This is America

[Chants Evensong]

Narith,

I assume that when you refer to the government program of forced sterilization, you're referring to the eugenics movement. You are correct to say that Amercia embraced the eugenics movement. You are also correct to state that the Holocaust emerged from Germany's eugenics movement. But you are wrong to imply that but for the the American eugenics movement, the holocaust would never have happened, ("i.e., where you state that America was indirectly the cause of the holocaust).

The modern eugenics movement of the 19th century and first have of the last century was international in it's scope. Although its roots may be traced to Malthus, the early 19th century British philosopher, it's birth is widely pointed to Sir Galton who sponsored the first international conference on Eugenics.

Many nations besides the U.S. also codified the sterilization of the "un-fit" well before Nazi Germany took it to an extreme. In fact, most modern westen nations codified eugenics in some sort of way.

The idea of eugenics is also not new. Ancient Greeks tossed deformed babies off of cliffs as a matter of public policy.

Interestingly, the Margaret Sanger, the celebrated founder of Planned Parenthood, was an unaplogetic, vocal, and strident proponent of the eugenics movement. Winston Churchill supoorted the movement, as did Woodrow Wislon, Alexander G. Bell, HG Wells, Teddy Roosevelt, and many others that one does not ordinarily associate with junk science.

I do not know what sort of education you personally recieved in school, but the deatials of the eugenics movement is taught in hundreds of colleges every year. The fact that the Japanese were placed in internment camps is taught in nearly every high school, and is a matter of common knowledge. Your assertion that these are things one will never be taught in school is compeltely unfounded, absurd to a degree difficult to comprehend.

I am intrigued by your statement that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. It is a well known phrase and undoubtedly true. In Michael Chricton's new book, "State of Fear", he discusses the eugenics movement in his appendix. He compares the massive and unquestioning embrace of this junk science movement to the modern embrace of global warming, which he claims is also based on junk science. To him, history is repeating itself. I imagine that you, Narith, have embraced global warming as a fact just like many other intelligent people embraced the eugenics movement without question.

You claim that the majority of Americans are bigots, that our president is a self proclaimed bigot, and that we are on the verge of another round of internment camps. The Patriot Act notwithstanding, America is in fact one of the most tolerant, open, and free societies in history. We can improve, and we should strive to do so. But you do not improve freedom and tolerance with ignorant statements like the majority of Americans are bigots, that if you do not worship the right god you might was well not come here, and that America is full of hate. Those statements are in fact full of precisely the sort of hate you claim to eschew, and stem from exactly the same sort of ignorance that leads to intolerance and the erosion of our civil liberties.

[superwalrus]

OH NO THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!

Seriously people, the simple fact remains, if you don't do anything wrong, the man won't come fuck with you. I live my life, I make money, I eat, I shit, and I fuck, and I follow the rules. So instead of having to follow 35 rules Arabs are going to have to follow 36? Who really cares? Their lives won't be affected by filling out 1 extra form anymore than mine will. Jesus, there is a reason why slippery slope arguments are considered logical fallacies.

Walrus

[Eidolon Faer]

Okay...

First of all, let's look at what we're talking about, here, with the hystrionics removed.

1. Law Enforcement Agencies monitoring Mosques.

Umm, you don't need a search warrant to send a guy in to join the congregation of a Mosque and find out if their prayer mats have the floorplans of the Pentagon on them. And, in fact, this sort of thing has been done to monitor a nominally-Christian group, the KKK, in the past. Frankly, if a Methodist Pastor decided to give a fire-and-brimstone speech advocating jihad against the infidel, I'd be kinda relieved when the nice men carted him off to the asylum.

Frankly, I don't see a problem with this. At all.



2. Requiring Muslims to register their location.

IMO this breaks down two ways: citizens and noncitizens. Frankly, I think EVERYONE who is here on a visa ought to be required to register their address as part of the process, if they aren't already. Sorry, but we need to do a better job in general of enforcing immigration policy and a FAR better job of tracking our legal visitors.

Citizens who happen to be muslims shouldn't be forced to register themselves any more than citizens who are Unitarians are. If they're making fire-and-brimstone Jihad speeches or cooking up bombs, charge them with a federal felony and take away their rights that way. Hell, I'm all for putting one of those GPS ankle-manacles on people convicted of making terroristic threats.


3. Profiling citizens based on their ethnicity and religion.

Duh. When I see a 92-year-old swedish woman attempting to board the plane with a WMD more destructive than Lefse, I'll reconsider my stance that this is a self-evidently good idea. Strip-searching EVERYONE simply is not practical, so we need to prioritize our security resources with the best, most intelligent heuristics possible.


4. Send undercover agents into civic and volunteer organizations.

Cool beans. If they want to send a undercover agent to infiltrate Marscon, put the fugger to work. Put him on the ConCom. He'll probably be a better worker than most of the volunteers.

[Eidolon Faer]

For that matter, if Mrs. Relbeek were to change her name to Fatima ibn Ghazi and buy a chador and a 5-gallon pail of tanning cream, do you think we'd get our designated federal agent in time for him to make up Hummus for the consuite?

[Relbeek Einre]

You're funny, Eid.

The little quip about our beloved Con, not the rest of what you said.

[McBash]

Nice post Chants.

McB

[Partha]

When I see a 92-year-old swedish woman attempting to board the plane with a WMD more destructive than Lefse

You say that like there is one.

[SicTimMitchell]

The data is meaningless as an indicator for bias against Islam for two reasons:

1. The questions aren't given. (Sorry, Aquinas, but the yellow box doesn't help. Look at my informal poll, and say 27% of Americans would want me killed. That doesn't count the "IF it would prevent terrorist attacks" part of the question.)

2. There's no control. We need to see what the numbers would be for Muslims vs. all Americans. That's the most egregious bias in the poll.

[SicTimMitchell]

BTW, don't think I'm not guessing there's an elevated level of bias against Muslims since 9/11.

What I object to is the poll itself. I'll quote myself once again here: "Science has no agenda."

[wende darling]

Well, I have a driver's license...

My aunt is a muslim from Turkey who has lived in America for about 12 years now. I fail to see why she should have to jump through any more hoops than someone from England should. Her 15 year old dd also should not have to be put through any of that. But hey, if they want to make sure that everyone who is foreign to this country jump through the same hoops I have absolutely no problem with it but to make them have to do extra things simply because of their religion is stupid, plain and simple. That would be like saying I dye my hair too often so I must be trying to hide something! Profile me.

[Aquinas]

I'm pretty sure the questions are given there. Beyond the first yellow box, tables 1-11. Each question is a statement followed by the option to agree or disagree.

Example: Statment: Mosques should be closely monitored: 34% of republican agree, 24% of indepdents agree and 22% of democrats agree.

[Akhbarali]

Very well said Chants.

Akhbar

[Narith]

Aye Chants, I was refering to the Eugenics movement. I wasn't saying that America was solely responsible. I know there were many social and economic factors that turned pre-war Germany into the state in which it became, however I am saying that Germany used the Eugenics movement from America and the research done into it by America in part to contribute as well to some of the more heinous crimes commited during that war. It could be argued that if America had not embraced and done research into this that perhaps more Jews, Blacks, Gays, Gypsies and so on might be alive today of course it is moot as though it is a given that what America did did play a role we do not know the actual level at which the research and such provided by America attributed to the holocaust, we only know that it did in part.

As for the Majority being biggots look at the last election, you are telling me that the gay marriage vote is not biggoted? You are telling me that from this poll mentioned above does not show the hatred and intolerance and the majority of those polled were for the intolerance? George Bush has publically admitted he hates gays, what is not biggoted about that? I did not say all of America was, just that it is a given that the majority are as proven by the last election and polls, it may not be openly against races anymore, but it is deffinatly openly biggoted against gays and muslims.

As for the highschool I went to public highschool in an upper-middle class town, I graduated about a decade ago and during that time I never even learned the word Eugenics, I had not even heard of it until a few years ago when doing research on the internet. I only have a years worth of college in so they may teach it in higher level courses, but things like these should be taught to our children so they do not repeat the mistakes not just taught to someone with a 4+ year college degree.... The internment camps in America were never taught in highschool either only pearl harbor the atom bomb drops and other things like the social and financial reasons for Germany (with no mention of the word Eugenics or America's involvement), but a decade ago there was never a mention of any crimes against humanity performed by America only those done by other countries. In Japan they teach thier students that AMerica started the war and Pearl Harbor never happened (at least as of a decade ago when I was taught this), this is why Pearl harbor is a major Japanese tourist attraction... I always felt America doing the same to thier population, only teaching that they were the victim and the hero of the war.

[McBash]

Good lord, what a horrible post, Narith. First off, assuming that people who voted for the gay marriage ban are biggoted against gays is simply a leap on your part, and something I happen to know is incorrect.

Next, the leaps you make to assign the holocaust to the US are beyond staggering. Are we all connected somehow in all things? Yes, but thats about the extent of the credibility of your claim.

I have never heard Bush claim to hate gay people, however he has claimed to consider homosexuality a sin, thats not the same thing, I hope you can grasp that.

Did we set up prison camps for innocent people during WW2? hell yes, was it a horrendous thing to do? again, yes, was it something we as a nation are proud of? from my experience the answer is a resounding hell no. Its one of those terrible things from our past that I hope and think we have learned from, tho some of the stories I hear about those 'prisoners' in Iraq make me question this.

Everyone who does not think like you is not a biggot, and infact, your own lack of tolerance for those who dont think like you is its own kind of biggotry.

Dont try to read to much into election results or opinion polls, the answers are never as simple as the questions, and if you lose respect for those with differing opinions, you lose the debate by default.

McB

[Relbeek Einre]

First off, assuming that people who voted for the gay marriage ban are biggoted against gays is simply a leap on your part, and something I happen to know is incorrect.

I would say that if you vote for the gay marriage ban, you're bigoted against gays by definition - unless you have some odd reason for voting for it along the lines of "I think it's wrong, but I'm voting for it anyway because of X."

It's not the same intensity of bigotry such as that Matthew Shepard faced, but it's still bigotry.

[Klast Brell]

http://www.comm.cornell.edu/msrg/report1b.pdf

Part 2 of the report for those of you that are curious.

[Klast Brell]

BTW Tim.
I also worked in survey research for several years. One thing you may have noticed is the pains that academic surveys take to remove any potential bias from the questions.

Now that you can read the text of the actual questions do you still think they were leading the respondent?

[Cartumandua]

We locked people up on WWII who were innocent because the majority were frightened.

I think if we were equally frightened today, we'd do it again in a heartbeat.

Perhaps I'm just a cynic, but I think lots of americans think civil rights are what they, personally, are allowed to do, and don't give a damn about others or their rights.

While it's a couple of years out of date, I just googled a '99 poll that indicated that 1 in 4 wanted an alabama law against interracial marriages to stay on the books. another 10% were undecided. I find that appalling, and entirely typical. I suspect the numbers would be somewhat better today, but still shockingly large.

I don't believe Americans have learned the lessons of the internment camps, nor have most really embraced the sentiments of the founding fathers about "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" if somebody else's pursuit offends or frightens you (while not actually threatening you.)

So I don't find this poll surprising, because I don't think we've "become" this way. I think we always have been this way.

[vaulos]

It seems to me that we HAVE come a long way. In WW1, many German-Americans were linched. In WW2, many Japanese-Americans were interned. In Iraq 2, we have only interned a handful. That seems like progress to me. Sure, we aren't where we want to be, but we must remember that civilizations move forward generation by generation. They do not move quickly.

[SicTimMitchell]

Of course, Klast.

Look and you'll notice that more are for forbidding the media to be critical than are for any of the restrictions on Muslims.

And I still don't see the actual phrasing of the questions anywhere. Now look at the choices listed. Negative outcomes for Muslims strongly outweigh positive outcomes, yet individually the answers are unfavorable to about 70% of Americans polled. You must be familiar with the concept of push polling, which this comes close to.

"Do you think that negroes are:

1. Lazy
2. Shiftless
3. Violent
4. Cool or
5. Rapists"

And I also worked specifically in the world of academic surveys for the University of Minnesota. The political pollsters I worked for were more scrupulous in every way towards their data and means of collecting it.