Australia Operates Eugenic Migration Policy

[Croft]

I happened to be watching a TV series today which touched on eugenics so I decided to do a little background reading. I was surprised to read that, according to one notable author in the field (Lynn, 2001, Part III. The Implementation of Classical Eugenics), "The final strategy for the promotion of positive eugenics would consist of the acceptance of good-quality immigrants." The writer even singles out Australia as an example of operating this policy.

 

Is the current visa system something you would see as eugenic? It is interesting to note the same author regards other policies such as providing information about or promoting contraception and abortion as eugenic in their nature too.

[Loopylu]

I happened to be watching a TV series today which touched on eugenics so I decided to do a little background reading. I was surprised to read that, according to one notable author in the field (Lynn, 2001, Part III. The Implementation of Classical Eugenics), "The final strategy for the promotion of positive eugenics would consist of the acceptance of good-quality immigrants." The writer even singles out Australia as an example of operating this policy.

 

Is the current visa system something you would see as eugenic? It is interesting to note the same author regards other policies such as providing information about or promoting contraception and abortion as eugenic in their nature too.

 

I have long thought that the Australian visa medical requirements have their roots in eugenics. It's flattering to know that my analysis is backed up by academic treatise!

[Parley]

What is wrong with inviting people to come who will add value to the country rather than be a drain ?

[Marisawright]

I think that's a stretch. The Australian migration system isn't based on anything so complicated.

 

Migrants are selected based on whether their skills are in demand, not on what their IQ is.

 

Health is considered, but only where the applicant has a serious illness that could cost the taxpayer money. Many migrants have less-than-perfect health and it's not a barrier.

 

Migrants are also not screened for their genetic make-up.

 

In Western countries, contraception and abortion usually have more to do with the woman choosing not to conceive because sh can't afford to, or is unable to for other reasons - nothing to do with eugenics at all, as far as I can see.

[flag of convenience]

Nothing to do with eugenics at all. If some are caught up in the swell of incomers, purely by chance. Australia does not as a rule attract the' best', they would tend to go to America. We have operated in different forms populate or perish, or like in more recent times a population Ponzi scheme , to enable GDP growth, maintain the housing market, increase competition and both parties support A Big Australia.

 

Not the brightest, nor the best, just those that fit a certain criteria, or have loads of money or some other way of gaining entry. Immigration does broaden the genetic pool, obviously. But the only country outside of Nazi Germany than I recall promoting something akin to eugenics was Singapore back in the eighties. The idea was to encourage the intelligent to marry and breed.

[Croft]

I think the point the author was making was that Australia looks for those with the skills it needs. Nothing wrong with that at all. Now those with the skills it needs tend to be more driven, motivated,, perhaps intelligent? It screens out the unhealthy who would be a burden on the health system. It ends up with a better workforce, as opposed the more open door policy in Europe. I'm not sure I agree with some of the authors conclusions that this has led to a lower quality of migrant, but they indicate some studies which support that view.

[flag of convenience]

I think the point the author was making was that Australia looks for those with the skills it needs. Nothing wrong with that at all. Now those with the skills it needs tend to be more driven, motivated,, perhaps intelligent? It screens out the unhealthy who would be a burden on the health system. It ends up with a better workforce, as opposed the more open door policy in Europe. I'm not sure I agree with some of the authors conclusions that this has led to a lower quality of migrant, but they indicate some studies which support that view.

 

But Australia does not operate an Eugenic immigration policy. (if we are going by the meaning of eugenics of course) Australia operates a policy on having a skill of some sort, many would argue not necessary in short supply either. The policy is to grow the country. For better or worse. More people coming in increase economic activity. It does not necessary increase the intelligence of the country. Although a expect taxi drivers have seen IQ's raise considerably over the year with so many professionally trained people driving one.

[starlight7]

I doubt the average person working in the migration field here would have the remotest idea what eugenics is/are. You are ascribing an intelligence that is simply not there.