"Progressives" vs " Black Children"
By Robert Zubrin
There is a single
ideological current running through a seemingly disparate collection of noxious
modern political and scientific movements, ranging from militarism,
imperialism, racism, xenophobia, and radical environmentalism, to socialism,
Nazism, and totalitarian communism. This is the ideology of antihumanism:
the belief that the human race is a horde of vermin whose unconstrained
aspirations and appetites endanger the natural order, and that tyrannical
measures are necessary to constrain humanity. The founding prophet of modern
antihumanism is Thomas Malthus (1766-1834), who offered a pseudoscientific
basis for the idea that human reproduction always outruns available resources.
Following this pessimistic and inaccurate assessment of the capacity of human
ingenuity to develop new resources, Malthus advocated oppressive policies that
led to the starvation of millions in India and Ireland.
While Malthus’s argument that human population growth invariably leads to
famine and poverty is plainly at odds with the historical evidence, which shows
global living standards rising with population growth, it nonetheless persisted
and even gained strength among intellectuals and political leaders in the
twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Its most pernicious manifestation in
recent decades has been the doctrine of population control, famously advocated
by ecologist Paul Ehrlich, whose bestselling 1968 antihumanist tract The Population Bomb has served
as the bible of neo-Malthusianism. In this book, Ehrlich warned of
overpopulation and advocated that the American government adopt stringent
population control measures, both domestically and for the Third World
countries that received American foreign aid. (Ehrlich, it should be noted, is
the mentor of and frequent collaborator with John Holdren, President Obama’s
science advisor.)
Until the mid-1960s, American population control programs, both at home and abroad, were largely funded and implemented by private organizations such as the Population Council and Planned Parenthood — groups with deep roots in the eugenics movement. While disposing of millions of dollars provided to them by the Rockefeller, Ford, and Milbank Foundations, among others, the resources available to support their work were meager in comparison with their vast ambitions. This situation changed radically in the mid-1960s, when the U.S. Congress, responding to the agitation of overpopulation ideologues, finally appropriated federal funds to underwrite first domestic and then foreign population control programs. Suddenly, instead of mere millions, there were hundreds of millions and eventually billions of dollars available to fund global campaigns of mass abortion and forced sterilization. The result would be human catastrophe on a worldwide scale.
Until the mid-1960s, American population control programs, both at home and abroad, were largely funded and implemented by private organizations such as the Population Council and Planned Parenthood — groups with deep roots in the eugenics movement. While disposing of millions of dollars provided to them by the Rockefeller, Ford, and Milbank Foundations, among others, the resources available to support their work were meager in comparison with their vast ambitions. This situation changed radically in the mid-1960s, when the U.S. Congress, responding to the agitation of overpopulation ideologues, finally appropriated federal funds to underwrite first domestic and then foreign population control programs. Suddenly, instead of mere millions, there were hundreds of millions and eventually billions of dollars available to fund global campaigns of mass abortion and forced sterilization. The result would be human catastrophe on a worldwide scale.
Among the first to be targeted were America’s own Third World population at
home — the native American Indians. Starting in 1966, Secretary of the Interior
Stuart Udall began to make use of newly available Medicaid money to set up
sterilization programs at federally funded Indian Health Services (IHS)
hospitals. As reported by Angela Franks in her 2005 book Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Legacy:
These sterilizations were frequently performed without adequate informed consent.... Native American physician Constance Redbird Uri estimated that up to one-quarter of Indian women of childbearing age had been sterilized by 1977; in one hospital in Oklahoma, one-fourth of the women admitted (for any reason) left sterilized.... She also gathered evidence that all the pureblood women of the Kaw tribe in Oklahoma were sterilized in the 1970s....
Unfortunately, and amazingly, problems with the Indian Health Service seem to persist ... recently [in the early 1990s], in South Dakota, IHS was again accused of not following informed-consent procedures, this time for Norplant, and apparently promoted the long-acting contraceptive to Native American women who should not use it due to contraindicating, preexisting medical conditions. The Native American Women’s Health Education Resource Center reports that one woman was recently told by her doctors that they would remove the implant only if she would agree to a tubal ligation. The genocidal dreams of bureaucrats still cast their shadow on American soil.
Programs of a comparable character were also set up in clinics funded by
the U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity in low-income (predominantly black)
neighborhoods in the United States. Meanwhile, on the U.S. territory of Puerto
Rico, a mass sterilization program was instigated by the Draper Fund/Population
Crisis Committee and implemented with federal funds from the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare through the island’s major hospitals as well as
a host of smaller clinics. According to the report of a medical fact-finding
mission conducted in 1975, the effort was successful in sterilizing close to
one-third of Puerto Rican women of child-bearing age.
Better
Dead Than Red
However, it was not at home but abroad that the
heaviest artillery of the population control onslaught was directed. During the
Cold War, anything from the Apollo program to public-education funding could be
sold to the federal government if it could be justified as part of the global
struggle against communism. Accordingly, ideologues at some of the highest
levels of power and influence formulated a party line that the population of
the world’s poor nations needed to be drastically cut in order to reduce the
potential recruitment pool available to the communist cause. President Lyndon
Johnson was provided a fraudulent study by a RAND Corporation economist that
used cooked calculations to “prove” that Third World children actually had negative
economic value. Thus, by allowing excessive numbers of children to be born,
Asian, African, and Latin American governments were deepening the poverty of
their populations, while multiplying the masses of angry proletarians ready to
be led against America by the organizers of the coming World Revolution.