The Natural Self-Genocide of Raymond Cattell
In the lastest issue of Right Now! Kevin Lamb
attacks Dr. Barry Mehler for leading a campaign to prevent
Raymond B. Cattell, a well known race scientist, from receiving
an award from the American Psychological Foundation. In an exclusive
article for Searchlight, Barry Mehler responds.
Searchlight #283 (January 1999) p. 17.
In the October-December issue of Right Now!
Kevin Lamb contends that "the Left is abandoning traditional liberal
ideas free speech, inquiry and debate, toleration of dissent,
and open-mindedness in order to preserve the sanctity of
egalitarianism." Case in point the scandal that surrounded
the American Psychological Foundation's decision to not to confer
their prestigious Gold Medal award for lifetime achievement to Raymond
According to Lamb, this author, was responsible
for a "hit-and-run character assassination" of a great scientist.
Working behind the scenes "blitzing the media with press releases
via fax machine, the Internet and e-mail, the APF "under pressure
from Mehler and other organized interest groups," withheld the
presentation of Cattell's award. Instead of passing into history
peacefully after claiming his final honor, Cattell died amidst
a swirl of controversy and condemnation.
As Lamb would have us believe, Cattell was the
victim of "modern McCarthyism," having offended the egalitarian
doctrines of left wing ideologues. Egalitarianism, however, was
never the issue. In my 1997 essay, “Beyondism: Raymond B. Cattell
and the New Eugenics,” I suggested that eugenics and fascism
had a special historical relationship which was exemplified in
Cattell's work. Cattell, an early supporter of German national
socialism, founded a religious movement called "Beyondism," which
I have described as "a neo-fascist contrivance." At the time of
his death, his associates included such notorious neo-fascists
as Roger Pearson, Wilmot Robertson and Robert K. Graham. It was
my contention that Cattell's work helped to dignify the most destructive
political ideas of the twentieth century.
It is telling that one has to go to Right
Now! and Mankind Quarterly and the likes of Kevin Lamb
to find anyone willing to speak out in defense of Dr. Cattell.
When the Canadian History and Philosophy of Psychology Bulletin
an official publication of the Canadian Psychological Association
wanted to put together a special issue discussing the Cattell
controversy, all of Cattell's closest supporters, colleagues and
family were asked to participate none accepted. However,
some did participate in an email discussion of the issues. During
that discussion Cattell's most loyal defenders tried to separate
him from the neo-fascist movement he led. Dr. Heather Cattell,
for instance, argued that her father's involvement with the publication,
The Beyondist, was insignificant. According to her, "a
few people tried to involve Dad" in "this obscure 'Beyondist'
newsletter" which never got beyond one or two issues and "is certainly
not Dad's writing..." (HC to HPPB discussion list, September 13,
That The Beyondist was indeed Dr. Cattell's
writing is made clear by a memo and draft circulated by John Horn.
On 28 September 1993, John Horn Cattell's protege and long
time associate wrote a memo which he attached to a draft
statement written by Raymond B. Cattell to the "self-appointed
executive group" of the "Beyondism working group." Horn identified
the draft, titled "The Beyondist Society: First Annual Meeting"
as "Ray's suggestion for the first Newsletter of the Beyondism
Society," and comments that he "thinks it needs some editing,
some modifications, some shortening, and some added to before
it goes to hoards of folks" and he asked for comments. The draft
was addressed to Cattell's closest associates including Herb Eber,
Robert Graham, John Gillis, Richard Gorsuch, John Nesselroad,
and Jack McArdle. Both McArdle and Eber have denied having any
significant engagement with the group (Blum, 5 January 1994, p.
A47). In it Cattell contended that "Beyondism is an increasing
acceptance of reality, and that involves dropping the emotional
support of a loving omnipotent god." As an example of a reality
that needed accepting, Cattell asked, "Should the more successful
[nations] bolster up the less successful (as the U.S. does Somalia)..."
Cattell's position is that the U.S. ought not interfere with natural
selection by obstructing "natural self-genocide." [from the draft]
The draft was published (with the above quotes edited out) as
the introductory essay of the first issue of The Beyondist
in November 1993.
In his 1972 monograph on Beyondism, Cattell recommended
that First World countries allow Third World countries "to go
to the wall" when they collapse into chaos, mass famine, and genocide.
Foreign aid to under-developed third-world countries is a mistake.
Incompetent and obsolete societies are not fit for the competitive
struggle for existence. "What is called for here is not genocide,
the killing off of the populations of incompetent cultures. But
we do need to think realistically in terms of "phasing out of
such peoples” (Cattell, 1972, p. 221; Lynn, 1974, p. 207).
According to sociologist Pierre Van Den Bergh
of the University of Washington, two-thirds of all people killed
by states since 1945 have been internal victims of genocide or
politicides. "Estimates of internal blood baths yield totals of
6.8 to 16.3 million victims ... between 1945 and 1987, depending
on whose figures one accepts. ...However one wants to classify
acts of state sponsored murder it is clear that since World War
II, three-fourths of all fatalities were caused by states killing
their own citizens..." [quotes taken from a transcript]. What
Cattell calls, "genthanasia," Van den Bergh calls "genocide or
politicide" committed by elites who inherited "an alien colonial
system of government perpetuated by minority rule through corruption
and violence" appropriating the organs of state control for private
exploitation "through a complex network of nepotism and ethnic
What exactly is "voluntary self-genocide" or
the "phasing out" of "incompetent cultures?" In the U.S. today
there is a vigorous debate over the morality of "doctor assisted
suicide." In Michigan, voters recently turned down a proposition
to allow physicians to aid terminally ill patients to end their
lives. Is this similar to "psychologists assisted self-genocide"
a program in which psychologists help nations like Somalia,
Bengla Desh, and Bosnia phase themselves out? Or are we really
talking about simply providing a justification for genocide?
Mehler, Jan. '99