Liberals Eugenics, population control ?

UC Berkeley bioethics professor Osagie K. Obasogie received a campus email about a research fund available to faculty members in the School of Public Health.

He was stunned by what he read.
And sponsors who had no idea what they were sponsoring in this radical Liberal university.

The Genealogical Eugenic Institute Fund, the email said, supports research and education in eugenics — a field discredited after World War II as a horrifying ideology that sought to use science to improve the human race by promoting traits deemed superior and breeding out those judged undesirable. The judgments aligned strongly with social biases that favored white, able-bodied and financially stable people.

Eugenics was used as a justification for Hitler’s Nazi Germany to kill 6 million Jewish people, and U.S. authorities to forcibly sterilize more than 60,000 people in California and more than 30 other states largely in the early 20th century.

I think today Liberals are "exterminating" conservatives and others who they see as inferior.
Media is one tool among many others. Unlike population control via abortion clinics in minority dominant areas. New tools are used.
This is racist supremacy group.

 

The more looney the assertion, the more important it is to provide references. This one appears off the charts.

You doing QAnon research?

 

My interpretation commentary maybe of the chart.
Eugenics at Berkeley is a fact.
They got away with it long time because they are Liberal.

 

Reference please

 

Highly unlikely; many Uni's, particularly the Liberal ones are not going in this direction. They are going in a bad direction, but not this direction.

 

When doing QAnon research, the primary goal is not truth, instead the primary goal is reaching a conclusion that liberals are wrong, evil, mean, bad, etc. That way the "believers" can congratulate each other and feel justified vindicated and generally good. It makes references irrelevant.

 

Bill why are you fixated on QAnon,
I don't know who they are.
Maybe I posted something in the past that somehow related to them, but you keep reminding me some group I don't follow or know.

This news is form here:

https://news.yahoo.com/uc-berkeley-disavowing-eugenic-research-130057499.html
UC Berkeley is disavowing its eugenic research fund after bioethicist and other faculty call it out
Teresa WatanabeMon, October 26, 2020, 9:00 AM EDT

 

The grant was given in 1975. The article says that no money from the grant was actually used for eugenics research. After Osagie K. Obasogie complained then the fund was frozen. This is not what you implied was going on. You were very misleading in the opening post IMHO. Perhaps that is why you didn't want to post a reference?

Regarding QAnon, you are the fellow that has tried multiple times to pass off QAnon nonsense as real news. You are the fellow that keeps posting strange assertions without references. Just because there is a small sliver of truth about it doesn't mean it has nothing to do with QAnon. If you don't want people to think you are into QAnon then you should stop trying to give that impression to people. To be blunt about it, sorry Lerner, you are the one that is hurting your own credibility don't try to blame it on me.

 

I wasn't misleading at all. It appears you are going in to damage control mode, its obvious because its form more prominent sources and not QAnon research as you claimed.

I quote the article:
"But Berkeley’s eugenic research fund has been very much active.

The $2.4-million fund was offering an annual payout of about $70,000 in fiscal year 2020 to support research and education on policies, practices and technologies that could “affect the distribution of traits in the human race,” including those related to family planning, infertility, assisted reproduction technologies, prenatal screening, abortion, gene editing and gene modification, the email said. That “modern definition of eugenics” included “perspectives that shed light on not only the benefits but also the limitations and the ethics of these alternative approaches to improving the human race.”

“By accepting and using these funds over the past four decades, we must acknowledge that Berkeley Public Health has been a part of this horrific legacy of eugenics and its disastrous impacts,” Lu wrote in a letter Monday to the School of Public Health faculty. “It was wrong then. It is wrong now.”

Berkeley’s announcement comes as campuses across the nation are stepping up efforts to repudiate those who promoted eugenics, including high-profile university leaders, amid the nation’s intensifying racial justice movement."

In June, USC stripped the name of former university President Rufus B. von KleinSmid from a prominent campus building. Stanford University announced this month it would remove the name of its founding president, David Starr Jordan, from campus buildings and streets, while a high school bearing his name was recently changed to simply Jordan High by the Los Angeles Board of Education.

At the California Institute of Technology, hundreds of alumni and faculty are petitioning to strip its buildings of the name of Robert A. Millikan, a towering figure on campus who was Caltech’s first Nobel laureate — but also a leader of the Human Betterment Foundation, a Pasadena-based group whose advocacy of eugenics and forced sterilization influenced Nazi policies. Pomona College recently announced it would rename its Millikan Laboratory after nearly 1,000 community members signed a petition."

Now obviously some at Berkeley are trying to defend it and say only one person used since 2000 it and it wasn't for Eugenics etc. The school has a right to present their case
and say the "Newgenix" not the same as Eugenics etc. But not all are buying.
But to be fair to the school I quote:
“The line between using reproductive and genetic technologies to prevent heritable diseases versus enhancing future children so that they can partake in social privileges is fraught and not always clear,” Obasogie said. “This deserves our utmost attention to ensure that these technologies are not used to exacerbate inequalities.”

At Berkeley, Lu said it did not appear that the fund was ever used for the kind of eugenic research that devastated marginalized communities.

This is given to the interpretation - how it was used.

As to QAnon, again I will look up who they are since you keep mentioning in attempt to discredit the messenger.

 

Agree,
Campuses across the nation are stepping up efforts to repudiate those who promoted eugenics, including high-profile university leaders, amid the nation’s intensifying racial justice movement."
Since after the WW2 and what Nazis did many in the US denounced Eugenics, including in the state of CA were sterilizations were taking place and Eugenics was practiced on poor, uneducated welfare population. California had accounted for 80% of the sterilizations nationwide. ... There were about 20,000 forced sterilizations in California between 1909 and 1963.
This is why such fund was so shocking and 1975 inception and it was active for 4 decades till 2018.

 

Progressivism’s concept of freedom as something merely latent, and not equally latent, in human beings dictated rethinking the purpose and scope of government.

Princeton University scholar Thomas C. Leonard, in his 2016 book “Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics & American Economics in the Progressive Era,” says progressives believed that scientific experts should be in society’s saddle, determining the “human hierarchy” and appropriate social policies, including eugenics.

 

Sorry Lerner, not only is your statement "I think today Liberals are "exterminating" conservatives and others who they see as inferior." is misleading as I said, it is complete and total bullshit that has absolutely nothing to do with the article. In addition it shows a detachment from reality that is staggering. (Assuming of course that you actually believe it?)

 

The whole thread is dangerous. I think you can die from bullshit poisoning!

 

Its eyes opening if one is willing to research the issue a little deeper.
In today's world, for the liberals conservatives are not rivals but enemies.
Contemporary progressive political movements have turned against liberal values such as free speech as is demonstrated today.

Just imagine a majority of liberal united in a death wish for the US as we know, and determined to use the state to carry out its aims.
Today, progressivism is associated exclusively with the left. But in the past it included Republican leaders as well.
Not all progressives were racially and exclusionary minded.
On the positive Progressives gave us overtime pay, the 40-hour work week, a minimum wage, protection from safety hazards at work, and more.
So there is room for balanced approach and to end the hate-rage.
Go from enemies to competitors or rivals.

 

The conservatives are the one's preaching hate, demonization of rivals and division. Trump, the whole QAnon movement and yourself are excellent examples.

 

As I said before, you have no idea what your party represents in practical aspect.
No one is preaching hate, I don't hate.
I disagree with the plans your party has. Of these plans you are in denial or being deceived.
And the amount of hate that your left media and left exhibited in the last 4 years is undeniable.
You with your QAnon, you know I haven't even looked what it is.
Demonetization is what left media did in the last 4 years.

 

QAnon is a politically conservative movement. You have posted QAnon false assertions here multiple times. When I pointed out a fact check that said most everything you copied into your post was false you said you don't believe fact checkers. The important point for this discussion though is that QAnon is a radical right movement that demonstrates the fact that the right is the side more commonly demonizing rivals, preaching hate and division.

Trump is the leader of the Republican party. He demonizes his rivals like no other President in modern history. He is always preaching hate and division. From his opening speech in the 2016 campaign about Mexicans being rapists and criminals, oh and some might be nice.

Regarding the media coverage exhibiting hate. They sometimes exhibit a left leaning tilt but exhibiting hate? Nope, nothing like Trump or QAnon anyway. Heck it took them years to even start calling Trump's lies lies instead of misstatements or untruths.

Here's what you said in the opening post of this thread.
"I think today Liberals are "exterminating" conservatives and others who they see as inferior."

That is demonization of the other side if I ever saw it. There are plenty more examples, that one is just extra egregious. Not only that it is an insane belief.

 

"I think today Liberals are "exterminating" conservatives and others who they see as inferior."
You noticed the quotation marks around exterminating? It means they want us gone as a movement not to kill us.
I can add that the far right also wants to "exterminate" the left.
But if you read further you would see my point that this hate didn't exist always and it should be reversed, to the level of rivalry when one side wants to beat
the other but not "Exterminate".
Presidents from John F. Kennedy through Ronald Reagan built their political careers on criticizing left-wing ideology and Communist regimes.
"the ant heap of totalitarianism." opposition to a global enemy communists and socialists everywhere.
But why this is happening?
Since Bernie Sanders imploded by extolling his love and adoration for Castro and the Soviets and all the other stuff he went nuts on.
It appears that the left doesn’t care who they rule over as long as they rule.
The reality is we, the middle class, are the targets of the left. They want us gone. (not dead - exterminated more like voted out for long time)

 

My view is that most Democrats and almost all Democrats in power believe that our country is better off with a two party system rather than a single party or one over powering party and one small minority party. Assertions that liberals see conservatives as inferior and vice versa are nothing more than the opinion of some individuals. Although I completely agree that Trump would like to squelch all voices that don't pander to his every whim. He has made the Republican party nothing more than a bunch frightened sycophants and would love to do the same with the Democratic party as well. But Trump should really be considered more of an autocrat wanna-be than a true conservative. There are many many references that support this position. Let me know if you want me start posting them but if you want to check yourself I suggest looking into the Lincoln project.

Opinions are best backed up with references and unusual strange opinions are best backed up with strong references. I'm looking forward to your presentation of some strong references and the key reference for this thread .
https://news.yahoo.com/uc-berkeley-disavowing-eugenic-research-130057499.html does NOT count as a reference. That was an extremely misleading opening post to this thread.