Monday, October 20, 2014

Kallikak Family, along with The Jukes, one of the most visible eugenic family narratives

Intellect Dev Disabil. Author manuscript; available in PMC Apr 15, 2014.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC3987907
NIHMSID: NIHMS569103

Who Was Deborah Kallikak?

Abstract

The Kallikak Family was, along with The Jukes, one of the most visible eugenic family narratives published in the early 20th Century. Published in 1912 and authored by psychologist Henry Herbert Goddard, director of the psychological laboratory at the Vineland Training School for Feebleminded Children in Vineland, New Jersey, The Kallikak Family told the tale of a supposedly “degenerate” family from rural New Jersey, beginning with Deborah, one of the inmates at The Training School. Like most books in the genre, this pseudoscientific treatise described generations of illiterate, poor, and purportedly immoral, Kallikak family members who were chronically unemployed, supposedly feebleminded, criminals, and, in general, perceived as threats to racial hygiene. Presented as a “natural experiment” in human heredity, this text served to support eugenic activities through much of the first half of the century. This article reviews the story of Deborah Kallikak, including her true identity, and provides evidence that Goddard’s treatise was incorrect.
“One bright October day, fourteen years ago, there came to the Training School at Vineland, a little eight year-old girl”
(Goddard, 1912, p. 1)
So began The Kallikak Family, Henry Herbert Goddard’s 1912 best selling addition to the depressingly-large eugenic family studies genre. Starting with the 1877 publication of Richard Dugdale’s study of the Juke family, these pseudoscientific genealogies chronicled the lives of society’s least capable families—often given pejorative names like the Smoky Pilgrims, the Pineys, the Dacks, the Happy Hickories, and the Nams. These eugenic family studies influenced the public’s understanding of what constituted “degeneracy” for nearly half a century.
The Kallikak Family, which Stephen J. Gould called the “primal myth of the eugenics movement” (Gould, 1981, p. 198), was published in 1912 and authored by psychologist Henry Herbert Goddard, director of the psychological laboratory at the Vineland Training School for Feebleminded Children in Vineland, New Jersey. The Kallikak Family told the tale of a supposedly “degenerate” family from rural New Jersey, beginning with Deborah (see Figure 1), one of the inmates at The Training School. Like most books in the genre, this pseudoscientific treatise described generations of illiterate, poor, and purportedly immoral, Kallikak family members who were chronically unemployed, supposedly feebleminded, criminals, and, in general, perceived as threats to racial hygiene.
Figure 1
“Deborah Kallikak” as pictured in the frontispiece of The Kallikak Family. (Photograph in public domain).
Unlike other such tales, however, the Kallikak story had a plot twist. The progenitor of this putatively degenerate line, an American Revolutionary War soldier called Martin Kallikak, Sr., had, purportedly, sired his disreputable ancestral line through a dalliance with an allegedly feebleminded bar maid. Martin Sr., however, righted his moral ship, married an upstanding Quaker woman, and became the forefather of a second line of descendants that included, as Goddard put it, “respectable citizens, men and women prominent in every phase of life (Goddard, 1912, p. 31).” Goddard derived the pseudonym Kallikak from the Greek words Kallos (beauty) and Kakos (bad); his dramatic way of capturing the essence of the story of the Kallikak family, one branch of which was supposedly good and the other bad (see Figure 2).
Figure 2
The influence of heredity is demonstrated by the “good” and the “bad” Kallikaks. From Garrett (1955) p. 65.

The Story of Deborah

The story of Deborah’s lineage, as told by Goddard, was a national best seller and it is evident from the onset of the narrative that Goddard intended The Kallikak Family as a moral tale written for the masses:
“It is true that we have made rather dogmatic statements and have drawn conclusions that do not seem scientifically warranted from the data. We have done this because it seems necessary to make these statements and conclusions for the benefit of the lay reader”
(Goodard, 1912, p. xi).
Goddard’s version of Deborah’s story begins in The Kallikak Family narrative as such:
One bright October day, fourteen years ago, there came to the Training School at Vineland, a little eight-year-old girl. She had been born in an almshouse. Her mother had afterwards married, not the father of this child, but the prospective father of another child, and later had divorced him and married another man, who was also the father of some of her children
(Goddard, 1912, p. 1).
The remainder of Chapter 1 relates records from Deborah’s years at Vineland. Throughout The Kallikak Family narrative, Deborah is depicted using clinical terms emphasizing defect and degeneracy… to paint a verbal picture of the type of “feebleminded” person Goddard wanted readers to believe she was… “Mouth shut” (p. 3), “Staring expression” (p. 3), “Jerking movement in walking” (p. 3), even
Ultimately, and predictably, Goddard turns to information from the Binet-Simon intelligence test to make his case for Deborah’s degeneracy. Goddard introduced the Binet test to an American audience and was the preeminent mental tester for the decade thereafter, until Lewis Terman usurped that role.
By the Binet Scale this girl showed, in April, 1910, the mentality of a nine-year-old child with two points over; January, 1911, 9 years, 1 point; September, 1911, 9 years, 2 points; October, 1911, 9 years, 3 points. (p. 11).
And:
This is a typical illustration of the mentality of a high-grade feeble-minded person, the moron, the delinquent, the kind of girl or woman that fills our reformatories. They are wayward, they get into all sorts of trouble and difficulties, sexually and otherwise (p. 12)
Turning even to Deborah’s positive qualities to bolster his thesis, Goddard argued that:
It is also the history of the same type of girl in the public school. Rather good-looking, bright in appearance, with many attractive ways, the teacher clings to the hope, indeed insists, that such a girl will come out all right. Our work with Deborah convinces us that such hopes are delusions (p. 12–13)
And:
Here is a child who has been most carefully guarded. She has been persistently trained since she was eight years old, and yet nothing has been accomplished in the direction of higher intelligence or general education. To-day if this young woman were to leave the Institution, she would at once become a prey to the designs of evil men or evil women and would lead a life that would be vicious, immoral, and criminal (p. 13).
Providing an advance organizer for how to interpret the remainder of the book, Goddard concluded Chapter 1:
We may now repeat the ever insistent question and this time we indeed have good hope of answering it. The question is, “How do we account for this kind of individual?” The answer is in a word “Heredity,” --bad stock. We must recognize that the human family shows varying stocks or strains that are as marked and that breed as true as anything in plant or animal life
(Goddard, 1912, p. 13).
Switching topics, in Chapter 2, to the means by which data on inmates at the Training School were gathered, Goddard continued:
The Vineland Training School has for two years employed field workers. These are women highly trained, of broad human experience, and interested in social problems. They become acquainted with the condition of the feeble-minded. They study all the grades, note their peculiarities, and acquaint themselves with the methods of testing and recognizing them. They then go out to the homes of the children and there ask that all the facts which are available may be furnished
(Goddard, 1912, p. 14).
So out into the slums, the hollows, and the barrens they went; a cadre of women field workers, many well educated but unable to break the barrier of gender to secure professional jobs with decent wages. Among them was Elizabeth S. Kite, who had recently returned to Philadelphia from the University of London and was the field worker who tracked down the Kallikak information. And, not surprisingly, they found—or claimed to find—what they were looking for:
The surprise and horror of it all, was that no matter where we traced them, whether in the prosperous rural district, in the city slums to which some had drifted, or in the more remote mountain regions, or whether it was a question of the second or the sixth generation, an appalling amount of defectiveness was everywhere found
(Goddard, 1912, p. 17).
One family, however, stood out even in this sea of so-called degeneracy.
In the course of the work of tracing various members of the family, our field worker [Kite] occasionally found herself in the midst of a good family of the same name, which apparently was in no way related to the girl whose ancestry we were investigating. These cases became so frequent that there gradually grew the conviction that ours must be a degenerate offshoot from an older family of better stock (p. 17).
Goddard then described this putatively degenerate ancestry:
The great-great-grandfather of Deborah was Martin Kallikak. We had also traced the good family back to an ancestor belonging to an older generation than this Martin Kallikak, but bearing the same name. Many months later, a granddaughter of Martin revealed in a burst of confidence the situation. When Martin Sr., of the good family, was a boy of fifteen, his father died, leaving him without parental care or oversight. Just before attaining his majority, the young man joined one of the numerous military companies that were formed to protect the country at the beginning of the Revolution. At one of the taverns frequented by the militia he met a feeble-minded girl by whom he became the father of a feeble-minded son. This child was given, by its mother, the name of the father in full, and thus has been handed down to posterity the father’s name and the mother’s mental capacity. This illegitimate boy was Martin Kallikak Jr., the great-great-grandfather of our Deborah, and from him have come four hundred and eighty descendants. One hundred and forty-three of these, we have conclusive proof, were or are feeble-minded, while only forty-six have been found normal. The rest are unknown or doubtful
(Goddard, 1912, p. 18).
After describing the seemingly endless ways in which this family was worth singling out among the “appalling amount of defectiveness [that] was everywhere found” (p. 17), Goddard stated:
This is the ghastly story of the descendants of Martin Kallikak Sr., from the nameless feeble-minded girl. Although Martin Sr. himself paid no further attention to the girl nor her child, society has had to pay the heavy price of all the evil he engendered
(Goddard, 1912, p. 30).
Deborah’s story concludes in The Kallikak Family narrative:
Martin Sr., on leaving the Revolutionary Army, straightened up and married a respectable girl of good family, and through that union has come another line of descendants of radically different character. All of the legitimate children of Martin Sr. married into the best families in their state, the descendants of colonial governors, signers of the Declaration of Independence, soldiers and even the founders of a great university. There are doctors, lawyers, judges, educators, traders, landholders, in short, respectable citizens, men and women prominent in every phase of social life. There have been no feeble-minded among them; no illegitimate children; no immoral women. There has been no epilepsy, no criminals, no keepers of houses of prostitution (pp. 30–31).
Good seed. Bad seed. Kallos. Kakos.

Impact

The impact of The Kallikak Family was significant. The book was received with acclaim by the public and by much of the scientific community and was reissued through 12 printings, including a reprinting as late as1939. It is difficult to locate a biology or psychology text in the years immediately following the publication of the Kallikak book that does not cite the study as conclusive evidence of the hereditary nature of feeblemindedness and, by extension, human intelligence. Eugenicists cited Goddard’s study to justify their hereditarian stance as early as 1911, a year before the book even appeared in print. The biology text used to teach evolution to students at Rhea County Central High School in Dayton, Tennessee by John Thomas Scopes, the nominal defendant in the 1925 Scopes trial starring attorneys Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryant, was A Civic Biology Presented in Problems by George William Hunter, published in 1914. Hunter’s text included a presentation of eugenic thought as scientific fact and an overview of the Kallikak story. It is interesting to note that the same text included an argument for the racial inferiority of all people other than those of European origins. No mention of this was made during the trial.
In 1927, The Callicac Family [sic] was entered into the record as evidence in Buck v. Bell, the case that resulted in the Supreme Court decision establishing that involuntary sterilization of “mentally defective” people was constitutional. The Kallikak Family was reprinted in German in 1933, the same year Nazi Germany passed the “Law for Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Defects Act.” That Act was based on the model sterilization law drawn up by American eugenicist Harry H. Laughlin, a star witness in Buck v Bell, and legalized involuntary sterilization of Germans with disabilities. From 1934 to 1939, Hitler’s Nazi regime involuntarily sterilized somewhere near 150,000 Germans with disabilities, and beginning in the winter of 1939, implemented a program of extermination that, by its end 20 months later, had resulted in the murder of 80,000 disabled Germans.
Deborah Kallikak became the poster child for societal fears, the flames of which were fanned by a select group of well educated, upper class, white Americans joined by an aspiring professional middle class and marching under the banner of the new sciences of genetics and heredity. The name Kallikak would become part of the vernacular; a synonym for backward, inbreeding hillbillies and slum dwellers. Deborah was only one of many young women whose primary ‘sin’ had been to be destitute, poorly educated, and attractive at a time when society viewed this combination as a deadly cocktail leading to, as then President Theodore Roosevelt, proclaimed, the threat of “race suicide.”
Society’s punishments for such transgressions were severe. For Deborah, it was life without parole in an institution. For others like her, it was worse. Before Goddard’s “menace of the feebleminded” era ended, somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000 Americans labeled as feebleminded had been involuntarily sterilized.

Emma’s Story

The Kallikak Family narrative begins with the chapter titled “Deborah’s Story” and it was “Deborah’s” story … to the extent that Deborah was an invention of Goddard, one he needed to tell his story. The story of Emma Wolverton, whom the world has known as Deborah Kallikak, is much richer and more complex, starting with her arrival in the world and at the Vineland Training school.
Emma’s entry into the world had been as ignoble and anonymous as her arrival at the Vineland Training School that October day in 1897. She was born, in 1889, into the wretchedly poor environs of a late 19th Century almshouse to a single mother who had lost her job as a domestic servant due to her illegitimate pregnancy (Kellicott, 1911, p. 162). Emma’s father, identified as normal but as morally bereft as he was financially bankrupt, abandoned the newborn Emma and her mother to the penury of the almshouse. The possibilities in life for Emma, her mother, and her three older siblings improved when they were brought to live in the home of a benefactor. Eventually, though, Emma suffered from the consequences of poor decisions made by her mother, who circumvented efforts by the host family to prevent further dissolute sexual behavior and entered into a relationship with another man that resulted in pregnancy. Unnerved by Emma’s mother’s promiscuity, the benefactor insisted upon and arranged for a marriage between Emma’s mother and this man. Soon thereafter, Emma’s mother and the rest of her family moved out of the benefactor’s home and in with her latest paramour, and after bearing him two children, moved to a farmhouse, where, eventually, Emma’s stepfather disappeared and her mother lived openly with the farmer/landlord. Seemingly cut off at every turn, the benefactor arranged for a divorce between Emma’s stepfather and mother, and for a marriage between Emma’s mother and the farmer. The farmer consented, with the caveat that the children who were not his would be sent away, including Emma.
Thus, Emma was brought to the gates of the Training School with the highly suspect explanation that because she didn’t get along with other children at school, she might, possibly, be feebleminded. When she entered Vineland, according to school records, she was of average size and weight with no particularly notable physical anomalies. She could wash and dress herself. She was identified as a good listener and imitator and as active and excitable, though not particularly affectionate. She was not literate and could not count—hardly surprising since it is unlikely she attended school regularly—but was handy and could use a needle, carry wood, and fill a kettle.
In 1911, the year before The Kallikak Family was published, 22-year old Emma Wolverton was described in institutional records as a skillful and hard worker who lacked confidence in herself. She continued to excel in woodworking and dressmaking. Academic subjects were still a problem, but the records indicate that across the years of her confinement at the Training School, she made considerable progress in multiple areas of her life, particularly in nonacademic learning and in social skills. She furthered her needlework skills and became a handy carpenter (see Figures 3 & 4). She learned to play the cornet and performed in the Vineland Training School band. Emma was an avid participant in outings and in the life of the institution (see Figure 5).
Figure 3
Deborah at the sewing machine (from The Kallikak Family, p. 4).
Figure 4
Deborah as a waitress (from The Kallikak Family, p. 4).
Figure 5
Deborah (lower left) on an outing at the Training School. (from author’s personal collection).
But, increasingly as she got older, Emma became subject to the laws of such institutions, in which more capable inmates were required to perform compulsory labor to meet the demands of these increasingly under-funded and overcrowded warehouses (Trent, 1994). Emma performed a wide array of tasks during her years at Vineland, including serving as a teacher’s aide for the kindergarten class. She also worked in the school dining-room and was a helper in the wood-carving class. In fact, Deborah’s capacities earned her the privilege of working for the family of Edward R. Johnstone, the institution’s superintendent (Doll, 1988).
And then, in July of 1914, at the age of 25 and after having lived at the Vineland Training School for 17 of those years, Emma was transferred to the women’s institution across the street, which provided a custodial situation in which feebleminded women could be placed to keep them from “propagating their kind” (Doll, 1988, p. 4). It was to be Emma’s home for most of her life.
In 1985, the lead author of this article published a book titled Minds Made Feeble: The Myth and the Legacy of the Kallikaks. Goddard’s thesis of the hereditary nature of feeblemindedness rested, in large measure, on the presumption that Emma’s Wolverton’s1 ancestors, or a large proportion of them, were feebleminded, although the only family member ever tested using an IQ test was Emma herself. The bulk of The Kallikak Family narrative itself involves descriptions of these ancestors: from Emma’s purported great-great-grandfather, Martin Kallikak Jr., the offspring of the ill-advised dalliance with the feeble-minded bar maid, on down to Emma herself. Of course, these family members were christened with stigmatizing names by Goddard and Kite; Martin Jr. was referred to, for example, as the “Old Horror.” The pictures in the text show Kallikak family members posed in front of what can best be described as hovels, thereby juxtaposing purportedly degenerate people with their degenerate homes (Figure 6).
Figure 6
Great-grandchildren of “Old Sal” (from The Kallikak Family, p. 88).
Minds Made Feeble debunked the assertion in Goddard’s narrative that these Wolverton ancestors were degenerate, more or less feebleminded. The present context does not allow for a detailed accounting, but a few examples will suffice to make this point.
It is, of course, Martin Kallikak, Jr., the great-great-grandfather of ‘Deborah,’ who is the fulcrum in The Kallikak Family narrative. Goddard’s description of Martin, Jr. is laden with those traits he felt characterized people he described as “morons”. In the text, Goddard narrates a conversation with an elderly woman who is, supposedly, part of the “good side of the Kallikak family” (p. 80), who was reported to remember Martin Jr. as:
… always unwashed and drunk. At election time, he never failed to appear in somebody’s cast-off clothing, ready to vote, for the price of a drink” (p. 80)
According to census data for Hunterdon County, Martin, Jr., whose real name was John Wolverton2, was born in 1776 and was married in 1804, a union that lasted 22 years, until his wife’s death. Unlike Goddard’s description of Martin, Jr., John Wolverton appears to have been fairly successful. He owned land throughout most of his adult life. County records indicated that he purchased two lots of land in 1809 for cash. Deed books for the county contain records of his transferring his property to his children and grandchildren later in his life. The 1850 census record shows that he was living with one of his daughters and several of his grandchildren at that time. That record also lists all of the adults in the household as being able to read. The 1860 census record lists his occupation as “laborer” and his property as valued at $100 (not a meager amount for the average person at that time). John Wolverton died in 1861 (Smith, 1985, p. 93).
Or, consider Martin Jr.’s fourth child, “Old Sal” whom Goddard described as feeble-minded and as marrying a feeble-minded man and as having two feeble-minded children, who, likewise married feeble-minded wives and had large families of defective children, some of whom are pictured in The Kallikak Family.
“Old Sal” was, in fact, Catherine Ann Wolverton, born in December, 1811. She was married in January, 1834 and died in 1897 at the age of 85 (Macdonald & McAdams, 2001, p. 218). Goddard’s nickname of ‘Old Sal’ probably came from Goddard and Kite mistaking Catherine for her sister-in-law, Sarah (Macdonald & McAdams, 2001, p. 811). There is not much known about Catherine herself from the records, but a family history relayed by some of Catherine’s descendants reveals many contradictions to Goddard’s portrayal of her offspring. Two of her grandchildren were still living in 1985 when Minds Made Feeble was published. A brother and sister, they were retired school teachers living in Trenton, New Jersey. One grandson moved from New Jersey to Iowa, became treasurer of a bank, owned a lumber yard, and operated a creamery. Another grandson moved to Wisconsin. His son served as a pilot in the Army Air Corps in World War II. A great, great grandson of Catherine was a teacher in Chicago. A great grandson was a policeman in another city in Illinois. A 1930 newspaper article reported that all of Catherine’s sons had been soldiers in the Civil War.
Others of the so-called bad Kallikak family members were land owners, farmers, and, while poor, were generally self-sufficient rural people. Though many of them had lived with limited resources and against considerable environmental odds, the records suggest that they were a cohesive family. With Emma’s grandfather’s generation, though, the tides turned for the family. Called Justin in Goddard’s narrative, Emma’s grandfather (also named John Wolverton) was born in 1834 and, like his ancestors, lived in Rural Hunterdon, New Jersey working primarily in agriculture. Like many of his generation, though, John and his family were swept up in the turmoil of the industrial age and by 1880, the family had moved to Trenton New Jersey and John worked as a laborer. Times were difficult, the cohesiveness of the family eroded, and Emma’s mother’s family scraped to get by in those tough economic times.
Malinda Woolverton was the actual name of Emma’s mother. She was born in April of 1868, when the family lived in Hunterdon, but by 1885, at the age of 17, she had already moved out of the family home, living with and serving as a domestic and child care helper in the home of a neighbor. Emma was born to Malinda in February of 1889. Though Goddard indicates that Emma’s mother had three illegitimate children who didn’t live past infancy before Emma was born in the almshouse, Mcdonald and McAdams’ (2001) genealogy of the Wolverton family noted that records suggest that Emma was Malinda’s only illegitimate child.
The real story of the disfavored Kallikaks, the ‘other Wolvertons,’ is not free of troubles and human frailties. The family had its share of skeletons in the closet, but so did many families of that era, particularly those who were faced with poverty, lack of education and scarce resources for dealing with tumultuous social change. But the family also had its strengths and successes. The tragedy of the disfavored Kallikaks is that their story was distorted so as to be interpreted according to a powerful myth, and then used to further bolster that myth. The myth was that of eugenics.
According to Goddard, ‘(t)his is the ghastly story of the descendants of Martin Kallikak, Sr. from the nameless feeble-minded girl” (Goddard, 1912, p. 29). But, of course, it wasn’t. It wasn’t because it was Goddard’s story, constructed by Goddard and Kite to fulfill the need for a eugenic-narrative to fit their world-view and to bolster the eugenic myth. It was, perhaps, ‘Deborah Kallikak’s’ story, but it wasn’t Emma Wolverton’s story. Her story was the story of many American families; people living simply in a rural setting who, for whatever reason, were swept at the end of the 19th Century and start of the 20th Century into urban America and into a life that, like many immigrants, was beset by hardships and for which they weren’t adequately prepared.
There is one more reason, however, that this was not Emma’s story. Wolverton genealogist David MacDonald wrote in 1997 that “I am certain that Dr. Goddard plugged the [Kakos] line into the wrong part of the Wolverton family. He obviously wanted for the [Kallos] branch a set of people as good and prominent as possible, and I think that he was not very scrupulous about how he found it.” (personal communication). In 2001, MacDonald and Nancy McAdams completed their 860 page magnum opus on the Wolverton Family. All of the Kalllikaks are to be found there, clearly and carefully documented. In an appendix devoted to the Kallikak study David MacDonald and Nancy McAdams wrote:
There should be no doubt that John Wolverton (note: referring to the man whom Goddard referred to as Martin Kallikak, Jr.) was a son of Gabriel Wolverton and Catherine Murray. John’s parentage would not merit further comment if he had not been described in The Kallikak Family, a book published in 1912 as an illegitimate son of John Woolverton and an unnamed feebleminded tavern girl, when in fact 6.4.1 John (Martin, Jr.) and 1.1.1 John (Martin, Sr.) were second cousins and both perfectly legitimate sons of their married parents
Martin Kallikak, Jr. was not the illegitimate son of Martin Kallikak, Sr. Whether the dalliance with a feebleminded barmaid was fiction or fact, Goddard’s natural experiment never occurred. There were no Kallos, no Kakos … and no Kallikaks. There was no good blood, no bad blood. Some Wolverton family members had access to resources… money, education, health care. Other Wolverton family members had none of those and were swept, with millions of rural Americans and immigrants, into the bowels of America’s urban areas, into lives that were often barely livable.
Emma Wolverton moved to the New Jersey State Institute for Feebleminded Women in July of 1914. “[Emma], at this time,” described a social worker who worked with her, “was a handsome young woman, twenty-five years old, with many accomplishments” (Reeves, 1938, p. 195). As she had done at the Training School, Emma assumed childcare responsibilities for the assistant superintendent of the women’s facility. For a number of years, Emma worked as a nurse’s aide at the institution’s on-grounds hospital. “In the early nineteen-twenties,” recounted Reeves, “a mild epidemic broke out in the building for low grade patients. Isolation was arranged and the hospital being short-handed at the time, Deborah was glad to assist the special nurse. She immediately mastered the details of routine treatment and was devoted to her charges” (Reeves, 1938, p. 196).
As was the case with the descriptions of Emma Wolverton’s childhood and adolescence in The Kallikak Family, hers is not a story without problems by any means. Emma was not an angel. She is described time and again as willful, overbearing, and possessing what could become a vicious temper. On the other hand, those are often exactly the behaviors necessary to survive in an institutional setting.
Inconsistent with Goddard’s depiction of her, Emma was literate and well-read. She was a passionate and committed letter writer as well. She wrote letters and sent photographs of herself to her friends up to the very end of her life. In her final years, Emma was offered the alternative of leaving the institution. By then, she was in intense pain because of severe arthritis and used a wheelchair most of the time. It is, of course, a cruel irony that the offer of greater freedom in her life came when it was impossible for her to embrace it. Emma declined the opportunity; she knew she needed constant medical attention.
“I guess after all I’m where I belong,” Emma had told her support person, Helen Reeves, once in 1938. “I don’t like this feeble-minded part but anyhow I’m not like some of the poor things you see around here”
(Reeves, 1938, p. 199).
Emma was hospitalized for the last year of her life, but “bore the frequent intense pain most bravely and without a great deal of complaint.” (Doll, 1988, p. 32). She died in 1978 at the age of 89 years. She had lived in an institution 81 of those years.
The now highly-offensive term “idiot,” was the primary term used to refer to people with intellectual disability up until the mid-1800s. It was derived, etymologically, from the Greek words “idatas” and “idios,” both which refer to a private person, someone who is set apart, peculiar (Oxford University Press, 2011); someone who is different. When we segregate people, we tell them and others that they are peculiar; different from us. It allows us to then talk about “them” in anonymity, as if they didn’t really matter. We can refer to them as morons, degenerates, trainables, retards and a million other labels as if they were not really like us. We can lock them away for the rest of their lives or sterilize them without their knowledge.
Her name was Emma, not Deborah. We cannot undue the injustices done to her or others, but we at least owe her the respect of calling her by her name.
Figure 7
Emma Wolverton at age 73.

Footnotes

1In 1985, the lead author chose not to reveal “Deborah’s” real name, in large part out of respect to family members who were still living at the time. In 1994, Straney published a paper focused on the genealogy of the “Kallikak” family, and in a footnote in that paper, revealed Deborah’s true name. In 2001, Macdonald and McAdams published the full Wolverton genealogy, including an appendix discussing the Kallikak/Wolverton link. Given the passage of time and the fact that Emma’s identity can be located if one searches diligently, we felt this was an opportune time, with the centenary of The Kallikak Family in 2012, to make that information known to professionals and others in the intellectual and developmental disability field.
2The spelling of Woolverton alternates from generation to generation, sometimes Woolverton, other times Wolverton. The spelling “John Woolverton” will refer to Martin Sr., the spelling John Wolverton refers to Martin Jr.

Contributor Information

J. David Smith, University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
Michael L. Wehmeyer, University of Kansas.

References

  • Doll EE. Before the big time: Early history of the training school at Vineland, 1888 to 1949. American Journal on Mental Retardation. 1988;93:1–15. 1988. [PubMed]
  • Garrett HE. General psychology. New York: American Book Company; 1955.
  • Goddard HH. The Kallikak family. New York: MacMillan and Company; 1912.
  • Gould SJ. The mismeasure of man. New York: W. W. Norton and Company; 1981.
  • Hunter GW. A civic biology presented in problems. New York: American Book Company; 1914.
  • Kellicott WE. The social direction of human evolution. New York: Appleton and Company; 1911.
  • Macdonald DA, McAdams NN. The Woolverton family 1693 – 1850 and beyond: Woolverton and Wolverton descendants of Charles Woolverton, New Jersey immigrant. Rockport, ME: Penobscot Press; 2001.
  • Oxford University Press. [Accessed August 18, 2011];Oxford English Dictionary. (3). 2011 online edition. at http://www.oed.com.www2.lib.ku.edu:2048/view/Entry/91049?rskey=8j9OXR&result=1&isAdvanced=false#eid.
  • Reeves HT. The later years of a noted mental defective. American Journal on Mental Deficiency. 1938;43:194–200.
  • Smith JD. Minds made feeble: The myth and legacy of the Kallikaks. Rockville, Maryland: Aspen Systems Corporation; 1985.
  • Straney SG. The Kallikak Family: A genealogical examination of a ‘Classic in Psychology. The American Genealogist. 1994;69(2):65–80.
  • Trent JW. Inventing the feeble mind: A history of mental retardation in the United States. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1994.

The Jukes: A historically awful episode of pseudo-science, eugenics

 
They're bad. Each and every one one of them, bad seeds, an inevitable inheritance handed down across generations due to their tainted genes.

"The story is incredibly hateful and lacking in compassion and false," says legal historian Paul Lombardo of Georgia State University in Atlanta. "The story of the Jukes is demonstrably false, and yet people keep repeating it, sometimes knowing it's false."

In the current edition of The Journal of Legal Medicine, Lombardo looks at the modern-day manifestations of the bad idea behind "the infamous Jukes family," as scientist Sir Francis Galton, founder of the "eugenics" movement, described them in 1876.

A historically awful episode of pseudo-science, eugenics aimed at breeding "better" humans, a movement eventually embraced by dozens of states, from Virginia to California, leading to more than 60,000 forced sterilizations by the 1960s. Lombardo worries that in our modern age of genomics, people have forgotten the cautionary tale behind the lies about the Jukes, and the tragedies of the eugenics movement they spawned.

A few states, most recently North Carolina, have repudiated that past, which started with an 1871 public health investigation of the so-called Jukes — a family name that was made up and used to refer to a group of poor white farmers in a "clan" that was mostly not even related. "But a lot of people today seem to have forgotten the lesson," Lombardo says. Forcible sterilizations no longer occur nationwide, but only a few states (North Carolina, South Carolina, Oregon, Georgia, Virginia and Indiana) have acknowledged or apologized for them happening, he notes. In 25 other states they remain unrecognized tragedies.

Where did it start? With a 19th-century "philanthropic physician" named Elisha Harris, a one-time president of the American Public Health Association, who first mentioned the Jukes. He published reports that an impoverished poor woman named Margaret was the "mother of criminals" and gave birth to "a race of criminals, paupers and harlots," in Upstate New York.
His mantle was taken up by a New York Prison Association colleague, Richard Dugdale, who in 1877 published a lengthy study of the clan he pseudonymously described as the "Jukes," noting thieves, rapists and roughnecks among their members filling a local jail. He renamed Margaret, "Ada Jukes," who he claimed was related (dubiously) to some 700 descendants, trapped by a "social Hades" into lives of criminal destitution.

Dugdale died in 1883, and observers quickly forgot the role of poverty he had pointed to in his study of the family, turning it into a "genetic morality tale," Lombardo writes, one that rested on a combination of religious imagery — the Ten Commandments' warning of God "visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and the fourth generations" — and the pseudoscience of eugenics, which saw traits such as poverty or criminality as solely resulting from heredity in the same manner as hair color or height. In his obituary, The New York Times summarized Dugdale's conclusion as "the whole question of crime and pauperism rests strictly upon a physiological basis," an idea endorsed by "the best informed scientists."

Not just scientists, but doctors, judges, politicians and clergy, urged "eugenic marriage laws" to wipe out folks like the Jukes, people seen as a threat to the gene pool. The most famous preacher of the day, Billy Sunday, who had denounced eugenics in other settings, warned of the dangerous powers of "one God-forsaken, vicious, corrupt man and woman to breed and propagate and damn the world by their offspring," in 1915 sermons.
Lawyers liked the Jukes story as well, and it was instrumental in testimony in the 1927 case of Buck v. Bell, which made forced sterilizations legal nationwide. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, "Three generations of imbeciles is enough," in that opinion, which has still never been overturned.

Geneticists widely disavowed eugenics in the 1930s, and after World War II's Nazi horrors became known, its popularity died out. Historical research in the 1960s showed that the Jukes story was bunk: "They weren't one family, but a bunch of different groups, and it's not clear they were related at all," Lombardo says. Eugenics researchers just picked and chose the occupants of local jails and designated them Jukes, more or less, in their studies. Moreover, their genetics studies looking to tie complicated character traits, such as poverty, to genes, regardless of environment or family wealth, look "totally discredited" to genetics researchers today, as Annals of Human Genetics editor Andrés Ruiz Linares of University College London, noted last year in an editorial exploring the eugenics-based past of that journal.

"The startling thing is that this mythology keeps bubbling along today," Lombardo says. "It's a simple story, 'like begets like' or 'the apple doesn't fall far from the tree,' that has run through eugenics thinking for a century. And that you still hear today in debates about crime, education, race and welfare, everything."
In 2006, a Charleston, S.C., city council member, Larry Shirley, said, "mothers need to be spayed" if their children are criminals, for example. A Louisiana state legislator, John LaBruzzo, called more recently for paying poor women $1,000 to be sterilized. Just this month, the Casper Journal in Wyoming published an opinion piece titled "Like begets like," that uncritically recounts the story of the Jukes. In religious circles today, titles of books and sermons with names such as Breaking Generational Curses, "The Sins of the Fathers" and "Generational Impact" also cite the story of the Jukes, Lombardo notes.

"The irony is that many religious figures reject eugenics, associating it with contraception and abortion, but some are buying into its same line of thinking now about generational curses, even using the same phrases that defined eugenics a century ago," he says.

In an era when genetic medicine is hurtling toward an era of personalized medicine defined by each individual's genes, the cautionary tale of the Jukes needs to be remembered, concludes Lombardo, who has documented the history of eugenics for decades. "We're just scratching the surface with our science today. The real lesson of the Jukes is that we need to have a little humility before we start demonizing people," he says.

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Walter A. Plecker: America's Potential Hitler AD Powell Open Salon Oct 23 1924

MARCH 10, 2011 1:48AM
 

Walter A. Plecker: America's Potential Hitler

Rate: 1 Flag
Walter A. Plecker
 
NOTE: W.A. Plecker, acting as Virginia's first Registrar of Vital Statistics, was determined to "mark" all Melungeons as not-white. Here is one of many articles and essays that he wrote and published on behalf of the American eugenics movement, a movement with haunting similarities to Hitler's genocide against European Jews and Gypsies. The views expressed below are those of W.A. Plecker and his racist colleagues; they are presented here to illustrate the hostility and vigor he showed inpersecuting mixed-ancestry Americans. An excellent discussion of Plecker'sdubious "legacy" can be found in Pocahontas'People by Helen Rountree.
VIRGINIA'S ATTEMPT TO ADJUST THE COLOR PROBLEM*
W. A. Plecker, M.D., FELLOW A.P.H.A.
State Registrar of Vital Statistics, Richmond, Virginia
* Read at the joint session of the Public Health Administration and Vital
Statistics Section of the American Public Health Association at the
Fifty-third Annual Meeting at Detroit Michigan, October 23, 1924. This copy from The American Journal of Public Health, 1925.
When two races live together there is but one possible outcome, and that is*the amalgamation of the races. The result of this will be the elimination ofthe higher type, the one on which progress depends. In the mixture the lower race loses its native good qualities which may be utilized and developed in the presence of a dominant race.
 The mongrels are superior in mental power to the lower race. They are more cunning and more capable, but they lack the creative power of the higher race, and cannot sustain a lasting civilization that will rank with the best of the world.
 History affords many examples. Egypt in the day of her greatness was white.  But the white Pharaohs began to extend their dominion south into the negro land, and to bring back multitudes of captives for laborers and soldiers, special mention being made also in their records that women in large numbers
were included. Interbreeding with these negroes began and continued through many centuries until the country became largely negroid.
 The climax was finally reached when one of the Pharaohs took to himself a negro wife and his mulatto son Taharka succeeding to the throne. The colorline had vanished and with it Egypt's greatness. Assyrian invaders met with no effective resistance. From that day to this Egypt has been a mongrel nation, incapable of initiative, and now dependent upon foreign protection and leadership.
 India affords a parallel example. Four thousand years ago the invasion of India by Aryans occurred. These came into contact with a mixed population of white-yellow- black composition. The conquerors attempted to prevent their own amalgamation with the natives by establishing a rigorous caste system, which was not like the present one based upon occupation, but upon color.
This system failed, and though caste is still in force in India the reason for it no longer exists.
Modern South Africa is a melancholy example of what may occur when the intermixture which inevitably results is hastened by fanatical religious teaching and misguided legal interference from the mother country.  Major E.S. Cox, who spent years in that region and in other countries studying race conditions, in his book "White America," (White America Society, Richmond, VA) gives a graphic account of the struggle made by the determined colonists against the imposition. They lost out, and the population of Cape Colony province is today largely mixed, showing how quickly this condition results when the natural process is speeded up by negrophilism and the law.
Let us return now to our own country, and, as we are considering Virginia, to that state in particular.
There are about twelve million negroes; of various degrees of admixture in the Union today. Of the population of Virginia, nearly one-third is classed as negro, but many of these people are negroid, some being near-white, some having actually succeeded in getting across into the white class.
 The mixed negroes are nearly all the result of illegitimate intercourse.The well known moral laxity resulting from close contact of a civilized witha primitive race makes illegitimate intermixture an easy matter. This is illustrated by the fact that the illegitimate birth-rate of Virginia negroes is thirty-two times that of Rhode Island, while the District of Columbia rate is thirty-seven times, and that of Maryland forty-six times.
 In the days when slavery was still a blight upon our state, it was quite acommon occurrence for white men to father children born to the negroservants. The history, as related to me, of at least one colony of people known as "Issue" or "Free Issue," now spread over several counties, is that they originated in part in that manner.
It was considered undesirable to retain these mulattoes on the place, bearing the family name, and a number from one county were given theirfreedom and colonized in a distant county. These intermarried amongs tthemselves and with some people of Indian- negro-white descent, and receivedan additional infusion of white blood, either illegitimately or by actual marriage with low-grade whites.
 At present these people are claiming to be white, or Indian, and under theformer law when a person with one-sixteenth negro blood could be declared white, they were able in some instances to establish their claim legally.
 These mixed breeds are not classed as white by the people of the community, and they will not associate with the genuine negroes. Five hundred or more in number they thus constitute a class of their own, and a serious problem in that county and others to which they migrate. If refused classification as white they claim to be Indian, and as such have been accepted in the birth reports to avoid listing them as white.
 In a recent test case, the court upon evidence submitted from our birthrecords reaching back to 1853, and from the testimony of old residents, decided that these people under the new "Racial Integrity" law cannot be permitted to intermarry with whites.
Another large colony which extends over into North Carolina probably has a similar origin. We have also compromised with these, and accept certificates as Indians, which indicates to us that they are not white.
 In another county are about forty descendants of an illegitimate mating of a negro man and white woman four generations back. All of these haveformerly succeeded in being classed as white. though under the new law our office has supplied to the clerks who issue marriage licenses, school authorities, commonwealth's attorneys, physicians and local registrars, a complete family tree, with the injunction to class them as colored.
 Similar conditions exist in other localities, though not yet so far advanced. A case was recently discovered where a white man married a mulatto woman (probably in another state), and now has nine children, four of them being reported to our office as white. Investigation revealed the fact that two other women bearing the same family name had mated with white men and were raising large families of children.
 Another man whose birth was reported in 1878, both parents being registered as colored, had the court declare him a white man under the one-sixteenth law; married a white woman, and has four children reported as white by physicians.
 The question of their color was referred to our office by the school authorities when the facts were discovered, and the white school advised under the new law not to receive them, though they engaged a lawyer to assist them.
 These examples illustrate the fact that even in Virginia where the questions of race and birth receive as much attention as anywhere in thecountry, the process of amalgamation is nevertheless going on, and in some localities is well advanced. Complete ruin can probably be held off for several centuries longer, but we have no reason to hope that we shall prove the one and only example in the history of the world of two races living together without amalgamation.
In Mexico, much of South America and the West Indies the process is practically complete, the mixture being Spanish or Portuguese, Indian and negro. Some portions of southern Europe have undergone a similar admixture.  Immigrants from these lands to this country, while really negroid, are classed as white.
 Several South American countries, or portions of them, still retain a considerable degree of race purity, which is being maintained by European immigration.
The immigration law recently passed by our Congress will stop the legal admission of Mongolians and will check much of the negroid immigration from elsewhere in the old world, but it will not prevent negro and negroidimmigration from other parts of the western hemisphere. It is estimated that there are today from 500,000 to 750,000 Mexicans in the state of Texas alone, and that Mexicans compose more than half of the population of .
 But it is possible to stop the legal intermixture, and that Virginia has attempted to do in the above mentioned law, which defines a white person as one with "no trace whatsoever of blood other than Caucasian," and makes it a felony punishable by confinement for one year in the penitentiary to make a willfully false statement as to color.
 Clerks are not permitted to grant licenses for white persons to marry those with any trace of colored blood. It is needless to call attention to the sad plight of a white person who is thus imposed upon or of a white woman who under such circumstances would give birth to a child of marked negro characteristics, as will occur from time to time under Mendel's law.
The new law places upon the office of the Bureau of Vital Statistics much additional work, but we believe it will be a strong factor in preventing the intermarriage of the races and in preventing persons of negro descent from passing themselves off as white.
We are greatly encouraged by the interest and cooperation of physicians, local registrars, clerks, school authorities, the general public, and even the midwives. Our success during the first four months of the enforcement of this law, in securing more accurate statements as to color on our birth certificates and in correcting previously existing errors is far beyond our expectation.
The states which now permit free intermarriage of the races, as listed in"American Marriage Laws", (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1919) are:
Connecticut, District of Columbia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,
Ohio, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and
Wyoming. The most urgent need is the speedy adoption by these states and the
District of Columbia of a law forbidding the intermarriage of the white and colored races.
The white race in this land is the foundation upon which rests its civilization, and is responsible for the leading position which we occupy amongst the nations of the world. Is it not therefore just and right thatthis race decide for itself what its composition shall be, and attempt, as Virginia has, to maintain its purity?
 This is working no hardship and no injustice upon the other races; for the same effort tends at the same time to maintain the purity of their races as well.
 That the mongrel races are liable to perpetuate the undesirable qualities of both their constituent stocks is abundantly demonstrated by a study of the larger and older of the mongrel groups in Virginia, as well as upon a study on a far larger scale in various other parts of the world.
The colored races therefore should be equally zealous in preventing both the legal and illegal admixture of the races. We are glad to say that the true negro of Virginia is beginning to appreciate this point and is agreeing to the wisdom of this movement. Our chief trouble is with some of the near-whites who desire to change from the colored to the white class.
 ___________________________________________________

Virginia Health Bulletin, November 1925
Vol. XVII, Extra No. 12
Shall America Remain White? *
By W. A. Plecker, M. D.
From the Booklet:
THE NEW FAMILY AND RACE IMPROVEMENT
Fifth of NEW FAMILY SERIES
Issued by
Bureau of Vital Statistics
State Board of Health
Richmond, VA
1925
* Read before Section on Public Health, Southern Medical Association,
Eighteenth Annual Meeting,
New Orleans, La., Nov. 24-17, 1924.
The negro as a laborer is valuable, and if it were possible to preserve the race in purity with him in our midst, he would be a great asset.  Because this cannot be done, and because the mixed breeds are a menace and not an asset,we have them as the greatest problem and most destructive force which confronts the white race and American civilization.
 Both remote and recent history of many nations shows that in none of them have white and colored races lived together without ultimate amalgamation, and without the final deterioration or complete destruction of the white or higher civilization.
 We behold with awe the evidences which we now find in Egypt of the wonderful civilization of the past, when that country was white. The Pharaohs extended their conquest south and brought back as captives large numbers of negro men and women. Intermixture of the races began and progressed to such a point that one of the Pharaohs took as wife a negro woman whose son succeeded to the throne. This was about the time when Jeremiah the Prophet warned Israel to break with Egypt and affiliate with Babylon.  His warning was disregarded, Egypt was as a broken staff upon which to lean. The fall of Jerusalem and the Babylonian captivity resulted.
 Egypt, then a mongrel nation, soon went down before Assyria and is today a feeble and helpless nation of brown-skinned people devoid of initiative and dependent upon white leadership and protection.
 Four thousand years ago, India was ruled by Aryan conquerors, who instituted an elaborate caste system to prevent intermixture of the races. This system failed and the few survivors who might be called white are now looked upon as curiosities.
 South America and Mexico were subdued by Spanish and Portuguese adventurers, who began at once to raise up a mixed breed.
 Indians would not make docile slaves, and negroes in large numbers were brought in.
Much of South America and Mexico is today inhabited by a mongrel race of white-black-red mixture, one of the most undesirable racial intermixtures known, as I can testify from my own observation of similar groups in Virginia.
 Professor A. E. Jenks, of the University of Minnesota, and his assistant,made a house-to-house study of families the result of mixed marriages, the marriage records not even showing the color of the man and woman. These people have in Minneapolis an organization known as the Manassas Society, membership in which is dependent upon the intermarriage of a negro man and white woman. Already 200 such families are included in this society, with probable omissions.
 Similar conditions exist in many parts of the North and West. That condition alone, if unchecked, will in a few centuries legally mongrelize that portion of our country.
If we turn our eyes southward, we find a different but even more serious situation. None of our Southern States permits the intermarriage of whites and pure blacks, but all except Virginia and perhaps two others allow the intermarriage of whites with those of one-sixteenth or one-eighth negro blood.
 This serious situation calls for the speedy enactment of laws based upon that of Virginia, which defines a white person as one with no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian and forbids the intermarriage of whites with those with the slightest trace of negro blood.
 Clerks who issue marriage licenses are required to assure themselves that both parties are white, according to the new definition, when that fact is claimed and are instructed to withhold the license, when in doubt, until satisfactory proof is submitted to them.
 The enforcement of the law naturally falls upon the Bureau of Vital Statistics, to which are reported the births, deaths, marriages and divorces of the State, all of which require a statement as to color.  Our office has accepted this task and has undertaken seriously, as far as possible, to secure from all sources the truth as to this point.
 Circular letters have been sent to all clerks physicians, local registrars, undertakers and midwives, with copies of the law, urging them to use all possible care to furnish us with correct statements.
School authorities have been reached through their journal, and the public is being instructed by newspaper articles and lectures.
 Much interest has been aroused and many cases of mixture are being called to our attention.
When this condition is found on the birth certificate if the mother has other children, we refer back to previous births to the same parents and make the certificates agree. We have thus caught a number of families in the act of passing over from the colored to the white class, some of their children being already recorded as white and some as colored.
 Our custom is to notify the head of the family that this situation cannot be allowed and that if one of his children is colored, they are all colored.
 The case is different, however, when the process of intermixture has so far advanced that communities of mixed breeds have been formed, particularly if they have or claim to have some intermixture of Indian blood.

Virginia Health Bulletin, November 1925
Vol. XVII, Extra No. 12
Discussion (by other doctors)
From the booklet:
THE NEW FAMILY AND RACE IMPROVEMENT
Fifth of NEW FAMILY SERIES
Issued by
Bureau of Vital Statistics
State Board of Health
Richmond, VA
1925

 Dr. A. T. McCormack, Louisville, Ky. - I had the opportunity of going to Panama, where every race had contributed something, and the negroid influence was predominant, and where degeneration of all races had been more rapidly brought about by that element. I think it of extreme importance to white civilization to prevent the contamination.

Dr. W. A. Evans, Chicago, Ill. --Dr. Plecker calls attention to the fact that, independent of the strength or weakness of the strain, when strains are crossed there is begotten a something which fails to have the characteristics of either parent stock. That is well recognized in animal breeding.
The health officer, whether working in epidemiology or not, who does not recognize racial hygiene and racial peculiarities, the advantages and disadvantages of mixing these stocks, is failing in the responsibility that rests upon his shoulders.

Dr.Geo. Dempsey, New Orleans, La. - No mixture of Japanese, Chinese, negro, etc., has ever attained the high pinnacle for which the white race is known.

Dr Carl F. Raver, Charleston, W. Va. -- During slave days it no doubt was advantageous, from a commercial standpoint, to produce as many offspring of negro parentage as possible and many slave owners must have encouraged the mixing of the races.
 This produced the mulatto. Now it is this mulatto, or his offspring, thatis causing all the trouble. They do not wish to be classed as negroes and, if light enough in color, try to pass as white and marry into white families. Every possible means should be used to prevent this. The strongest weapon is public opinion. Public opinion allowed the mulatto to become started as an institution. It condoned the situation.

Correspondence: Plecker and Tennessee State Librarian 

Plecker Letter to Trustee of Lee County, Va. Schools 

Amount of Negro and Other Colored Blood Illegal in Various States for Marriage to Whites: 1929

Letter Distributed to County Officials Listing Mixed-Race Surnames 

Sunday, October 5, 2014

Under cover of the Night: Your Real Government


Naming Names: Your Real Government

When dark deeds unfold, point the finger in this direction.
by Tony Cartalucci


This is your real government; they transcend elected administrations, they permeate every political party, and they are responsible for nearly every aspect of the average American and European's way of life. When the "left" is carrying the torch for two "Neo-Con" wars, starting yet another based on the same lies, peddled by the same media outlets that told of Iraqi WMD's, the world has no choice, beyond profound cognitive dissonance, but to realize something is wrong.

What's wrong is a system completely controlled by a corporate-financier oligarchy with financial, media, and industrial empires that span the globe. If we do not change the fact that we are helplessly dependent on these corporations that regulate every aspect of our nation politically, and every aspect of our lives personally, nothing else will ever change.

The following list, however extensive, is by far not all-inclusive. However after these examples, a pattern should become self-evident with the same names and corporations being listed again and again. It should be self-evident to readers of how dangerously pervasive these corporations have become in our daily lives. Finally, it should be self-evident as to how necessary it is to excise these corporations from our lives, our communities, and ultimately our nations, with the utmost expediency.




International Crisis Group
www.crisisgroup.org

Background: While the International Crisis Group (ICG) claims to be "committed to preventing and resolving deadly conflict," the reality is that they are committed to offering solutions crafted well in advance to problems they themselves have created in order to perpetuate their own corporate agenda.

Nowhere can this be better illustrated than in Thailand and more recently in Egypt. ICG member Kenneth Adelman had been backing Thailand's Prime Minster Thaksin Shinwatra, a former Carlyle Group adviser who was was literally standing in front of the CFR in NYC on the eve of his ousting from power in a 2006 military coup. Since 2006, Thaksin's meddling in Thailand has been propped up by fellow Carlyle man James Baker and his Baker Botts law firm, Belfer Center adviser Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers, and now Robert Amsterdam's Amsterdam & Peroff, a major corporate member of the globalist Chatham House.

With Thailand now mired in political turmoil led by Thaksin Shinwatra and his "red shirt" color revolution, the ICG is ready with "solutions" in hand. These solutions generally involve tying the Thai government's hands with arguments that stopping Thaksin's subversive activities amounts to human rights abuses, in hopes of allowing the globalist-backed revolution to swell beyond control.

The unrest in Egypt, of course, was led entirely by ICG member Mohamed ElBaradei and his US State Department recruited, funded, and supported April 6 Youth Movement coordinated by Google's Wael Ghonim. While the unrest was portrayed as being spontaneous, fueled by the earlier Tunisian uprising, ICG's ElBaradei, Ghonim, and their youth movement had been in Egypt since 2010 assembling their "National Front for Change" and laying the groundwork for the January 25th 2011 uprising.

ICG's George Soros would then go on to fund Egyptian NGOs working to rewrite the Egyptian constitution after front-man ElBaradei succeeded in removing Hosni Mubarak. This Soros-funded constitution and the resulting servile stooge government it would create represents the ICG "resolving" the crisis their own ElBaradei helped create.

Notable ICG Board Members:

George Soros
Kenneth Adelman
Samuel Berger
Wesley Clark
Mohamed ElBaradei
Carla Hills

Notable ICG Advisers:

Richard Armitage
Zbigniew Brzezinski
Stanley Fischer
Shimon Peres
Surin Pitsuwan
Fidel V. Ramos

Notable ICG Foundation & Corporate Supporters:

Carnegie Corporation of New York
Hunt Alternatives Fund
Open Society Institute
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Morgan Stanley
Deutsche Bank Group
Soros Fund Management LLC
McKinsey & Company
Chevron
Shell




Brookings Institutewww.brookings.edu

Background: Within the library of the Brookings Institute you will find the blueprints for nearly every conflict the West has been involved with in recent memory. What's more is that while the public seems to think these crises spring up like wildfires, those following the Brookings' corporate funded studies and publications see these crises coming years in advance. These are premeditated, meticulously planned conflicts that are triggered to usher in premeditated, meticulously planned solutions to advance Brookings' corporate supporters, who are numerous.

The ongoing operations against Iran, including US-backed color revolutions, US-trained and backed terrorists inside Iran, and crippling sanctions were all spelled out in excruciating detail in the Brookings Institute report, "Which Path to Persia?" The more recent UN Security Council resolution 1973 regarding Libya uncannily resembles Kenneth Pollack's March 9, 2011 Brookings report titled "The Real Military Options in Libya."

Notable Brookings Board Members:

Dominic Barton: McKinsey & Company, Inc.
Alan R. Batkin: Eton Park Capital Management
Richard C. Blum: Blum Capital Partners, LP
Abby Joseph Cohen: Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Suzanne Nora Johnson: Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
Richard A. Kimball Jr.: Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Tracy R. Wolstencroft: Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Paul Desmarais Jr.: Power Corporation of Canada
Kenneth M. Duberstein: The Duberstein Group, Inc.
Benjamin R. Jacobs: The JBG Companies
Nemir Kirdar: Investcorp
Klaus Kleinfeld: Alcoa, Inc.
Philip H. Knight: Nike, Inc.
David M. Rubenstein: Co-Founder of The Carlyle Group
Sheryl K. Sandberg: Facebook
Larry D. Thompson: PepsiCo, Inc.
Michael L. Tipsord: State Farm Insurance Companies
Andrew H. Tisch: Loews Corporation

Some Brookings Experts:
(click on names to see a list of recent writings.)

Kenneth Pollack
Daniel L. Byman
Martin Indyk
Suzanne Maloney
Michael E. O'Hanlon
Bruce Riedel
Shadi Hamid

Notable Brookings Foundation and Corporate Support:

Foundations & Governments

Ford Foundation
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation
Government of the United Arab Emirates
Carnegie Corporation of New York
Rockefeller Brothers Fund

Banking & Finance

Bank of America
Citi
Goldman Sachs
H&R Block
Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
Jacob Rothschild
Nathaniel Rothschild
Standard Chartered Bank
Temasek Holdings Limited
Visa Inc.

Big Oil

Exxon Mobil Corporation
Chevron
Shell Oil Company

Military Industrial Complex & Industry

Daimler
General Dynamics Corporation
Lockheed Martin Corporation
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Siemens Corporation
The Boeing Company
General Electric Company
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
Raytheon Co.
Hitachi, Ltd.
Toyota

Telecommunications & Technology

AT&T
Google Corporation
Hewlett-Packard
Microsoft Corporation
Panasonic Corporation
Verizon Communications
Xerox Corporation
Skype

Media & Perception Management

McKinsey & Company, Inc.
News Corporation (Fox News)

Consumer Goods & Pharmaceutical

GlaxoSmithKline
Target
PepsiCo, Inc.
The Coca-Cola Company