top of page

Part Four of How Much Are You Worth?: Toward an Economic Theory of Disability

Eugenics: Create Outliers and then Cast them Away





Eugenics


Those who aren’t able to operate well within the construct of society do not have “top” genes."

Upon taking a deeper look at the motivations of society in response to those who are impaired, one can see that the second framework that is tied to unconscious ranking of valuation is the concept of eugenics. This concept states that there is a top human specimen. Supporters believe that some genes are stronger than others. This human operates profitably and richly within the bounds and norms of society. Since they operate well, they are considered to have top genes. Those who are handsome, healthy, fit, and fit into society should continue their genetic line. However, “treating health and vigor as moral virtues for everyone harms people with disabilities and illnesses” (Wendell, 2020). This treatment harms people with disabilities because it classifies them as unfit and demoralized. 

For example, by creating a best of the breed category, eugenics then creates another category; those who are not operating well within the bounds of society. They don’t have good genes.These are people who are not adding profit to society, they’re not fit and they’re not successful. Therefore, those who aren’t able to operate well within the construct of society do not have “top” genes.


Threat to Society


Eugenics then goes on to say that those with “bad” genes pose a threat to the rest of society. “Eugenics sought to improve the body politic and to relieve it of the economic and social burdens of disease and degeneracy" (Rose, 2007). It stated that those who were defective were an active weight on society. That they held society back, posed a burden, and even a threat to the rest of the population. Here we see that eugenics has placed value on human life. The greater the ability to be a productive member of society, the more one was worth. 


Eugenics believed that the genetic line of the defective should be ended. Doctors practiced this through sterilization, abortion, euthanization, or the death penalty. As stated by Nikolas Rose, eugenics practiced “...the prevention of those who are members of defective or inferior sub-populations from reproducing through sterilization or extermination" (Rose, 2007). There is no space for flexibility or inclusion here. Those who are not effectively creating profit and working well within society must die, as stated within the Eugenics movement. 


Exemplary Humans


“The greater the ability to be a productive member of society, the more one was worth.

On the flip side, the genetic line of those with the top genes should be continued and exemplified through artificial insemination and reward systems. This desire is not always overt. It can happen in such delicate ways as “parental desires for a perfect child in an age of manipulated consumerism and reproductive choice” (Rose, 2007). The desire for population purification can happen on the most inherent and unconscious level, as we see with parents. One of the main defining points of rank is one’s health and one’s job. An impaired person faces a bodily barrier which then leads to social, educational, and workplace barriers. If a person is successful, they’re considered a prosperous value creator. Once again, a human’s worth is tied to their work, more specifically tied to how much profit they’re creating. 


We Don't Want to Be Reminded,


In addition to this, much of society doesn’t want to see ill health. It reminds the population of death and pain. Things many don’t want to think about. “Suffering caused by the body, and the inability to control the body, are despised, pitied, and above all, feared. This fear, experienced individually, is also deeply embedded in our culture" (Wendell, 2020). We are taught to fear not having control, and to fear pain. Our culture does not recognize that at some point in everyone’s life, they will be impaired and reliant on others' assistance. So, instead of valuing reciprocity and various body abilities, we turn our cheek, create a divide, and exclude the impaired. 


The danger here is that the population is following a ranking system of and valuation of a human soul. This ranking system tells the population, some people are worth more than others. Those who are worth less, don’t need our attention, effort, money or care. They don’t need to be included. “The public world is the word of strength, the positive (valued) body, performance, and production, the able-bodied youth. Weakness, illness, rest and recovery, pain, death, and the negative (de-valued) body are private, generally hidden, and often neglected. Coming into the public world with illness, pain, or a de-valued body, we encounter resistance to mixing the two worlds; the split is vividly revealed" (Wendell, 2020). Therefore, the public doesn’t want to see illness because it reminds them of their own mortality. 

 

In Conclusion,


If frameworks like this are not changed, those with limited mobility remain unable to participate in life and create profit thereby raising themselves up within this valuation system. Therefore, the structure of the system itself ensures that those with impairments will remain in the category of value takers, burdens on society, and excluded. 


Much of the conversation within the disabled rights community is in regard to changing structures: playgrounds, classrooms, work places, conference rooms, etc. in order to make them more accessible. The first thing that needs to be addressed is the ranking, rating, and valuation system that all are unconsciously participating in. When this is realized, underlying motivations can be changed. When underlying motivations change from work hard profit first to comfort first human life equality, then we will see greater flexibility in public and private spaces since architecture is an extension of the human mindstate.

Comments


bottom of page