Monday, March 16, 2009

HST 498 - Essay 6 - Newhard

Since the birth of civilization, no age has broken with tradition more radically or more self-consciously than the twentieth century. In part, the modernist break with the past represents the willful rejection of former values but it also registers the revolutionary effects of science on all aspects of life. Unfortunately, a new reason for racism was born from the new scientific “knowledge” obtained during this century. There are two relatively clear reasons for the steadfast insistence on subjugating the observed African to a simplified stereotypical image of “other”. The first concerns the nature of we/they relationships. The relationship itself requires that we identify the characteristics that distinguish us from them. The second factor, that influenced twentieth century Europeans, is the failure to distinguish between biological and cultural classifications. Twentieth century Europeans embraced a new theory called eugenics which was the belief that biology could determine the superiority and inferiority of different racial and social groups. In other words, Eugenics was scientific racism. Eugenics used scientific findings and methods to validate racist attitudes. This theory was very popular in England and Germany during the early twentieth century due to both countries desire for domination.
In England, the main reason behind the segregation and discrimination of Africans was due to tension within the middle class. Stone wrote, “the middle class in Britain felt trapped between a still dominant old elite and an emerging working class clamoring for rights.”(Stone 2) This in turn created a need to prove English middle-class superiority and the opportunity was provided by the theory of Eugenics and the presence of Africans. Europeans believed that Africans were not hard working, poor, and unintelligent. In addition, it was believed that Africans were barbaric creatures who killed woman after intercourse (Bush 210). These factors allowed Europeans to feel superior to Africans but at the same time elevated fears that Africans posed a threat to the European way of life. Therefore, the German’s desire for preservation of racial purity was justified.
Germany took a different approach to the implementation of the theory of Eugenics. In Germany at this time, “pure” German blood was the most important and powerful weapon Germany had. Therefore, any tainting of German blood would be catastrophic. The fear of African contamination also stemmed from the presence of French African soldiers in Germany after the Vienna conference. German people began to fear and despise African people fro their intrusion of Germany. In addition, both Germans and British believed that the interbreeding of Africans with their superior race would cause a decline in their superiority and sought out to inhibit reproduction between Europeans and Africans. This in turn resulted in the belief of European superiority and African inferiority. Africans were thought of as a different species of being. Africans were of a race unworthy and unable to join European culture. They were therefore cast out as “others”.

1 comment:

  1. I agree with your assertion that Eugenics played a major role in justifying racism in Europe. This movement used science to help define the African as something “other.” However, I did not think that you fully explained how Europe portrayed the Africans as something other during this time. I think that your argument would have been better if you clearly explained the perception of black culture in Europe.

    I think that your argument was well supported using various evidence from the readings. I also focused heavily on the Eugenics movement in Great Britain and the occupation of Germany by foreign soldiers. I just think that your argument could have been a little bit clear. I did not fully understood what you meant by the relationships between the races being a reason for the subjugation of the African.

    Overall, the essay was well supported, but the argument could have been better organized. I think that you had many great ideas, but I just could not understand how they all fit with your argument.

    ReplyDelete