Eugenics is a 19th century movement that advocated the improvement of human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention. Its supporters believed that the human race would be improved through careful genetic planning and focus.

The modern field and term were first formulated by Sir Francis Galton in 1883, drawing on the recent work of his cousin Charles Darwin. From its inception Eugenics was supported by prominent people, including H.G. Wells, Emile Zola, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, William Keith Kellogg and Margaret Sanger.

The problem is that eugenics became linked to nationalism and racism. The notion that certain national groups (i.e. "races") of people were genetically predisposed to be better at some activities was very popular and may be at the heart of the Olympics. It was certainly a pillar of Nazi ideology, If fact, Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympics, was a close friend of Nazi bureaucrat, and organizer of the 1936 Berlin Games, Carl Diem.

Today, Eugenics and race seem like nonsense: French Canadians make good hockey players, and Kenyans are better runners, but this has little to do with genetics, and everything to do with climate and ice. Yet, we still accept the basic Olympic competition framework of nation-states competing against each other at different sporting events. Why do the Olympics focus on determining which nation produces the best runners? This goal of determining which national group produces the best runners makes me very uncomfortable. It begs the question: Is there any place for Eugenics in modern sports?

Certainly, The Boston Marathon, The New York Marathon, and The London Marathon do not have the goal of determining which country produces the best runners. When Paula Radcliffe won the New York Marathon in 2007, it was not considered a victory for England, but rather a remarkable victory for a woman who recently had a baby.

It is certainly easy to enjoy the 19th century pageantry of the Olympics, but we should be cautious with the underlying principles. Ask yourself: Do you really believe it is important to know which nation-state is genetically predisposed to produce good runners? Is this a worthwhile activity? What does it say about us?

John G. Lyng
Editor, Longboat Daily Express