Confronting the “Weaponization” of Genetics by Racists Online and Elsewhere

IF 2.3 3区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Aaron Panofsky, Kushan Dasgupta, Nicole Iturriaga, Bernard Koch
{"title":"Confronting the “Weaponization” of Genetics by Racists Online and Elsewhere","authors":"Aaron Panofsky,&nbsp;Kushan Dasgupta,&nbsp;Nicole Iturriaga,&nbsp;Bernard Koch","doi":"10.1002/hast.4925","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Genomics research is regularly appropriated in social and political contexts to publicly legitimize unjust and malicious political views, policies, and actions. In recent years, there have been high-profile cases of mass shooters, public intellectuals, and political insiders using genomics findings to convince audiences that deadly force and coercive policies against racial minorities are warranted. To create a just genomics, geneticists must consider what makes their research so attractive and adaptable for the legitimization of unjust ends and what they can do to counter such appropriations. We offer insights and recommendations drawing from our research into the many ways online white nationalist and far-right political movements mobilize genetics research to promote their racist, sexist, antisemitic, and homophobic views. First, geneticists should identify and change routine research practices that feed eugenic thinking. Second, geneticists should adopt creative extra-scholarly communication efforts to counter the use of their field's research that occurs in nonscholarly spaces. Third, we identify permissive epistemological and professional practices within the genetics field that have enabled such unjust appropriations to thrive, and we recommend strategies for institutional reform.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55073,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Center Report","volume":"54 S2","pages":"S14-S21"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hast.4925","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Center Report","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.4925","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Genomics research is regularly appropriated in social and political contexts to publicly legitimize unjust and malicious political views, policies, and actions. In recent years, there have been high-profile cases of mass shooters, public intellectuals, and political insiders using genomics findings to convince audiences that deadly force and coercive policies against racial minorities are warranted. To create a just genomics, geneticists must consider what makes their research so attractive and adaptable for the legitimization of unjust ends and what they can do to counter such appropriations. We offer insights and recommendations drawing from our research into the many ways online white nationalist and far-right political movements mobilize genetics research to promote their racist, sexist, antisemitic, and homophobic views. First, geneticists should identify and change routine research practices that feed eugenic thinking. Second, geneticists should adopt creative extra-scholarly communication efforts to counter the use of their field's research that occurs in nonscholarly spaces. Third, we identify permissive epistemological and professional practices within the genetics field that have enabled such unjust appropriations to thrive, and we recommend strategies for institutional reform.

面对种族主义者在网上和其他地方的基因“武器化”
基因组学研究经常在社会和政治背景下被挪用,以公开合法化不公正和恶意的政治观点、政策和行动。近年来,出现了一些引人注目的大规模枪击事件,公共知识分子和政治内幕人士利用基因组学的发现来说服观众,针对少数种族的致命武力和强制性政策是有道理的。为了创造一个公正的基因组学,遗传学家必须考虑是什么让他们的研究如此吸引人,并使其适用于使不公正的目的合法化,以及他们能做些什么来反对这种挪用。我们通过研究发现,白人民族主义者和极右翼政治运动是如何利用遗传学研究来宣传他们的种族主义、性别歧视、反犹主义和恐同观点的。首先,遗传学家应该识别并改变那些滋养优生思想的常规研究实践。其次,遗传学家应该采取创造性的学术之外的交流努力,以对抗在非学术空间中使用他们领域的研究。第三,我们确定了遗传学领域内纵容的认识论和专业实践,这些实践使这种不公正的拨款得以蓬勃发展,我们建议了制度改革的策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hastings Center Report
Hastings Center Report 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Hastings Center Report explores ethical, legal, and social issues in medicine, health care, public health, and the life sciences. Six issues per year offer articles, essays, case studies of bioethical problems, columns on law and policy, caregivers’ stories, peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and book reviews. Authors come from an assortment of professions and academic disciplines and express a range of perspectives and political opinions. The Report’s readership includes physicians, nurses, scholars, administrators, social workers, health lawyers, and others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信