242 Chapter 10
TheNon-Threatof LockeanReprogenetics
Onceagain,to uncoverthe absurdityof Black’s and Mahoney’s conflationof governist
eugenicswithprivate,consensualreprogenetics,one mustrecallthatgovernisteugenics
consistedof governmentsimplementingthe followingregulations.
- Coercivelysterilizingsomeone,by forceof law,whomayhavehadmentallyill
ancestorsor relatives,or whomaycarryany otherheritablegenesthe Statedoesnot
wantpassedon. - ExercisinggovernmentforceagainstimmigrantJuanfor settingfooton native-born
countrymanRick’s landat Rick’s owninvitation.Thegovernisteugenicsrationale
wouldbe thatimmigrantJuan,beingethnicallydifferentfrommuchof the host
country’s native-bornpopulation,mightproducea childwithsomebodyamongthe
native-bornpopulation.Thisinterracialmixingwouldsupposedlypollutethe na-
tive-bornpopulation’s genepoolwiththe DNAof his allegedlyinferiorethnicity.
As we mentionedin chapter2, that is calledmiscegenation. - LawsbarringJackandLisa—bothof whomare of differingracialbackgrounds—
frombeingon the sameplotof real estateas one anotherat the sametime.Thisban
wouldbe in effectdespitethe land’s ownerconsentingto bothJackand Lisabeing
on his landsimultaneously.Thisis Jim Crowsegregationand apartheid. - Lawstreatingat leastone geneticethnicitydifferentlyfromothers.
- Government-approvedmurderof one or morepersonson the groundsthathe or
she carriesgenetictraitsthatthe Statedoesnot wantdeliveredto futureprogeny.
Thisis the governisteugenicistpolicyof ethniccleansingand,mostfamously,the
Nazis.
Attemptsby humanbeingsto controlwhatgenestheyendowto futuregenerationsof
theirsociety,shouldbe illegalonlyinsofaras theyspoliatesomeone.WhenBlackpillories
JamesD. Watsonfor implementingFrancisGalton’s planto utilize“socialengineering” to
“createa masterrace,” Blackirresponsiblyneglectsto acknowledgea specificcontrast.
WhereasGaltonprevaileduponthe Stateto spoliateindividualson behalfof restructur-
ing England’s genepoolin the mannerthathe preferred,Watsonsimplyasksthatthe
governmentleaveconsentingadultsfree to attemptto maintainthe sort of familiesthey
want,peaceably.Watsonvoicedhis actualviewon the subjectof reprogeneticsthusly—
“... individualsshoulddirectthe evolutionof theirdescendents;don’t let the Statedo
it.”^60
Blackdeclinedto mentionthatwhenWatsonadmittedthathe wantedgeneticengi-
neeringto raiseIQ scoresand makegirlsprettier,Watsonwasnot proposingany law to
forceanythingon anyone.Watsonassumedthatmostparentswouldvoluntarilyopt to
raisetheirchild’s IQ or makeher good-lookingif the opportunitypresenteditself.If his
advocacyof spoliationis the reasonfor FrancisGalton’s treachery,thenBlackhas morein
commonwithGaltonthanWatsondoes.It is Blackwhodemandsthatgovernmentspoli-
ate individualsby dictatingoverwhatgeneticadvancestheymayor maynot peaceably
bestowupontheirownchildren.BlackconcludesWarAgainstthe Weakby sermonizing,
“It will takea globalconsensusto legislateagainstgeneticabusebecauseno singlecoun-
try’s law can by itselfanticipatethe evolvinginter-collaborativenatureof globalGenom-
ics. Onlyone preceptcan preventthe dreamof twentieth-centuryeugenicsfromfinding
fulfillmentin twenty-first-centurygeneticengineering:no matterhowfar or fast the sci-
encedevelops,nothingshouldbe doneanywhereby anyoneto exclude... an individual
basedon his or her geneticmakeup.”^61
Actuallyit shouldbe legalfor someoneto avoidassociatingwithotherson the basisof
theirgeneticmakeup,providedthatsuchshunningdoesnot entailspoliation.Sucha