Was Margaret Sanger a white supremacist / racist?

Author: rbelivb

Posts

Total: 5
rbelivb
rbelivb's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 210
1
2
5
rbelivb's avatar
rbelivb
1
2
5
The idea that Margaret Sanger was a racist white supremacist who wanted to use abortion to wipe out the "inferior" races is a common refrain of the conservative opponents of abortion. However, closer investigation shows that the situation is more complex. In fact, Sanger saw herself as a proponent of "eugenics" - but in a broader sense of eugenics as the genetic improvement of the human race. This is an idea which certainly deserves criticism, but there is a difference between this kind of eugenics, and white supremacy. In fact, Sanger saw her project as helping the black communities, and wanted to communicate the benefits to them. She did not see the promotion of abortion in black communities as an attempt to wipe them out, but instead wanted to work with black leaders such as W. E. B. DuBois to help "a group notoriously underprivileged and handicapped to a large measure by a 'caste' system that operates as an added weight upon their efforts to get a fair share of the better things in life."

I think it is magnificent that we are in the ground floor, helping Negroes to control their birth rate, to reduce their high infant and maternal death rate, to reduce their high infant and maternal death rate, to maintain better standards of health and living for those already born, and to create better opportunities for those who will be born.
The attempt to simply project conservative ideas about abortion as harming the demographics of a group, and the connotations of "eugenics" as inherently racist, in order to paint Sanger as a "third rail" untouchable figure, is a genuine example of the "cancel culture" which conservatives claim to oppose.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I agree entirely with you on this matter. Some spiteful black people who resent being seen as in needy of help will find issue with her saying 'white saviour complex' and other stuff to make her and people like her feel bad for wanting to help and feeling good about helping.

At the end of the day it's women like her that changed things for the better.

Also, you used the word 'eugenics' to refer to a culture defending its values, recently on these forums... So, if anyone has no right to talk about bastardised usage of the term it's you more than any other user on this website.

As for abortion, plan B pill and eugenics the key is how much was known. Was the fetus slaughtered for perhaps being Down's syndrome? Was it slaughtered for being a gender, a certain complexion etc?

Eugenics would be to eliminate those that are 'weak' or 'dumb' or 'low value' and maintain those that are high, at its most sexist and graphic it involves killing baby girls in a culture that favours males.

I do not believe she was racist but I am curious where and how she'd support term limits for abortions and if she'd advocate for doing everything possible to make people not want, seek or go through with abortion in her ideal endgame society.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Eugenics

After World War I, Sanger increasingly appealed to the societal need to limit births by those least able to afford children. The affluent and educated already limited their child-bearing, while the poor and uneducated lacked access to contraception and information about birth control.  Here she found an area of overlap with eugenicists. She believed that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit." She distinguished herself from other eugenicists, by writing "eugenists [sic] imply or insist that a woman's first duty is to the state; we contend that her duty to herself is her duty to the state. We maintain that a woman possessing an adequate knowledge of her reproductive functions is the best judge of the time and conditions under which her child should be brought into the world. We further maintain that it is her right, regardless of all other considerations, to determine whether she shall bear children or not, and how many children she shall bear if she chooses to become a mother."   Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aimed to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing the reproduction of those who were considered unfit.

Sanger's view of eugenics was influenced by Havelock Ellis and other British eugenicists,  including H.G. Wells, with whom she formed a close, lasting friendship.   She did not speak specifically to the idea of race or ethnicity being determining factors and "although Sanger articulated birth control in terms of racial betterment and, like most old-stock Americans, supported restricted immigration, she always defined fitness in individual rather than racial terms." Instead, she stressed limiting the number of births to live within one's economic ability to raise and support healthy children. This would lead to a betterment of society and the human race.[119] Sanger's view put her at odds with leading American eugenicists, such as Charles Davenport, who took a racist view of inherited traits. In A History of the Birth Control Movement in America, Engelman also noted that "Sanger quite effortlessly looked the other way when others spouted racist speech. She had no reservations about relying on flawed and overtly racist works to serve her own propaganda needs."

In "The Morality of Birth Control", a 1921 speech, she divided society into three groups: the "educated and informed" class that regulated the size of their families, the "intelligent and responsible" who desired to control their families in spite of lacking the means or the knowledge, and the "irresponsible and reckless people" whose religious scruples "prevent their exercising control over their numbers". Sanger concludes, "There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped."

Sanger's eugenics policies included an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods, and full family planning autonomy for the able-minded, as well as compulsory segregation or sterilization for the "profoundly retarded".   Sanger wrote, "we [do not] believe that the community could or should send to the lethal chamber the defective progeny resulting from irresponsible and unintelligent breeding."  In The Pivot of Civilization she criticized certain charity organizations for providing free obstetric and immediate post-birth care to indigent women without also providing information about birth control nor any assistance in raising or educating the children.  By such charities, she wrote, "The poor woman is taught how to have her seventh child, when what she wants to know is how to avoid bringing into the world her eighth."

In personal correspondence she expressed her sadness about the aggressive and lethal Nazi eugenics program, and donated to the American Council Against Nazi Propaganda. 

Sanger believed that self-determining motherhood was the only unshakable foundation for racial betterment.  Initially she advocated that the responsibility for birth control should remain with able-minded individual parents rather than the state.  Later, she proposed that "Permits for parenthood shall be issued upon application by city, county, or state authorities to married couples," but added that the requirement should be implemented by state advocacy and reward for complying, not enforced by punishing anyone for violating it. 

She was supported by one of the most racist authors in America in the 1920s, the Klansman  Lothrop Stoddard, who was a founding member of the Board of Directors of Sanger's American Birth Control League.  Chesler comments:
Margaret Sanger was never herself a racist, but she lived in a profoundly bigoted society, and her failure to repudiate prejudice—especially when it was manifest among proponents of her cause—has haunted her ever since.
Abortion

Margaret Sanger opposed abortion and sharply distinguished it from birth control. She believed that the latter is a fundamental right of women and the former is a shameful crime.  In 1916, when she opened her first birth control clinic, she was employing harsh rhetoric against abortion. Flyers she distributed to women exhorted them in all capitals: "Do not kill, do not take life, but prevent."   Sanger's patients at that time were told "that abortion was the wrong way—no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but it was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun."   Sanger consistently distanced herself from any calls for legal access to abortion, arguing that legal access to contraceptives would remove the need for abortion.  Ann Hibner Koblitz has argued that Sanger's anti-abortion stance contributed to the further stigmatization of abortion and impeded the growth of the broader reproductive rights movement.

While Margaret Sanger condemned abortion as a method of family limitation, she was not opposed to abortion intended to save a woman's life. Furthermore, in 1932, Margaret Sanger directed the Clinical Research Bureau to start referring patients to hospitals for therapeutic abortions when indicated by an examining physician.   She also advocated for birth control so that the pregnancies that led to therapeutic abortions could be prevented in the first place. 

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,675
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
Sanger was also anti-Catholic. Fuck her
rbelivb
rbelivb's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 210
1
2
5
rbelivb's avatar
rbelivb
1
2
5
-->
@RationalMadman
Also, you used the word 'eugenics' to refer to a culture defending its values, recently on these forums... So, if anyone has no right to talk about bastardised usage of the term it's you more than any other user on this website.
Of course, because I do not view any of these issues as separate. For example, the division between "ethnicity" and "race," the idea of "civic nationalism" - which I view as abstractions which do not describe reality. Likewise, I do not support eugenics, but we cannot simply view the projects of modern states as totally disconnected from eugenics, or the basic problems or questions which gave rise to that idea. In fact, in many cases the problem of eugenics has simply been sublimated, but the same dynamic is still taking place if only in an indirect way. The questions of politics have receded to the themes of "health" and "security" and all other themes have been made secondary or erased entirely, which is not inherently different from the fascist ethos. That is also why I object to the Nordic model and its theme of a "healthy society." Philosopher Agamben also commented how much of the state reaction to COVID took the form of reducing human life to something being managed, as a biological organism or "bare life," a security or health risk, and the distancing of individuals, withdrawing from everyday social interaction, creates a dangerously impersonal environment in which there is a precedent for totalitarianism.