Anarchism and Eugenics: A Seeming Paradox (1890-1940)

这项研究旨在考察国际无政府主义劳工运动和国际优生学运动之间的历史重叠。乍一看，这两者似乎是相互排斥的。无政府主义是一种反威权、平等主义的运动，反对国家的权力，质疑包括医疗权威在内的所有形式的权威，肯定会被一种寻求消除“不适合”的人并支持“适合”作为一种“种族”生存手段的“科学”学说所排斥。然而，尽管看似自相矛盾，但不同国家的许多无政府主义思想实际上在历史上确实涉及优生思想和实践的某些方面，并为其传播提供了一个论坛。通过历史分析，无政府主义对进化论思想、人口控制以及马尔萨斯、反神职主义和革命变革的思想感兴趣，本文描绘了这两个运动在鼎盛时期(19世纪90年代至20世纪40年代)的交集和冲突。为此，该研究金重点关注五个不同国家的优生学运动和无政府主义运动，这五个国家的优生学和无政府主义在历史上都有影响--英国、法国、葡萄牙、西班牙和阿根廷。通过使用一套创新的理论和方法工具，从福柯的见解到女权主义认识论，再到后无政府主义的解释，本研究旨在改变优生学和无政府主义的史学。第一个原因是，尽管在过去几十年中出现了新的方向，但优生学的右翼派别和中央集权主义的起源被假定为，任何接受优生学的想法都被解释为本质上的极权主义，并导致纳粹死亡集中营的恐怖；第二个原因是，太多时候人们认为无政府主义的支持者会考虑节育、遗传主义观念或倡导实现人口的健康。在这个团契的18个月里，我们寻求三个主要目标。第一个目标是分析在所研究的五个国家中，国家和中央集权做法的存在与否对优生思想和实践的阐述有多重要。根据当前的政治理论，国家不仅被认为是一个特定的政府、一套政策或立法，而且是一个多种多样的政治和社会权力框架，可以通过胁迫、武力或实际上是同意来实施。无政府主义者的不遵守和对国家的不尊重如何改变了自由意志主义运动对优生学的接受？第二个目标侧重于优生学、无政府主义内部以及两者之间的跨国知识流动。在这种情况下，优生学在多大程度上“无政府化”，无政府主义如何“优生化”？第三个目标是探讨另一个主要社会影响--天主教会的存在如何影响无政府主义对优生学的吸收。无政府主义在多大程度上将其与优生学的接触定义为其宣称的反神职主义的一部分，以及教会规制性行为和生殖的权力？然而，这项研究的范围不仅是历史性的，而且是跨国的。通过考察过去对科学思想的接受，我们可以提出关于医学思想的伦理、关于选择的问题、关于国家的权力和医疗职业的问题，以塑造人们对疾病的反应和当今社会的赋权。研究金寻求通过学术成果(一本专著、一篇期刊文章、一篇会议论文)和面向公众的展览的方式参与这些辩论，以传递研究金的研究结果。

This Fellowship aims to examine the historic overlap between the international anarchist labour movement and the international eugenics movement. At first sight, the two would appear to be mutually exclusive. Anarchism, an anti-authoritarian, egalitarian movement opposed to the power of the state and questioning of all forms of authority, including medical authority, would surely have been repelled by a 'scientific' doctrine that sought to eliminate the 'unfit' and champion the 'fit' as a means of 'race' survival. Paradoxical though it may seem, however, numerous strains of anarchist thought in different countries did in fact engage historically with certain aspects of eugenic thought and practice and provided a forum for their dissemination. By means of a historical analysis that situates anarchism's interest in evolutionary ideas, population control and the ideas of Malthus, anti-clericalism and revolutionary transformation, this Fellowship charts the intersection and the conflicts between - and within - the two movements during their heyday; the 1890s to the 1940s. In order to do so, the Fellowship focuses on the eugenics movement and the anarchist movement in five different countries where both eugenics and anarchism were historically influential - England, France, Portugal, Spain and Argentina. These movements are examined simultaneously and within a contemporaneous period (1890-1940), the years of both movements' maximum influence.By using an innovative set of theoretical and methodological tools, from Foucauldian insights to feminist epistemologies, through to 'post-anarchist' interpretations, this research aims to transform the historiography of both eugenics and anarchism. The first, because, despite new directions taken in the last decades, a right-wing affiliation and a statist origin of eugenics is assumed, whereby any reception of eugenic ideas is interpreted as inherently totalitarian and leading to the horrors of the Nazi death camps; the second, because too often it is thought inconceivable that the supporters of anarchism could contemplate birth control, hereditarian notions or advocate the achievement of a 'well-born' population.Three principal objectives are sought during the eighteen months of this Fellowship. The first objective analyses how important the presence or otherwise of the state and statist practice were in the articulation of eugenic thought and practice in the five countries studied. The state, drawing on current political theory, is considered to be not only a particular government, a set of policies, or legislation, but a varied political and social framework of authority that could be implemented through coercion, force or indeed consent. How did anarchist non-adherence and a lack of deference to the state alter the reception of eugenics by the libertarian movement? The second objective focuses on the transnational knowledge flows within eugenics, anarchism and between the two. To what extent was eugenics 'anarchized' and how was anarchism 'eugenicized' in this scenario? The third objective is to explore how the presence of another major social influence, the Catholic Church, affected the uptake of eugenics by anarchism. To what degree did anarchism define its engagement with eugenics as part of its declared anti-clericalism and the power of the Church to regulate sexuality and reproduction?This research, trans-national in its remit is not merely historical in scope, however. By examining the reception of scientific ideas in the past, we can pose questions on the ethics of medical thought, on matters of choice, on the power of the state and medical profession, to mould people's responses to illness and empowerment in today's society. The Fellowship seeks to engage with these debates by means of academic production (one monograph, one journal article, one conference paper) and a public-facing exhibition for the transmission of the Fellowship's findings.