Count yourself lucky dear.
A heavily pregnant woman and her fiance have gone on the run after social workers threatened to take away their baby at birth.
Kerry Robertson, 17, and Mark McDougall, 25, had been told that she was not bright enough to raise their child and that they would have to give him up.
It\’s not all that long ago that the caring sharing lefties would have happily sterilised you rather than allow you to reproduce.
Leftism is a disease. It gave us Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot. All the evidence is there that life under Socialism is likely to be a lot worse than having a mother who is slightly dim. Quite frankly, a sizeable fraction of the Gramscian left need to suffer a worse fate than excoriation in the Daily Mail. They need killing, and brutally. When the Leftist political class has manoeuvred itself into a position where it deems itself fit to decide upon the a priori fitness of people to have children, it needs winkling out with gunfire and high explosives. I’m quite serious. This is modern-day eugenics, and eugenics has always been a project of the Left. I would absolutely like to see every single agent of the State involved in this affair shot out of hand. With messy rifle shots to the brain-pan into the bargain.
Is there a horror that a parent can imagine that is worse than the loss of a child? If a baby is taken by disease or accident, then perhaps – perhaps – one can learn to live with the grief, although God knows how. But if the child is robbed from you by the stroke of a bureaucrat’s pen, how the hell do you come to terms with it? And when, at long last, your innocence is proved,or demonstrated (as in the Cleveland and Orkney abuse trials), but the courts rule it would be too disruptive to reunite the children with you, their parent, what do you do? I think I’d go insane.
There should have been an italic marker to reiterate Tim’s headline: this is modern-day eugenics…
Tim, add a preview button, for God’s sake.
This is, of course, the same couple whom a registrar refused to marry on the advice of the social workers…
They aren’t called the SS for nothing.
If she manages to evade capture then surely she will have proven that she is intelligent enough or at least more intelligent than the social workers.
Socialists never change their spots
beautiful. for no particular reason you attach the idea of sterilizing people to the left wing, and then your coterie of mentally impaired commentators have the prompt they need to speake their branes
here’s somebody suggesting sterilization. Which side of the political divide to you think he’s on? Take a look at his blog roll. Hmm, and who’s this famous pinko?
Meanwhile, if we were to conduct a survey asking the British public whether they are in favour of sterilizing the underclasses and whether they identify as right wing or left wing, what do you think the results would look like? Yeah, I can really see the Guardian coming out in favour of it.
This historian describes how Eugenics found support across the spectrum, saying radical leftists were “at least as likely” to support it as right wingers.
The character of interest in Eugenics in Britain certainly has a left wing slant .There can be few more influential reports than the Beveridge report for example
Years earlier Beveridge had written a paper called “The Problem of the Unemployed,” with a solution. Men who can’t take their place in industry should be recognized as unemployable, and should be maintained as “the acknowl-edged dependents of the State.” But the price for government support was “complete and permanent loss of all citizen rights ã including not only the franchise but civil freedom and fatherhood.” In other words, if you couldn’t work, the government would feed you, but would not allow you to have children
This was no longer explicit n by the time of the time of the report but it does give a glimpse at the arrogant cast of mind required for the ordering of people according to scientific nostrums whether they like them or not . It was all very modern once the consideration of population shows that the old assumptions about the rights of eliteswere still present
The enthusiasm of the Fabian society for eugenics is well documented and they were highly influential in real Policy that had a decided effect in Australia .
Marxism remember pretended to be a scientific view of society and believing themselves scientific and modern , the left have always been much more gripped by the scientific orthodoxies of the time . Eugenic thought was one such orthodoxy , Environmentalism is a contemporary example . Left wing Political intellectuals have also always been against spiritual or religious understanding of man and his conditions believing them to be tricks ( Here they are often in direct conflict with left wing voters ) . This is why abortion for them is an easy matter , the foetus , after all , is incapable of life alone , or rational thought , why not kill it , and then why not kill some more inconvenient people or their unborn children ,its so rational. so scientific .
I wonder if a rationalist like Mr. Worstall might have been attracted by the delightful logic or eugenics when it was all the rage , I wonder where he stands on abortion and why ?
“beautiful. for no particular reason you attach the idea of sterilizing people to the left wing…”
For ‘no particular reason’? Really?
The people you highlight, Luis, talk about it. The socialist parties of Scandinavia carried it out as part of policy…
Well done Julia , it seems we “mentally impaired commentators ” may be allowed to live love and multiply after all. I am not sure I see any need for Luis Enrique genes to be a permanent part of the picture though.
I know that Julia. I think you are a little confused. I’m arguing that support for sterilization isn’t an especially left wing thing. This means I think it has found support on both the left and the right. I think there’s no particularly reason to pin support for sterilization on left. This argument is no more undermined by you pointing out some lefties doing it that it would be by somebody pointing out some righties doing it….. such as a certain famous right wing movement the Scandinavian policies are often compared to.
Socialists logically have to approve of eugenics – else no welfare state of the sort they want can long be sustainable. An earlier generation of socialists was at least capable of intellectual honesty on the subject.
This post is equivalent to one of those lame “aren’t right wingers horrible” posts you get on Liberal Conspiracy, and the clapping seals here have their equivalents over there too. Tim should be familiar with them.
I’m arguing that support for sterilization isn’t an especially left wing thing. This means I think it has found support on both the left and the right. I think there’s no particularly reason to pin support for sterilization on left
Its influence on Fabians and Beveridge are clear , where is your Conservative example ? Churchills remarks have nothing to do with it .
It is of piece with left wing contempt for private space and their supposedly scientific utopian beliefs .
If that is the case you are making you have made it very badly . The eugenic reasoning is that for the good of society one individual must suffer.
That logic can only apppeal to a collectivist and has done .
Tim is right to see its shadow in the presumption social workers but the attempt to replace parents with the state across a range of policies has the arrogant mind -set behind it .
Leftism did not give us Hitler. The right–not the left–gave the world eugenics, David. Hitler was not a leftist. He’s the one elected by the German people to combat leftism and shoot all the Jews–that’s why Hitler invaded the Soviet Union and killed as many Jews as he could along the way. He would not have like Mao very much at all.
A ‘totalitarian’ (that’s the word you’re searching for, David) state may lean left or right, but it always leans on the people.
Geesh.
The UK needs to stop giving local political entities the power of life and death and to adopt a genuine Bill of Rights–to protect everyone from the all-powerful and omnipresent “village council.” Apparently, it also needs to learn a thing or two about totalitarianism and fascism–you’ve a heavy dose of both.
“This argument is no more undermined by you pointing out some lefties doing it that it would be by somebody pointing out some righties doing it….. such as a certain famous right wing movement the Scandinavian policies are often compared to.”
Firstly, you have to define “left” and “right”. As a single axis, it can only be defined by a single measure. What measure do you use to define that?
MrsBud is a social worker. In the past, when there have been stories of children being taken away from couples and adopted out, and the courts refusing to return the children when they’re found not guilty of whatever imagined offense they were accused of, I’ve said to her, if it happened to you, why wouldn’t you kill everyone involved, social workers, judge, etc., what would be left when the state has stolen everything from you? Her response is basically to agree.
As parents, and parents who grieved the loss of a baby, we can just begin to understand the absolute emptiness and devestation one would have if the state stole your children, leaving you with an empty home and empty life, and the knowledge that your children were being brought up by others.
I don’t believe in the death penalty, but I fully understand why those emotionally involved might want to revenge heinous crimes against themselves, and would not condemn them for doing so.
“Leftism did not give us Hitler. The right–not the left–gave the world eugenics, David. Hitler was not a leftist. He’s the one elected by the German people to combat leftism…”
Oh don’t be a fucking idiot (I’ll let the ‘elected by the people’ bit slide). Fascism is, under any reasonable interpretation of the case, an explicitly Leftist doctrine. This is scarcely a heterodox reading – it has a long and distinguished pedigree from Friedrich Hayek to Jonah Goldberg. All of the various breeds of totalitarianism that the 20th Century saw were an efflorescence of the Left. I’m a pretty extreme libertarian, and therefore cannot be pigeonholed on a single Left-Right axis. But I know Leftism when I see it, and to characterise eugenics as anything other is to betray a grossly ignorant ahistoricity in one’s writing. It might be a truism to point out that the word Nazi derives itself from National Socialist, but truisms have the uncomfortable property of being true.
And DocBud, my profound sympathies. I don’t have children, yet, but my mind reels at what you must have gone through. To lose a child is the ultimate horror, I imagine, but to lose one preventably and at the behest of the State is beyond comprehension.
Taking children into care is about the most abusive thing that can be done to them. I once saw a parent misuse a child when she was in a towering rage; I thought about informing the authorities but decided not to so so because it seemed more likely the child would suffer at the hands of the SS than at the hands of the parent.
See WinstonSmith33 for abundant evidence on this point.
This couple are being treated like serfs. I can’t help but wonder whether someone in that social services department hasn’t just got it in for them. And the secrecy around our family courts doesn’t give us any basis of confidence that this is above board.
Whole thing stinks.
Newmania – “In other words, if you couldn’t work, the government would feed you, but would not allow you to have children”
Except Beveridge was not really a Leftist but a Liberal. Mind you, this is not just a policy of the Left. I believe the Libertarian-ish society of Iceland required people to support the indigent but at the price of castration. So maybe it is a Scandinavian thing not a Social Democrat thing.
Thanks, David. Interestingly, you can never look back and wish that things might have been different. We had another child a little over a year later, and we most certainly would not have done so if little Mark had survived. That child has grown up into a lovely young lady who has given us our first beautiful grandchild. But yes, 22 years down the track, every now and then I dwell on it have a tear or two.
Anyhow, I discussed the story with MrsBud, she was horrified and stated that it is wrong on so many levels but particularly made Brian’s point that the child is likely to suffer far more harm being taken from its family than being left with the family who can be helped as they require.
One of the major differences between social workers is when they enter the profession. MrsBud only studied in her 40s, after a lifetime of bringing up four children, running a couple of businesses and generally experiencing life. My mother did the same. In these circumstances you can look at the theories in the context of real life and recognise utter bollocks when it is taught to you.
However, if you study straight after school, you tend to believe everything you are taught. One of those things you are taught is that people can be sorted into boxes and that simple tick boxes enable you to diagnose mental problems.
To MrsBud and I, the range of normal behaviours is vast, but for those with the tick box training there is a sharp distinction between those who are deemed to be normal and those who are cursed as abnormal. I remember one such case where the father was considered to have sociopathic tendencies because he resented the threats of the state to take his baby away. MrsBud commented on that occasion that she took it as a positive that the father cared so.
Fascism is, under any reasonable interpretation of the case, an explicitly Leftist doctrine.
I wish I had a fiver for every time I’ve been howled down for suggesting that. Well said. An identifying characteristic of socialism is that a competing brand can’t be tolerated. One of the great propaganda victories of Marxist-Leninist socialists is persuading the world that Nazism was a right-wing political system.
The same goes for the BNP – socialist to the core. Just read their manifesto and economic beliefs – state control of everything. Madder than a box of chimps on PCP.
As for compulsory sterilisation, let’s not overlook the Canadians and their inglorious efforts into the 80’s.
Eugenics is a fine idea- if you believe in angels. We know that it is posible for creatures both cleverer than the cleverest cow and working for many cow generations to produce a better breed of cow. All we need to make eugenics work is some creatures cleverer than the cleverest human, and working for many human generations, and it can be done.
As I said it requires Angels.
Of course if where this was done with cows, it produced cows that were better for humans, I doubt the bovine community has benefited one iota. So we need angels dedicated to the benefit of mankind.
I don’t believe there are any, and I seriously doubt we could verify there good intentions- being cleverer than us they could easily fool us.
If we were to find such a one we could certainly find better employment for it than as a social worker- by the way does anyone think that social workers salary is adequate to attract angels?
All those supporting authoritarian regimes be that the divine right of kings or the supreme soviet are basically showing a belief in angels. I do note however that producing a new type of man was/is part of the communist program.
And I do believe that when a party calls itself socialist it means to attract socialists to join it- the name would repel anyone else- so it must become socialist as more and more socialists join it
the bovine community has benefited one iota
I expect the vulnerable members of the bovine community are very grateful that inappropriate bovine behaviour has been bred out.
Except Beveridge was not really a Leftist but a Liberal.
He was ‘New Liberal’ not a Gladstonian Liberal and that means you have accepted the lefts version of freedom which is that control can allow “Positive freedoms ” like the freedom not to be poor …etc. This sophistry has allowed the repulsive Liberals to face in both directions with a fig leaf of consistency ever since but if we call him a socialist we will make life easier.
On deciding whether this or that is leftwing or right wing I would make the point that whilst it reasonable to locate left wing politics by their proximity to Marxist derived ideas the forces of Conservatism have wished to retain a wide variety of societies . Muslims , Kremlin power brokers ,and American Indians can all be called conservative and have been .Iti s in the Nature of Conservatism to be particular it is in the nature if utopians to impose general solutions on them , like eugenics.
This makes it peculiarly difficult to locate right wing politics according to international and universal schemes . Fascism ,has played almost no part in British politics. In British context then I think we can safely say Eugenics has been adopted by the left as part of their scientific presumption , willingness to sacrifice means for ends ,relative disinterest in religious values and moral corruption …well just evil really
So let the last word be that Eugenics is left wing
Eugenics is but one tool available to us.
There are cases where timely sterilisation prevents a bigger disaster(and it would be immoral not to do so), and of course cases where it is just immoral and wrong.
I think the problem is that no-one applies common sense and compassion to problems anymore — hence we are demanding all those one-size-fits-all solutions because we reckon that people are too stupid to think for themselves, and by now this has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I wish there was a place where one could donate funds to that persecuted couple btw…!
Addendum:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18098-murderer-with-aggression-genes-gets-sentence-cut.html
(…)
Taking children into care is about the most abusive thing that can be done to them
I’ve bookmarked this thread to quote next time there’s another Baby P scandal, when the usual suspects are blaming social workers for failing to intervene.
“I’ve bookmarked this thread to quote next time there’s another Baby P scandal, when the usual suspects are blaming social workers for failing to intervene.”
Indeed, because the logical response to a failure to save a boy who received frequent contact with state services and was tortured to death over a period of months by his mother’s boyfriend is to remove children at birth from their parents.
That makes sense.