Re: Biological Reductionism/Ideology

Thank you, Alan, for your most generous remarks.  Thank you also 
for your postings.  TKGanesh.

From:                   "Alan Spector" <spectors@netnitco.net>
To:                     "Trich Ganesh" <TGanesh@southampton.liu.edu>
Copies to:              "WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK" <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
Subject:                Re: Biological Reductionism/Ideology
Date sent:              Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:39:21 -0600

I would like to thank Trich Ganesh for the excellent comments/critique of my 
earlier, short comment. I agree wholeheartedly that it was not "ideology" or 
"psychology" that created the various fascisms and genocides of the 1930's, but 
rather that it was fundamentally a major crisis of capitalism 
that could only be solved by:

1) the destruction of major means of production as Marx said (no, I don't mean 
that this was all planned in advance by the capitalists to destroy the means of 
p
roduction to ease their crisis, but these kinds of massive wars have the effect 
of destroying those means of production until the crisis 
is eased)

and, as a related point,

2) the elimination, destruction of what Hitler called the "useless eaters", who 
were a dangerous potential source of rebellion and in any case, were "using up" 
resources that the Nazis needed to "pay off" those who were loyal to them.  
This is going on today, in a more diffuse but just as deadly 
way, with the massive destruction of human life in the so-called "Third World", 
especially Africa and the Indian subcontinent, as well as in parts of Eastern 
Europe. One could argue that the mass incarceration of working class youth in 
the U.S. is an aspect of this, although much less intense.

What was my point about ideology, then?

Simply that the existence of the various (often contradictory) aspects of this 
fascist ideology, in
cluding especially the racism, did help win various segments to support, or at 
least tolerate the d
estruction of their working class sisters and brothers. In that sense, the 
ideology can be very imp
ortant, in fact, decisive in certain circumstances.  My point was in response 
to someone who had em
phasized the "practical application" of biological determinism. I was simply 
arguing that while the
 experiments that the Nazis did killed thousands, it was their ability to 
convince many Germans and
 Central & Eastern Europeans to support the racist ideology that help 
strengthen the Nazi regime, a
nd therefore, probably helped kill millions. The ideology of bio-determinist 
racism was even more d
eadly than the actual experiments which were based on it. Without the support 
given by the widespre
ad a

But Trich's point is extremely important. It is always necessary to examine 
just what those "critic
al points" are, and in the case of Nazi Germany, it has to be discussed in the 
context of the crisi
s of capitalism. Otherwise, we end up with these silly psychological 
reductionist theories about ho
w "Hitler (supposedly) hypnotized a whole nation."   

Thanks again for the clarification,

Alan Spector

P.S. -- A controversial but useful (and little known) book on this is Dutt 
"Fascism and Social Revo
lution", which represented major parts of the line of the Third International 
until it was supplant
ed by the softer theories of Dimitrov.  That book, and other hard to find books 
can often be found 
at addall.com (no commercial here, just some info....)

===========================================




2)the 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Trich Ganesh 
  To: Alan Spector 
  Cc: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 5:58 PM
  Subject: Re: Biological Reductionism/Ideology


  Alan, your message is perhaps a little cryptic. I am not sure what is "bad 
ideology" (as distinct
 I suppose from "good" ideology). Perhaps you may want to clarify. 

  Regarding the Nazi genocides - of Jews, of Gypsies, of homosexuals, and the 
systematic eliminatio
n of all communist opposition to the regime - I think it had more to do with 
the effects of the con
crete experience of the crisis of capitalism, the tearing of the social fabric 
through the effects 
of unfettered free enterprise.... Fascism and Nazism were differential 
responses - with different s
pecificities in Italy and Germany - taken by the 'self-protecting society' to 
the utopian logic of 
a seemingly unstoppable 'self- regulating market' (to use Polanyi's concepts). 
Something surely sim
ilar - despite its specific differences - took place in Rwanda (cf. Mamdani's 
attempts to understan
d those 'massacres'), as well as in India (the communal violencia of the the 
1990s in particular). 
One may extend the similarity to the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, that we 
read about so much. O
ne m

  I apologize for this lengthy response. My shorter response would have been 
that perhaps by 'bad i
deology' you refer to the working of Zweckrationalitat in the context of the 
Nazi genocides.

  In another sense I think the pointer you make to ideology is correct, but 
perhaps for different r
easons. Ideology is effective, that is say, ideology has material effects, but 
its effectivity is t
o be 'measured' in relation to the ways in which it helps reproduce the 
conditions and relations of
 production necessary for the endless accumulation of capital. What if all of 
us are always "in" id
eology (as Althusser argued)? What implications does this have for the 
worldwide struggle? 

  Apologies again for the length of this response. TKG.


  From: "Alan Spector" <spectors@netnitco.net>
  Copies to: "WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK" <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
  Subject: Re: S J Gould on new genome findings 
  Date sent: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:46:55 -0600

  The Nazis attempted to carry out their biological reductionist theories, and
  thousands of people died in medical experiments and forced breeding placed.

  But I would argue that more people were killed as a result of the "bad
  ideology" of the Nazis than from those gruesome, inhuman experiments. It was
  the ideology that justified not only those experiments, but much of the war
  effort that killed tens of millions.


  Alan Spector

  ========================================
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Richard N Hutchinson" <rhutchin@U.Arizona.EDU>
  To: "Boris Stremlin" <bc70219@binghamton.edu>
  Cc: "WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK" <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
  Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 9:40 PM
  Subject: Re: S J Gould on new genome findings


  > Boris-
  >
  > Perhaps my message was too condensed.
  >
  > My point is that if Gould is right, we have nothing to fear from genetic
  > engineering. Personally, I'm still very worried about what it might lead
  > to -- I'm afraid the reductionist biology agenda might be much more
  > dangerous than simply a bad ideology.
  >
  > RH
  >
  >
  > On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Boris Stremlin wrote:
  >
  > > On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Richard N Hutchinson wrote:
  > >
  > > > I only hope Gould is right, but unfortunately capitalism is pouring
  > > > billions into the search for traits and behaviors encoded in genes,
  and
  > > > the reductionist approach may bear ominous fruit...
  > >
  > > Three quick points -
  > >
  > > 1) The finding that the number of genes is approximately 1/4 to 1/5 the
  > > size previously estimated is not Gould's, but that of the "reductionist
  > > establishment"; he is merely commenting on its obvious significance.
  > >
  > > 2) the fact that reductionism may bear ominous fruit in some cases is no
  > > reason to accept a reductionist world-view.
  > >
  > > 3) "capitalism" has also poured billions into neo-classical economics,
  to
  > > ominous ends in some circumstances.
  > >
  > > --
  > > Boris Stremlin
  > > bc70219@binghamton.edu
  > >
  > >
  >