the great Liberal titan and mastermind of the welfare state, William Beveridge, who argued that those with “general defects” should be denied not only the vote, but “civil freedom and fatherhood”.

And now we get to the heart of the matter.  The man (Keynes), the myth (Keynesian economics), and the legend (Keynes’ legacy).

Hence the enthusiasm of John Maynard Keynes, director of the Eugenics Society from 1937 to 1944, for contraception, essential because the working class was too “drunken and ignorant” to keep its numbers down.

Now why is it that the left, and especially the current administration, is so in favor of abortion?  They say women’s rights, sure, and I think that’s a major reason.  But based on their predecessors who favored eugenics, I will re-post what Keynes, the father of Obama’s economic beliefs, has to say on the matter:

… the working class was too “drunken and ignorant” to keep its numbers down.

And there’s the plainly honest truth.  Abortion, for which the overwhelming majority is performed for poverty-stricken women (about 65% for whom are never-married; about 48% for whom earn below $30k per year) is about economics, with the underlying belief that higher births under the poverty level will create more poverty.

Instead of inspiring hard work and education (Brookings Institute: “Most people are poor in the United States because they either do not work or work too few hours to move themselves and their children out of poverty”) and fostering conditions for self-improvement and upward social mobility, today’s Left instead are dependent on the social immobility of Americans below the poverty level.  The Left wants to limit those living in the poverty level because an increasing underclass would make the entirety poorer.  They enforce this limitation through abortion (a rate of over a million per year).

So the next time that you hear about women’s rights, remember that the Left wants to control the poverty level.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: