It is reported that Nicholas Sarkozy has said “the only way to stop the violence and hatred of a multicultural society is through the interbreeding between the races”. If he said that, (and many others have said that) a case can be made that he is (and they are) eugenicists, perhaps (as might be later demonstrated) more despicable than that other sociology amateur and pseudo-scientist, Adolf Hitler.
Since the topic is so emotive and, since definitions vary, to develop the rationale in relation to Sarkozy’s alleged philosophy, it might be wise to start with a relatively neutral consideration of eugenics. Therefore a summary from Wikipedia, unabridged (in small case below), has been used as the foundation text upon which to base this argument:
As a social movement, eugenics reached its height of popularity in the early decades of the 20th century. By the end of World War II eugenics had been largely abandoned. Although current trends in genetics have raised questions amongst critical academics concerning parallels between pre-war attitudes about eugenics and current "utilitarian" and social theories allegedly related to Darwinism, they are, in fact, only superficially related and somewhat contradictory to one another. At its pre-war height, the movement often pursued pseudoscientific notions of racial supremacy and purity.
Sarkozy’s philosophy is that a new, multiply inbred race, the mulatto, will be an improvement upon the variety of races which have existed since pre-history. He claims that it will be a “better” because he speculates - with a naivety only paralleled by Hitler and his cronies - that such a uniform race will be less violent and less hating. Has he any basis whatever for this fantastic belief? Are there any precedents, or any genetic science to support this? There is not. It is entirely a concocted, thumb-suck pseudo-science. Sarkozy claims to have a formula by which he will trump the enormous complexities of human diversity, and believes that he is able to upstage a construct of biology ordained by thousands and thousands of years of successful evolution. Before the barracking starts, it has been successful because humankind has survived, the sine qua non of all debate.
Eugenics was practiced around the world and was promoted by governments, and influential individuals and institutions.
Was practiced? – Is practiced now by self opinionated politicians, with unjustified delusions of a grandiose capability, which they inflict upon hundreds of millions of people, afflicting numbers which historically has never been even remotely approached by the most extreme of megalomaniacal tyrants.
Its advocates regarded it as a social philosophy for the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of certain people and traits, and the reduction of reproduction of other people and traits.Does this make my point that Sarkozy is an eugenicist?
Today it is widely regarded as a brutal movement which inflicted massive human rights violations on millions of people.
Agreed. The destruction of race, and the language and cultural uniqueness which these possess, will deprive millions of their, not inconsequential, senses of identity, of belonging, of community and uniqueness.
The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups -- such as the Roma and Jews -- as "degenerate" or "unfit"; the segregation or institutionalisation of such individuals and groups, their sterilization, euthanasia, and in the extreme case of Nazi Germany, their mass extermination.
The “entire racial group” now in question is the white, western European, already an extreme minority (about 8% of the world’s population), and already threatened with extinction. Hitler aimed to exterminate individuals, Sarkozy aims to exterminate an entire race.
The practices engaged in by eugenicists involving violations of privacy, attacks on reputation, violations of the right to life, to found a family, to freedom from discrimination are all today classified as violations of human rights.The right to found a family is also the right to construct a family with the genetic, social and cultural identity of the parents. To prevent this is to prevent the entrenched imperative of many humans – a crass violation of rights. This philosophy imposes a discrimination upon Europeans.
Are we expected to believe that the untrained amateur, Sarkozy, has this super-human insight, this capacity beyond the realm of God to predict an outcome and to manipulate an entire human race into oblivion on the basis that he believe he can engineer “improvements” to human behaviour? Who is he to ordain genocide?
The practice of negative racial aspects of eugenics, after World War II, fell within the definition of the new international crime of genocide, set out in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Many European governments, this last century, have jeopardized their populations’ social and cultural integrity, primarily to keep themselves, as individual politicians, in power. To do this they mis-used propaganda, abused legislation and suppressed free-speech on vast numbers of people, far exceeded those numbers controlled by the Nazi government.
The modern field and term were first formulated by Sir Francis Galton in 1883, drawing on the recent work of his half-cousin Charles Darwin. At its peak of popularity eugenics was supported by prominent people, including Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, H. G. Wells, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Emile Zola, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Linus Pauling  and Sidney Webb. Its most infamous proponent and practitioner was, however, Adolf Hitler who praised and incorporated eugenic ideas in Mein Kampf and emulated Eugenic legislation for the sterilization of "defectives" that had been pioneered in the United States.
G. K. Chesterton was an early critic of the philosophy of eugenics, expressing this opinion in his book, Eugenics and Other Evils. Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities, and received funding from many sources. Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenicists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States. Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in a variety of other countries, including Belgium, Brazil, Canada, and Sweden, among others. The scientific reputation of eugenics started to decline in the 1930s, a time when Ernst Rüdin used eugenics as a justification for the racial policies of Nazi Germany, and when proponents of eugenics among scientists and thinkers prompted a backlash in the public. Nevertheless, In Sweden the eugenics program continued until 1975.
Since the postwar period, both the public and the scientific communities have associated eugenics with Nazi abuses, such as enforced racial hygiene, human experimentation, and the extermination of "undesired" population groups. However, developments in genetic, genomic, and reproductive technologies at the end of the 20th century have raised many new questions and concerns about what exactly constitutes the meaning of eugenics and what its ethical and moral status is in the modern era.
Now realizing the magnitude and irreversibility of their catastrophic errors these politicians are trying to find a salvation in ways that have all the stains of blind ineptitude driven by panic, fear and, mainly, cowardice.
The Exquisite Cultivar
Experimenting on Humans.
The Spirit Level.