This post deals with the attitude of the extreme right (by which I mean the Fascist and neo-Nazi movements) towards disabled people. Organisations such as the British National Front and the British National Party are best known for their advocacy of racial policies including the repatriation of all non-whites from the UK and for denying that the Nazi holocaust (the murder of approximately six million Jews) took place. Closely aligned with the far right’s conception of creating what they perceive as a better and stronger white race is the concept of eugenics (the idea of using genetic measures to “improve” the population. As pointed out in Wikapeidia, eugenics was not invented by the Nazis, however it was in Nazi Germany that the practice of eugenics took on its most extreme form with the killing and/or sterilisation of countless people with mental or physical disabilities. The Action T-4 Programme was predicated on the idea that the disabled where “useless eaters, life unworthy of life” and that they constituted a drain on the German economy which could not be sustained.
I’ll demonstrate that the BNP, the NF and other similar organisations share their Nazi predecessors eugenic beliefs and that the extreme right poses a threat to people with disabilities.
In an article entitled “Beauty and the Beast”, which can be found on the National Front’s website, Dr Tom Sunic writes “The concept of eugenics is now associated with National Socialism and has come to be understood among the educated classes as the epitome of evil. In fact, however, eugenic measures were a standard family practice from time immemorial among European tribes. Undoubtedly, each family had to be prolific with a multitude of children able to work on the land or to guard the household. This meant allowing and frequently facilitating the death of children who were sickly or had disabilities. … After 1945 everything changed. The whole hell of moralizing and do-good pontificating broke loose. The more degenerate, the more maladaptive and the uglier — the better. The role of the environment became a sacrosanct dogma of liberal and communist world improvers, while blind faith in progress became a shining path for a promiscuous end of history. Especially the German word ‘Rasse,’ which was commonly used in the 1920s, 30s and the early 40’s, came to be highly uncomfortable for postwar German politicians who were themselves to be groomed by the Allies in self-hate and guilt feelings about their race. … Hence the reason that the legacy of National Socialism and thousands of German titles dealing with race, racial hygiene, racial studies, racial mixing, etc., had to disappear from library shelves, only to reappear as a subject of criminal proceedings in modern Germany. The German ruling class today is quick to raise the red flag against scholars who dare to use this word in a normative and value free manner. Shortly after WWII, thousands of books dealing with race and racial differences were burned and destroyed by the Allies. Institutes specializing in racial hygiene, such as Deutsche Gesellschaft für Rassenhygiene or the prestigious Kaiser Wilhelm Institut für Anthropologie, were closed down. Hundreds of European doctors and specialists in genetics and biology — if not spirited out furtively to the USA or the USSR — were hunted down as war criminals, or denounced as proverbial Nazi quacks. (See Manfred Heinemann, Hochschuloffiziere und Wiederaufbau des Hochschulwesens in Westdeutschland,1944–1952. See also Reinhard Grohnert, Die Entnazifizierung in Baden 1945–1949.)”
It is instructive that Dr Sunic fails to condemn the mass killing of people with disabilities by the Nazi regime and that he is so blinkered that he is unable to perceive why decent people now shy away from the ideas propounded by so-called Nazi scholars as regards race and eugenics.
It is noteworthy that the National Front’s website carries material of this nature. Material which insinuates that Hitler got it right when he murdered the disabled. A party which allows such material to appear on it’s site (without comment or comdemnation of any kind being voiced by said organisation) should inspire deep concern in the minds of the disabled. (For Dr Sunic’s article please go to http://www.national-front.org.uk/sunic4.htm).
Again Eddy Morrison (a National Front member) writes as follows “In case of serious mental disorder then eugenically that child is of going to be of little use to the race and probably lead a miserable life.
A mother should choose (oh and father too of course!)
· The whole issue of applying racial eugenics and Social Darwinism, both of which I favour should be studied as to see whether it should become
part of NF policy.
With a National Front government in power of course the WHOLE issue of improving and expanding the size and quality of the race will become official government
The above has chilling echoes of the rhetoric employed by the Nazis to justify their Action T-4 Programme. Again people with disabilities watch out! (For the article please visit http://www.national-front.org.uk/abortion.htm).
Turning to the British National Party, their official line is that the party opposes eugenics. However this is not supported by the statements of prominent BNP members. Following the tragic death of David and Samantha Cameron’s severely disabled son, Ivon the Central London organiser of the BNP wrote as follows “We live in a country today which is unhealthily dominated by an excess
of sentimentality towards the weak and unproductive. No good will come of it”. A clear statement if anyone was ever in any doubt that the BNP would implement a Nazi eugenics programme if they ever obtain power. (for one of the many articles on this issue please go to http://www.racedebate-msf.org/forums/showthread.php?p=11935).
Marshall’s comments are part of a pattern of advocacy of eugenic measures on the part of the BNP. As stated in Searchlight (an anti-fascist magazine), “Marshall’s disturbing and repellent views recall those of Tony Lecomber, who was, until 2008, one of Griffin’s right-hand men. Lecomber proposed a racist
eugenics programme, echoing that of the Nazi murderer Dr Josef Mengele, which advocated a “racially purer” Britain through the sterilisation of the poor,
the sick and the disabled. Lecomber believed, and presumably still does, that the rich are “genetically superior” to ordinary people and that poor people
should not be allowed to have their own children”. (for the article please go to http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=275).
Again anyone who visits the archived site of Spearhead Magazine (a publication owned by the now deceased former leader of the BNP, John Tyndall) will find, in the books section a number of titles advocating the use of eugenics. This fits in with the views expounded, by Tyndall in his book “The Eleventh Hour” in which he supports the implementation of eugenic measures. (for Spearhead’s archived website please visit www.spearhead.com).
(To be continued in a later post).