Eugenics, race and IQ

Programmes against people deemed to be "racial inferiors" stemmed from the Nazi philosophy that politics was based upon biology: in order to have a strong state, it was necessary to have a strong, pure race. The Nazis sought to prevent "unfit" Germans from breeding and corrupting the strength of the race. Hence many of their policies, including extermination, were directed at fellow "Aryans".

One of the first laws the Nazis passed, after taking power in 1933, was a law to enable the compulsory sterilisation of people with mental and/or physical disabilities. A special unit was established, euphemistically called the General Foundation for Welfare and Institutional Care, or T4. The T4 programme carried out "mercy killings" of 70,000 men, women and children by nurses, doctors and psychiatrists in institutions across Germany. The programme was eventually stopped as a result of protests from the clergy.

The Nazis based their racial policies on the so-called "science" of eugenics, which had been founded in the nineteenth century by the British psychologist Francis Galton. Eugenicists believed that it was possible to breed a strong race by controlling who should be permitted to have children. Eugenicists therefore also argued that society should discourage breeding by those of its members who were "unfit" either physically, mentally or socially. In the early part of the nineteenth century, many educated people in Europe and the United States were drawn to eugenic ideas. In fact the Nazi laws on sterilising the handicapped were based upon laws which had previously been passed in California. In 1910 Winston Churchill, as Home Secretary, drafted a proposal to sterilise, or put into labour camps, 100,000 "degenerate British citizens".

One logical conclusion of the eugenic philosophy was the death camps. Indeed eugenic "scientists", such as Josef Mengele, conducted gruesome "experiments" on people in the Nazi camps. Another conclusion was the breeding centres that the Nazis established: healthy, racially pure, Aryan young women were encouraged to contribute to the future of the race by having as many children as possible. Thus the philosophy of Nazism was not only inherently racist and homophobic, but also fundamentally sexist.

After the Second World War there was a massive decline in support for the philosophy of eugenics. There were two principle reasons for this. First, the horrors of Auschwitz and Dachau revealed the inhumanity of the eugenic idea. Second, and just as important, new findings in the science of genetics were demonstrating that the old genetic theories were muddle-headed and not scientifically supported.

Into the mainstream - eugenics and psychology

Despite the new developments in genetics, there was a slight upsurge of eugenic ideas in the 1960s and 1970s. Several notable psychologists, such as Jensen and Eysenck, started claiming that blacks were genetically less intelligent than whites. These theories, which used outdated genetic models and which were rejected by most serious geneticists, were seized upon by fascist groups.

The 1990s have seen a resurgence of eugenic ideas. The catalyst has been a book, The Bell Curve, written by two American academics, the psychologist Richard Herrnstein and the sociologist Charles Murray. The Bell Curve, which was published in 1994, is a rehash of the old eugenic ideas designed to appeal to a modern audience.

Herrnstein and Murray suggest that the genetic stock of the United States is under threat. They claim that the health of a nation is determined by the IQ (Intelligence Quotient) of its population and that IQ is largely determined by genetics. They suggest that a low IQ is associated with criminality, illegitimacy and a general breakdown of social order.

The Bell Curve, true to its eugenic tradition, has a strong racial theme. Herrnstein and Murray warn that in the United States there is a large so-called "underclass" with a low IQ. Repeating the old eugenic scare, they warn that this "underclass" is outbreeding the small elite with a high IQ. And of course they suggest that blacks are disproportionately represented in this criminal, violent, unintelligent "underclass".

The book contains an overt political message against the American policy of "affirmative action". This policy was designed to counteract the effects of years of racism. It encourages employers to ensure that their workforce represents the ethnic mix of the general population. According to Herrnstein and Murray, affirmative action means that lower intelligence applicants (ie blacks) are getting jobs which should have gone to higher intelligence candidates.

If Herrnstein's and Murray's warnings are all too familiar, then so are their solutions. Basically they propose that the genetic inferiors should be prevented from breeding. For example, they propose ending welfare support for unmarried mothers as a means of lowering the birthrate of the "underclass" (which they assume to be predominantly non-white).

When The Bell Curve was published, it attracted wide publicity especially in the United States. Critics were quick to point out the flaws and history of the book's ideas. For example, the distinguished biologist Lewis Wolpert wrote a lengthy rebuttal in The Sunday Times (11 December 1994), demonstrating how the authors had neglected the extent to which intelligence is affected by environmental conditions. The New York Times Review of Books showed how much of the "evidence" cited by Herrnstein and Murray had been published in the rather dubious journal Mankind Quarterly.

The New York Times used information originally published by Searchlight in the late 1970s to reveal that Mankind Quarterly had been established by white supremacists, some of whom had direct links with extreme far-right groups. Its founder, Robert Gayre, had links with the Northern League. Indeed, Mankind Quarterly's original editorial board contained Dr von Verschuer, the academic supervisor and mentor of Josef Mengele.

When The Bell Curve was published, Time magazine declared "racists will be delighted" (31 October 1994). It was right. The message of The Bell Curve has been music to the ears of fascist groups such as the British National Party and the National Front. It fits their philosophy that the state should seek to improve the genetic stock of the nation, rooting out genetic "inferiors".

Support from the far right is predictable. More worryingly, books such as The Bell Curve enable eugenic ideas to get a hearing among the "respectable" right. The American Spectator, in January 1995, gave the book a lengthy, favourable review. It repeated at length the warnings about "the worsening of the American gene pool". The American Spectator went further than the original book. It even raised the question whether criminals should be sterilised.

Right Now, the right wing conservative quarterly referred to The Bell Curve, as "possibly the most important reference book you'll ever buy".

In the late 1990s Chris Brand, an Edinburgh University lecturer, wrote a book entitled The 'G' Factor, in which he put the view that certain ethnic groups had a lower IQ than whites. Brand was eventually dismissed from his post at Edinburgh after he claimed that paedophilia was not that harmful.

The BNP has also relied heavily on eugenics in the past. For instance, on the issue of abortion it states, "abortion, when it means the killing of normal white babies - is a bad thing". What this implies is not only that not only will white women not have the right to have an abortion, but "non-white" women will not have the right to have children at all. Tony Lecomber, the BNP's Group Development Officer, has written lengthy articles in Spearhead, asserting his belief in the need for eugenics to further the white race.

Once again eugenic ideas are seeping back into mainstream thinking. The "unthinkable" is being thought, as racism, not for the first time, shows its "intellectual" face. Only last year, Home Secretary Jack Straw held a public debate with Charles Murray on poverty and its causes.