Racial Research And Eugenics Depopulation Program
“Eugenics or good genes” was a science based on 'social Darwinism or survival of the fittest,' applied to humans. It was very popular with those who had most of the wealth and felt like they needed a scientific rationale for it, to validate the great poverty and suffering that also would occur.
After 1900, Rockefeller, along with the Harriman family, the family that gave the Bush family it starts, began to spend millions on “eugenics” research.
Some of the Rockefeller Foundation money went to a Swiss psychiatrist named Ernst Rudin. He later went on to head the German “Racial Hygiene Society,” a section of the new Nazi state. Rockefeller would also hire William Lyon Mackenzie King as a “Director of Industrial Research” for the Rockefeller Foundation, shortly after he began the racist war on opium-smoking Chinese in Canada.
“Eugenics” soon evolved into “racial hygiene”, a term the Nazi’s used to scientifically justify their genocidal policies. Hitler was called “physician of the German people” who was “killing in the name of healing.”
One member of Davenport’s office would remark that Hitler “should be made (an) honorary member” of the ERO. (191) The ERO and Ernst Rudin, ex-Rockefeller employee and head the German “Racial Hygiene Society” – worked together on a regular basis.
Rockefeller’s racist writers were a hit. By the early 1930’s, thirty states had passed compulsory sterilization laws that gave panels of “experts” the power to sterilize individuals who fell into such undesirable social categories as “sexual perverts,” “epileptics,” “drunkards” and “drug fiends.” Hitler accredited eugenics in America as the most important factor influencing his policies on racial and hereditary science.
At least half of the world population have to die
Rockefeller’s Council on Foreign Relations recently published an article stating that the US population should be reduced to “about its size in the 1940’s”, in other words, cut it back by at least half.
It goes without saying that similar (if not more drastic) “cuts” are called for in the rest of the world. Most of their attention is with the “less developed” countries. AFRICA of course... and you will not believe it..., blacks in Atlanta...
Atlanta is often affectionately called the “Black Mecca” of the South but the city has undergone a dramatic demographic shift over the past four decades. Black Atlanta is shrinking and there are 20 major reasons, a “20-Point Plan”, that account for this depopulation. Many of them are detailed in a book entitled; “The Black Metropolis in the Twenty-First Century” 2007.
The Center for the Study of Racism, Social Justice, and Health
The Center for the Study of Racism, Social Justice, and Health is dedicated to examining how and when racism affects health, providing tools to improve the rigor with which researchers study racism and health, and evaluating intervention strategies that most effectively address racism’s contributions to health inequities.
The Center is distinguished from other disparities-related research units at UCLA by its primary focus on the health implications of racism for diverse populations. Public Health is both an academic discipline and an applied one.
Therefore, the Center encourages the translation of research findings for use by public health professionals, community organizations, and policymakers in their ongoing health equity efforts.
Many Center affiliates are working to identify, investigate and explain the specific mechanisms by which various forms of racism may produce local, national or global health inequities.
Others are advancing critical racial theories or building community partnerships to guide their anti-racism, health equity work.
How does racism affect the physical and mental health of diverse populations? What tools are available to improve the rigor with which researchers study racism and its relationship to health inequities?
Which intervention strategies most effectively address racism’s contribution to specific health inequities? What are effective ways to teach public health students about racism?
As journal writer of UCL of FSPH professor Chandra Ford writes about how study results may be influenced by conscious or unconscious assumptions.
How can public health researchers address racism? That’s the focus of a supplement to the latest issue of the journal Ethnicity & Disease, for which UCLA professor Chandra Ford served as a guest editor.
“Race is a social construct and not a biological attribute, but scientists continue to design studies that reinforce the notion that race and ethnicity are causes of health outcomes,” said Ford, an associate professor of community health sciences and the founding director of the Center for the Study for the of Racism, Social Justice & Health at the at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health.
The journal supplement includes a collection of papers based on critical race theory, a concept developed more than three decades ago by legal scholars that illuminate the subtle ways racism matters in any situation.
“Critical race theory helps public health researchers avoid common pitfalls that pervade the field and limit the capacity to achieve equity,” Ford said.
These pitfalls include erroneously targeting biological or cultural characteristics of minorities as the root cause of the disease, thus missing the true cause, and conflating the effects of racism with those of race or ethnicity and reinforcing racial or ethnic stereotypes.
For example”, Ford said, “a researcher might incorrectly jump to a conclusion that differences between white and black people observed in a study are due to genetic factors, even if that researcher did not actually analyze their genetic backgrounds.
A paper by Ford and colleagues in the supplement examines the public health version of critical race theory, called “public health critical race praxis,” which she and Collins Airhihenbuwa, a professor of health management and policy at Georgia State University, coined in 2010. Scientists can use the praxis to minimize the risk of inserting racial bias into their research.
A team led by Ford applied the praxis to an ongoing study in which they are analyzing the type of care received by a group of people who were diagnosed with HIV between 2008 and 2012. All of the authors of the HIV research completed brief, confidential questionnaires asking what they believed the outcomes would be for the research questions they plan to answer, including any racial or ethnic patterns they expect to find.
The study of possible bias in the HIV research is not complete, but Ford and her colleagues will compare the authors’ assumptions with the actual data the study produces to determine whether the authors’ biases could have affected the results.
For the ongoing study, Ford and her colleagues also plan to analyze whether the services HIV patients receive is affected by the race and ethnicity of the health care workers who are caring for them.
“These are just two examples of how public health critical race praxis can be applied to research,” Ford said. “This is not a formula, but a broad, standardized approach that researchers can use to draw attention to how racism can influence the empirical work that they do.”
Chandra Ford, Ph.D., is Associate Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences. Her areas of expertise include HIV/AIDS prevention and care; HIV testing among older adults; the social determinants of health/social epidemiology; conceptualizing and measuring racism, race and ethnicity; Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP)/Critical Race Theory; and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) health disparities.
Dr. Ford earned her Ph.D. from the Gillings School of Public Health at the University of North Carolina. She completed postdoctoral fellowships in the Department of Social Medicine at the University of North Carolina and the Department of Epidemiology at Columbia University, where she was a W. K. Kellogg Foundation Kellogg Health Scholar. Ford has received several competitive awards. She currently is a Kaiser Permanente Chris Burch Leadership Awardee.
Disclaimer: "The views/contents expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of Johan van Dongen and do not neccessarily reflect those of Modern Ghana.