| |
|
| |
|
| |
NEWS &
EVENTS |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
FEATURES |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ARE
INDIANS CHILDREN OF A “LESSER”
MONKEY?
-
Philip P. Eapen |
 |
|
Author's webpage:
http://philip.eapen.googlepages.com
Racial Undercurrents of
the
Population Control Movement
|
|
|
If I should assert that the population
control movement initiated by the West has racial
underpinnings, it might sound preposterous at first
reading. However, a few promoters of “population
control” are candid about this dark underside of their
movement! Instead of expressing a general concern about
global human population growth, lobbyists moan about the
rise in “third world” populations. Population growth
rates in the third world are historically unprecedented”
(Lappé and Schurmann, Taking Population Seriously, 1989,
1.) Lappé and Schurman buttress their point using graphs
that compare the population growth in the developed West
with that of the developing countries in the Majority
World. What might be the reasons behind this undue
concern about the population growth in the Majority
World? I remain unconvinced about any philanthropic
explanation that might be put forward. Such a
distressing concern about “third world” population swell
is best understood from a strategic military or economic
point of view. If ever there will be a global democracy,
the Majority World will stand to benefit! That could be
a major cause of concern for the rich First World.
What makes the picture murkier is their firm belief in
the theory of evolution. (An evaluation of the theory of
evolution is beyond the scope of this work. I wish to
cite a necessarily corollary of this theory the genetic
disunity of humans.) Traditionally, evangelical
Christians have believed that all humans are children of
an original human coupleAdam and Eve. The
Judeo-Christian view is expressed in St Paul's words:
“And he made from one every nation of men to live on all
the face of the earth, having determined allotted
periods and the boundaries of their habitation ...” Acts
17:26 RSV. The different races that we see are
by-products of geographical separation of various human
families and the resultant genetic isolation from each
other.
Evolutionists, unlike these Christians, do not believe
that the all humans came from one human couple; in other
words, they do not believe in the genetic unity of the
global human community. They believe that different
human races have different evolutionary histories
(William P. Andrews, “Facing the Malthusian Threat,”
121.) Even “evangelical” Christians such as Jeeves and
Berry, who bend backwards to reconcile their allegiance
to the Bible with their faith in the theory of
evolution, reach a similar conclusion. (Malcolm A.
Jeeves and R. J. Berry, Science, Life and Christian
Belief, A Survey and Assessment (Leicester: Apollos,
1998), 111-12.) In their own words, “A Neolithic Adam
and Eve could not be the physical ancestors to the whole
human species. ... The Bible insists on the spiritual
unity of the human race (Acts 17:26; Romans 5:12-14).
This does not necessarily mean a genetic unity.” In
other words, evolutionists believe that humans in Europe
came from a species of monkey while humans in other
parts of the world came from various other monkeys! It
is not clear how these Christian scientists classify
humans of diverse genetic origins as one species called
homo sapiens on the basis of some nebulous “spiritual
unity.” The necessary corollary of this viewpoint is the
fundamental disunity of global humanity. Thus, the
theory of evolution provides the “superior” races a
justification for the practice of racial discrimination,
inter-racial competitions, and for the classification of
global humanity into different sub-species.
With such an evolutionary under-standing of different
human races, it is not surprising that Andrews expresses
an alarm at the rising population of Asians/Africans in
the following words: But the reality as provided to us
by evolution is a variety of different populations, some
of which are still segregated into more or less
homogeneous political states, and others mixed together
in multi-racial political units. Consider a multi-racial
state made up of blues and reds. Suppose that blues were
reproducing faster than the reds, and the reds, to
control excessive growth decided to restrict their own
reproduction rate. This would help ameliorate the
problem for a while, but only until, at long last, there
were no more reds, only blues. (William P. Andrews,
“Facing the Malthusian Threat,” p. 112)
The author's careful choice of non-human colours such as
“red” and “blue” to represent people of different human
races does not help to make this extremely racist
statement sound a little less weird. The benevolent
“reds” in the above illustration who “restrict their own
reproduction rate” in the interest of global humanity
clearly represents the developed West! However, voicing
concern about Asian “population explosion” betrays a
lack of such benevolence in real life.
Andrews is also desperate because the “blues” will not
learn “restraint” until it is too late (Ibid). In a
democratic multiracial country, Andrew moans, there is
no way to “legislate parity of ethnic reproduction” due
to a hurdle called “freedom of reproductive choice.” It
is clear that Andrews, given a choice, would scrap this
offending “freedom of reproductive choice” from civil
societies!
Racial undercurrents influenced vile practices such as
the dumping of banned contraceptives on non-Caucasian
women. For instance, Depo-provera, a hazardous
contraceptive that was banned by the Federal Drug
Authority of the USA, was used by the Indian Health
Service agency to temporarily sterilise American Indian
women for three to six months (Associated Press, “Indian
Health Services Dispenses Banned Contraceptive Drug to
35,” New York Times 17 August 1987). Philippino women
were not educated about the adverse effects of this
dangerous drug. (Frances Moore Lappé and Rachel Schurman,
Taking Population Seriously, 45.) Lappe and Schurman
also note that black women in South Africa were
selectively subjected to sterilisation by Depo-Provera,
often without their consent or knowledge.
The documentary La Operación exposed the scandalous
sterilisation unleashed in Puerto Rico in the 1950s.
(Ana Maria Garcia, prod./dir., La Operacion, New York:
The Cinema Guild, 1982) More than a third of Puerto
Rican women were encouraged to undergo a fashionable
operationan irreversible sterilising procedure which the
perpetrators never explained to them. Some women were
sterilised while under anesthesia for another operation!
(Ibid). The same film documents how, in the 1960s,
Puerto Rican women were used as guinea pigs to test the
contraceptive pill.
|
|
|
|
|
This page
is updated on Jan 04, 2010 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
