Week Thirteen: Eugenics and the Critical Art Ensemble

Investigating the role of eugenics on society and the
reproductive nuclear family

In an essay titled, “Eugenics: The Second Wave,” written by several authors of the Critical Art Ensemble, discusses how the concept never died after its implementation since it complements the “authoritarian control” with the increased “rationalization of culture.” The perception of eugenics first appeared with derivatives from World War II and the Nazi fascist ruling class. As a result, the term was also applied to medical science based on concepts of “mandatory sterilization, selective breeding, and genocide.”

The author states that the role of eugenicists is to repair the human body like a machine where it is designed to maintain life and improved through medical and genetic intervention. One eugenicist mentioned in the article is Frederick Osborn who served as the director of the Carnegie Institute in the 1930s. Osborn said that eugenics could not be implemented by military directive but rather through consistent introduction into society over time.


Osborn also discussed terms such as “consumer economy” and a maintaining a “nuclear family,” which assisted with concepts of eugenics. He stated that through the fundamentals of eugenics relied on a consistent consumer economy, which demands goods and services such as food, water, and shelter. These items are considered as purchasable items that are either “chosen or refused.”


On the topic of healthcare, Osborn states that this service is not a human right or an unexpected luxury but rather another business component of society. Routine medical intervention has become a service that is taken for granted, according to Osborn.


Throughout the essay, the author states that two situations occur as a result of the family structure. In the first instance, one often requires satisfaction from work through either success or obtaining material goods. The second instance states that individuals will follow their employer’s directive to commute to several different locations. In doing so, maintaining their rank rather than be close to their family and friends is most important.


By analyzing this concept of the nuclear family, the reader understands that familial procreation is necessary for survival to either extend reputation or financial rank. With the amenities of proper schooling and healthcare, these “advantages” generate more success and the author notes that the “quality of life is equivalent to economic performance.”


The author breaks down the social structure of the working class and states that these individuals are not participants of eugenic practices. Since the poor lack proper health care, their infant mortality rates are much higher despite the increased number of pregnancies.


In addition, the author discusses “genetic cleansing” and how it allows parents to decide the genetic characteristics of their future children. By testing embryos to avoid deformities and health problems, parents are purchasing various goods and services in an effort to ensure higher health rates for their unborn children. Therefore, this utopian promise has generated a higher form of anxiety for parents to produce the best children and give an advantage for their children in the competitive world.


Osborn states it best when he mentions that the “foundation for consumer consciousness is replicated in the foundation of eugenic consciousness,” which notes that eugenics is still in its early states and must endure multiple trials before effectively enhancing society. Until then, there were be several pros and cons to whether the rationalized process of reproduction is a worthy process rather than a “silent flesh revolution.”