{"id":523,"date":"2005-01-01T12:00:09","date_gmt":"2005-01-01T12:00:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/72.47.250.174\/?p=523"},"modified":"2005-01-01T12:00:09","modified_gmt":"2005-01-01T12:00:09","slug":"peter-singer-and-eugenics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/","title":{"rendered":"Peter Singer and Eugenics"},"content":{"rendered":"

Peter Singer is an Australian philosopher who is best known for his book \t\tAnimal Liberation<\/em>. His work on ethics is respected within the academy \t\tand he has had an impact on public opinion unmatched by almost any other \t\tprofessional philosopher. He is the world’s foremost proponent of utilitarianism, \t\tone of the two major doctrines within mainstream western ethics. Singer \t\twas recently appointed to a prestigious chair at Princeton University, \t\ta top US school. That appointment has brought to these shores a heated \t\tcontroversy about various of Singer’s views that has been raging in much \t\tof Europe for the past decade. This article will only address Singer’s \t\tviews on selective infanticide, one of his most controversial positions.<\/p>\n

Singer advocates the killing of certain newborn infants at the discretion \t\tof their parents. The criteria he proposes for deciding which infants \t\tmay be killed center on a wide range of hereditary physical conditions \t\twhich Singer considers “disabilities”. He has been forthright and consistent \t\tin his advocacy of this position for many years. The second sentence of \t\this 1985 book Should the Baby Live?<\/em> (co-authored with his close \t\tcolleague Helga Kuhse) reads: “We think that some infants with severe \t\tdisabilities should be killed.” The reason that Singer supports infanticide \t\tin such cases is not, as one might expect from a utilitarian, to put an \t\tend to the newborn’s suffering; as Singer himself repeatedly points out, \t\tin many of the cases in which he favors infanticide there is no physical \t\tpain or suffering of any kind involved. His stated reason, rather, is \t\tthat such children have diminished prospects of eventually enjoying an \t\tadequate “quality of life”, in his words, and to allow them to live would \t\ttake away resources from what Singer calls “normal” children. He therefore \t\tadvocates killing “disabled” infants, if the parents so choose, and replacing \t\tthem with “normal” ones. The terminology of “replacement” is Singer’s \t\town; his philosophy “treats infants as replaceable”, in his words (Practical \t\tEthics<\/em> p. 186).<\/p>\n

What counts as a “severe disability” for Singer? He intentionally leaves \t\tthe term vague to allow for a broad range of parental discretion, but \t\the has discussed a number of specific examples, both hypothetical as well \t\tas actual cases. The conditions he has explicitly named as sufficient \t\tjustification for active infanticide include Down syndrome, spina bifida, \t\tand hemophilia. Here is Singer’s reasoning on the latter condition, taken \t\tfrom his popular textbook Practical Ethics<\/em> (P. 186): \t “Suppose a woman planning to have two children has one normal \t\tchild, then gives birth to a haemophiliac child. The burden of caring \t\tfor that child may make it impossible for her to cope with a third child; \t\tbut if the disabled child were to die, she would have another. . . . When \t\tthe death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant \t\twith better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will \t\tbe greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for \t\tthe first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. \t\tTherefore, if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on \t\tothers, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him.”<\/p>\n

Like hemophilia, spina bifida is a congenital condition. It covers a \t\tvery broad range of symptoms, many of them quite minor. Singer considers \t\tany one of the following conditions to constitute, in conjunction with \t\ta diagnosis of spina bifida, a “severe physical handicap”: “chronic urinary \t\tinfections; kidney disease; paraplegia requiring the use of calipers, \t\tcrutches, or wheelchairs; severe spinal deformities; precariously controlled \t\thydrocephalus; blindness, fits, or other less common defects.” (Should \t\tthe Baby Live?<\/em> p. 61) This list of “severe” handicaps comes in the \t\tsame book that begins, “We think that some infants with severe disabilities \t\tshould be killed.”<\/p>\n

Down syndrome, once again a genetically based condition, gets the most \t\tattention in Singer’s recent work. His 1994 book Rethinking Life & \t\tDeath<\/em>, whose aim is to articulate “a social ethic where some human \t\tlives are valued and others are not” (p. 112), recapitulates the arguments \t\tin favor of selective infanticide outlined above. There he endorses the \t\tview that “it is ethical that a child suffering from Down’s syndrome…should \t\tnot survive” (p. 123) because “the quality of life of someone with Down \t\tsyndrome [is] below the standard at which medical treatment to sustain \t\tthe life of an infant becomes obligatory” (p. 111; in Singer’s terms “treatment \t\tto sustain life” doesn’t refer merely to surgical intervention but to \t\tsimple feeding as well). This “quality of life” reasoning is sometimes \t\tcast in more colorful terms; in Should the Baby Live?<\/em> Singer quotes, \t\tentirely approvingly, the grandmother of a Down syndrome child: “Had the \t\tpoor little mongol been allowed to die, as he so easily could, my daughter \t\tmight have had one or two healthy children in his place” (p. 66). Singer \t\tgoes on to suggest lethal injection “in the case of a Down syndrome baby \t\twith no other defect” (p. 73).<\/p>\n

This contrast between “mongols” and “healthy” people – a crucial dichotomy \t\tfor Singer – is entirely spurious (we might also note that Singer fails \t\tto question or challenge the term “mongol”, an obsolete and pejorative \t\tdesignation for people with Down syndrome). There is nothing “unhealthy” \t\tabout people with Down syndrome. They do not walk around with constantly \t\trunning noses or malfunctioning bladders. They do not require ongoing \t\tmedical attention. The contrast is even more ludicrous in the case of \t\themophiliacs, who are physically indistinguishable from non-hemophiliacs. \t\tSuch judgements are doubly suspect when applied to newborn infants. In \t\tthis context, “healthy” and “normal” cannot refer to an individual’s physiological \t\tconstitution, which has yet to be fully formed. They can only refer to \t\tgenetic factors.<\/p>\n

Down syndrome is usually characterized by short stature, distinctive \t\tfacial features, and, as my dictionary puts it, “mild to moderate mental \t\tretardation”. Singer himself describes the condition as involving “some \t\tphysical abnormalities” as well as “mild to moderate intellectual disability” \t\t(Rethinking Life & Death<\/em> p. 106). There is no mention here \t\tof “severe disabilities”; Singer notes that “People at the upper end of \t\tthis range [of Down-related intellectual disability] can live independently \t\twith little supervision. Others need help with managing their financial \t\taffairs, and need to be supervised when shopping, cooking or travelling \t\toutside the home.” (ibid.) Unlike migraines or arthritis, Down syndrome \t\tis not a painful condition, and people who have it do not “suffer” from \t\tit in any conventional sense.<\/p>\n

Why, then, does Singer argue that infants born with this condition can \t\tjustly be killed? Because they are “abnormal” and do not have “good prospects” \t\t(Rethinking<\/em> p. 214). This notion of “prospects” runs like a mantra \t\tthrough Singer’s discussion of Down syndrome children: “the future prospects \t\tof life may be so bleak” (211), “the prospects are clouded” (213), and \t\tso forth. But what sort of prospects does he have in mind? On p. 213 of \t\tRethinking<\/em> he lists several activities which a person with Down \t\tsyndrome will supposedly never be capable of: “to play the guitar, to \t\tdevelop an appreciation of science fiction, to learn a foreign language, \t\tto chat with us about the latest Woody Allen movie, or to be a respectable \t\tathlete, basketballer or tennis player.” This list reads like a parody \t\tof bourgeois myths of achievement, success, and respectability. To Singer, \t\thowever, these are legitimate reasons for killing a newborn. After all, \t\tif you can’t do your own financial planning, why should you be allowed \t\tto live?<\/p>\n

Thus we find that in Singer’s view, “severe disabilities” – and also \t\tsometimes merely “mild to moderate” ones – are acceptable grounds for \t\tparents to decide to have their babies killed. He stands by this view \t\teven in some cases where other families offer to adopt the child (Should \t\tthe Baby Live?<\/em>, p. 13). At no point does he entertain the possibility \t\tthat parents who make such a decision on the basis of these criteria are \t\tcapitulating to a groundless social prejudice exactly analogous to sexism, \t\tracism, or homophobia. Indeed he embraces such criteria as ethically proper \t\tand vociferously promotes their widespread application.<\/p>\n

This is a eugenicist position. It endorses selection according to desirable \t\tand undesirable genetic traits, and favors the elimination of the latter. \t\tSinger’s argument sorts people into two categories, “normal” and “abnormal”, \t\tand declares the ostensibly abnormal ones fair game at birth. He doesn’t \t\teven bother to try to provide “objective” grounds on which to classify \t\tsome human physical or mental conditions as “defective” (a term he used \t\tin earlier editions of Practical Ethics<\/em>) and contrast them with \t\t“healthy” ones. Instead he simply welcomes whatever arbitrary social norms \t\thappen to prevail, thus turning his argument into a vehicle for prejudice. \t\tBut of course there is no perfect, flawless version of the human form \t\tagainst which putatively “inferior” specimens could be measured.<\/p>\n

Singer’s stance is understandably distressing to those disabled adults \t\twho think they’re quite capable of leading full human lives even if they \t\tdon’t fulfill some mythical and arbitrary definition of perfect humanness. \t\tIn Germany his public pronouncements have generated vigorous opposition, \t\tmuch of it galvanized by disability rights activists as well as radical \t\tpolitical ecologists around the group “Ecological Left”. In North America, \t\thowever, Singer’s eugenicist views have been commended by some on the \t\tleft, especially as the controversy surrounding his Princeton appointment \t\thas lead to predictable condemnations of Singer by the traditional “right \t\tto life” right. Singer’s arguments have resurrected the troubling tradition \t\tof “progressive” support for eugenic programs, the tradition of Planned \t\tParenthood founder Margaret Sanger and many others who should have known \t\tbetter. This tradition is an attempt to erase the fundamental contingency \t\tof sexual reproduction and to create an “improved”, “healthy” race, cleansed \t\tof deficiencies and deformities.<\/p>\n

Those of us who believe that people can’t be divided into “fit” and “unfit” \t\tcategories reject Singer’s pernicious logic. We resist the re-emergence \t\tof eugenicist thinking in a “progressive” guise. We insist that any ethical \t\tsystem which condones such invidious distinctions among people is morally \t\tbankrupt and has no place on the left. In the era of The Bell Curve, resurgent \t\tsociobiology, and modernized Social Darwinism, we cannot afford to be \t\tcomplacent on this question.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Peter Singer is an Australian philosopher who is best known for his book Animal Liberation. His work on ethics is respected within the academy and he has had an impact on public opinion unmatched by almost any other professional philosopher. He is the world’s foremost proponent of utilitarianism, one of the two major doctrines within […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_piecal_is_recurring":false,"_piecal_recurring_interval":1,"_piecal_recurring_frequency":"","_piecal_recurring_exact_position":false,"_piecal_recurring_end":"","_piecal_color":"","_piecal_text_color":"","_piecal_global_color_master":false,"_piecal_rsets":"[]","_piecal_is_event":false,"_piecal_start_date":"","_piecal_end_date":"","_piecal_is_allday":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[58],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-523","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-archive"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nPeter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Peter Singer is an Australian philosopher who is best known for his book Animal Liberation. His work on ethics is respected within the academy and he has had an impact on public opinion unmatched by almost any other professional philosopher. He is the world’s foremost proponent of utilitarianism, one of the two major doctrines within […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Institute for Social Ecology\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/InstituteforSocialEcology\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-01-01T12:00:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Peter Staudenmaier\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Peter Staudenmaier\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Peter Staudenmaier\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/8d39ffa7483d5b683a116b20f39b3355\"},\"headline\":\"Peter Singer and Eugenics\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-01-01T12:00:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1708,\"commentCount\":9,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Article Archive\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/\",\"name\":\"Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-01-01T12:00:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/2005\\\/01\\\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Peter Singer and Eugenics\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/\",\"name\":\"Institute for Social Ecology\",\"description\":\"Popular Education for a Free Society\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Institute for Social Ecology\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/ISE-logo-acorn-with-leaves-2.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/ISE-logo-acorn-with-leaves-2.png\",\"width\":872,\"height\":1085,\"caption\":\"Institute for Social Ecology\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/InstituteforSocialEcology\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/InstSocEcology\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/8d39ffa7483d5b683a116b20f39b3355\",\"name\":\"Peter Staudenmaier\",\"description\":\"Peter Staudenmaier is a social ecologist and historian who has been involved with the Institute for Social Ecology since 1989. He has been an active participant in the anarchist movement, the green movement, and the cooperative movement in the United States and Germany for over two decades. He lives in Wisconsin and teaches history at Marquette University.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/social-ecology.org\\\/wp\\\/author\\\/peter-staudenmaier\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology","og_description":"Peter Singer is an Australian philosopher who is best known for his book Animal Liberation. His work on ethics is respected within the academy and he has had an impact on public opinion unmatched by almost any other professional philosopher. He is the world’s foremost proponent of utilitarianism, one of the two major doctrines within […]","og_url":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/","og_site_name":"Institute for Social Ecology","article_publisher":"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/InstituteforSocialEcology","article_published_time":"2005-01-01T12:00:09+00:00","author":"Peter Staudenmaier","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Peter Staudenmaier","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/"},"author":{"name":"Peter Staudenmaier","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#\/schema\/person\/8d39ffa7483d5b683a116b20f39b3355"},"headline":"Peter Singer and Eugenics","datePublished":"2005-01-01T12:00:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/"},"wordCount":1708,"commentCount":9,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Article Archive"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/","url":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/","name":"Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-01-01T12:00:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/2005\/01\/peter-singer-and-eugenics\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Peter Singer and Eugenics"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#website","url":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/","name":"Institute for Social Ecology","description":"Popular Education for a Free Society","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#organization","name":"Institute for Social Ecology","url":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/ISE-logo-acorn-with-leaves-2.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/ISE-logo-acorn-with-leaves-2.png","width":872,"height":1085,"caption":"Institute for Social Ecology"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/InstituteforSocialEcology","https:\/\/x.com\/InstSocEcology"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/#\/schema\/person\/8d39ffa7483d5b683a116b20f39b3355","name":"Peter Staudenmaier","description":"Peter Staudenmaier is a social ecologist and historian who has been involved with the Institute for Social Ecology since 1989. He has been an active participant in the anarchist movement, the green movement, and the cooperative movement in the United States and Germany for over two decades. He lives in Wisconsin and teaches history at Marquette University.","url":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/author\/peter-staudenmaier\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/523","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=523"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/523\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=523"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=523"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/social-ecology.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=523"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}