Robert wrote:I made no partisan reference. I stated that I feel race relations and the movement to equality was set back. I did not say everything was great. I grew up in the south and know the deep seeded racism that existed there.
I do think that progress made in equality was damaged by the Eugenics movement of the early 1900's. There was not the struggle in the north as much prior to Eugenics. Some states elected African American congressman and senators. Most were in state houses, but a few in federal positions. I would agree that there was not total equality, but what progress that was made was nullified.
I'm curious - what can we look at to measure the degree of racism before and after the Eugenics movement? Did it just give people a "respectable scientific" way to be the racists they already wanted to be or did it really move the needle?
How can we tell?
I think it's at least very clear that the Eugenics movement had clear ties to both the Nazi movement in Germany and certain political movements in the United States, including Planned Parenthood (on the left) and the anti-Immigration movement (on the right).
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Bootstrap wrote:what can we look at to measure the degree of racism before and after the Eugenics movement?
I think this would be hard to quantify. I see it as what many say about President Trump that his words justify and cause raise to white supremacy. I am sure anyone who would see that could see how a movement like Eugenics would bring a raise to elitism and racial inequality of that time.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
Bootstrap wrote:what can we look at to measure the degree of racism before and after the Eugenics movement?
I think this would be hard to quantify. I see it as what many say about President Trump that his words justify and cause raise to white supremacy. I am sure anyone who would see that could see how a movement like Eugenics would bring a raise to elitism and racial inequality of that time.
Quite possibly. I think it's helpful to take a look at the time period in which it arose.
The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of Sir Francis Galton, which originated in the 1880s. Galton studied the upper classes of Britain, and arrived at the conclusion that their social positions were due to a superior genetic makeup.
What was going on in race relationships in America and England in the 1870s and 1880s? What made them so receptive to this teaching?
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Bootstrap wrote:I think it's at least very clear that the Eugenics movement had clear ties to both the Nazi movement in Germany and certain political movements in the United States, including Planned Parenthood (on the left) and the anti-Immigration movement (on the right).
That’s a bit of a slur against the right. Most people who are opposed to immigration talk about things like lowering wages, overpopulation, high housing prices, etc (which are all effects of large, mass scale immigration).
Bootstrap wrote:I think it's at least very clear that the Eugenics movement had clear ties to both the Nazi movement in Germany and certain political movements in the United States, including Planned Parenthood (on the left) and the anti-Immigration movement (on the right).
That’s a bit of a slur against the right. Most people who are opposed to immigration talk about things like lowering wages, overpopulation, high housing prices, etc (which are all effects of large, mass scale immigration).
Sorry, but the left gets to own this one.
When you look at history with a fair eye, you usually find fault and virtue on both the conservative and liberal side.
The connection to the right was discussed in another thread. Without Cordelia Scaife May, we would not have the modern anti-immigration movement in anything like its current form.
Bootstrap wrote:Today, the New York Times ran an article about Cordelia Scaife May:
Cordelia Scaife May, an heiress to the Mellon family’s banking and industrial fortune, was far and away the most important donor to the modern anti-immigration movement during her lifetime. Now, more than a decade after her death, her money still funds the leading organizations fighting to reduce migration.
Her Colcom Foundation has poured $180 million into groups that spent decades agitating for policies now pursued by President Trump: militarizing the border, capping legal immigration and prioritizing skills over family ties for entry. And language she used — about the threat of an “immigrant invasion,” for instance, and environmental strain — echoes in today’s anti-immigration rhetoric, most recently in the words of the killer in the El Paso mass shooting.
The New York Times unearthed letters from Mrs. May and other personal writings that reveal what motivated the movement’s publicity-shy benefactor.
And here's a link between abortion and immigration: Cordelia Scaife May started out working with Margaret Sanger on birth control and abortion. The New York Times article focuses on their relationship, and avoids (unfortunately) calling May out for her views on abortion.
But it was Margaret Sanger, the famous and, in some circles, scandalous founder of Planned Parenthood, who provided the sense of direction Mrs. May had craved. Mrs. Sanger was a close friend of her grandmother. Mrs. May acknowledged that it was not the birth control pioneer’s “works or ideals” that initially appealed to her but the fact that she had been jailed for her activities.
Mrs. May first worked for the Planned Parenthood chapter in Pittsburgh and later joined the board of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. “I have always admired and tried to take a part in the work that you started,” she wrote in a 1961 letter to Mrs. Sanger.
Her twin passions, protecting natural habitats and helping women prevent unplanned pregnancies, merged over time into a single goal of preserving the environment by discouraging offspring altogether. “The unwanted child is not the problem,” she would later write, “but, rather, the wanted one that society, for diverse cultural reasons, demands.”
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Robert wrote:I made no partisan reference. I stated that I feel race relations and the movement to equality was set back. I did not say everything was great. I grew up in the south and know the deep seeded racism that existed there.
I do think that progress made in equality was damaged by the Eugenics movement of the early 1900's. There was not the struggle in the north as much prior to Eugenics. Some states elected African American congressman and senators. Most were in state houses, but a few in federal positions. I would agree that there was not total equality, but what progress that was made was nullified.
I'm curious - what can we look at to measure the degree of racism before and after the Eugenics movement? Did it just give people a "respectable scientific" way to be the racists they already wanted to be or did it really move the needle?
How can we tell?
I think it's at least very clear that the Eugenics movement had clear ties to both the Nazi movement in Germany and certain political movements in the United States, including Planned Parenthood (on the left) and the anti-Immigration movement (on the right).
I am genuinely curious here Bootstrap: is the final paragraph in which you allege the American Right to be in favor of Eugenics as a method of dealing with immigration based in an acquaintance with primary sources from actual “Old Right” conservatives or is it just passing speculation on your part? I don’t deny the possibility; it could in fact be true. Nevertheless, in all the reading I’ve done both on eugenics and the Progressive Era I’ve always understood the eugenic impulse to be a beast of the Progressives; keen on remaking society in the model of the Prussian social sciences with the goal of a more efficient, advanced and humane society and with eugenics, sociology and psychology as the vehicles for that change.
0 x
Affiliation: Lancaster Mennonite Conference & Honduran Mennonite Evangelical Church
Bootstrap wrote:I think it's at least very clear that the Eugenics movement had clear ties to both the Nazi movement in Germany and certain political movements in the United States, including Planned Parenthood (on the left) and the anti-Immigration movement (on the right).
That’s a bit of a slur against the right. Most people who are opposed to immigration talk about things like lowering wages, overpopulation, high housing prices, etc (which are all effects of large, mass scale immigration).
Sorry, but the left gets to own this one.
When you look at history with a fair eye, you usually find fault and virtue on both the conservative and liberal side.
The connection to the right was discussed in another thread. Without Cordelia Scaife May, we would not have the modern anti-immigration movement in anything like its current form.
Bootstrap wrote:Today, the New York Times ran an article about Cordelia Scaife May:
Cordelia Scaife May, an heiress to the Mellon family’s banking and industrial fortune, was far and away the most important donor to the modern anti-immigration movement during her lifetime. Now, more than a decade after her death, her money still funds the leading organizations fighting to reduce migration.
Her Colcom Foundation has poured $180 million into groups that spent decades agitating for policies now pursued by President Trump: militarizing the border, capping legal immigration and prioritizing skills over family ties for entry. And language she used — about the threat of an “immigrant invasion,” for instance, and environmental strain — echoes in today’s anti-immigration rhetoric, most recently in the words of the killer in the El Paso mass shooting.
The New York Times unearthed letters from Mrs. May and other personal writings that reveal what motivated the movement’s publicity-shy benefactor.
And here's a link between abortion and immigration: Cordelia Scaife May started out working with Margaret Sanger on birth control and abortion. The New York Times article focuses on their relationship, and avoids (unfortunately) calling May out for her views on abortion.
But it was Margaret Sanger, the famous and, in some circles, scandalous founder of Planned Parenthood, who provided the sense of direction Mrs. May had craved. Mrs. Sanger was a close friend of her grandmother. Mrs. May acknowledged that it was not the birth control pioneer’s “works or ideals” that initially appealed to her but the fact that she had been jailed for her activities.
Mrs. May first worked for the Planned Parenthood chapter in Pittsburgh and later joined the board of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. “I have always admired and tried to take a part in the work that you started,” she wrote in a 1961 letter to Mrs. Sanger.
Her twin passions, protecting natural habitats and helping women prevent unplanned pregnancies, merged over time into a single goal of preserving the environment by discouraging offspring altogether. “The unwanted child is not the problem,” she would later write, “but, rather, the wanted one that society, for diverse cultural reasons, demands.”
This sure makes Miss May carry a lot of water for anti-immigration. Without her we wouldn’t have the modern anti-immigration movement as we know it? Really? Additionally, was she a conservative? I’ve never met a conservative keen on limiting population growth, never seen a single conservative appeal for limiting population for the sake of the environment. That too is a baby of the Progressives.
0 x
Affiliation: Lancaster Mennonite Conference & Honduran Mennonite Evangelical Church
Robert wrote:I made no partisan reference. I stated that I feel race relations and the movement to equality was set back. I did not say everything was great. I grew up in the south and know the deep seeded racism that existed there.
I do think that progress made in equality was damaged by the Eugenics movement of the early 1900's. There was not the struggle in the north as much prior to Eugenics. Some states elected African American congressman and senators. Most were in state houses, but a few in federal positions. I would agree that there was not total equality, but what progress that was made was nullified.
I'm curious - what can we look at to measure the degree of racism before and after the Eugenics movement? Did it just give people a "respectable scientific" way to be the racists they already wanted to be or did it really move the needle?
How can we tell?
I think it's at least very clear that the Eugenics movement had clear ties to both the Nazi movement in Germany and certain political movements in the United States, including Planned Parenthood (on the left) and the anti-Immigration movement (on the right).
Could you add a link to the thread, and page, for this quote?
Possibly you could request Robert add it to your OP, where it would be most useful.
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.
Robert wrote:I made no partisan reference. I stated that I feel race relations and the movement to equality was set back. I did not say everything was great. I grew up in the south and know the deep seeded racism that existed there.
I do think that progress made in equality was damaged by the Eugenics movement of the early 1900's. There was not the struggle in the north as much prior to Eugenics. Some states elected African American congressman and senators. Most were in state houses, but a few in federal positions. I would agree that there was not total equality, but what progress that was made was nullified.
I'm curious - what can we look at to measure the degree of racism before and after the Eugenics movement? Did it just give people a "respectable scientific" way to be the racists they already wanted to be or did it really move the needle?
How can we tell?
I think it's at least very clear that the Eugenics movement had clear ties to both the Nazi movement in Germany and certain political movements in the United States, including Planned Parenthood (on the left) and the anti-Immigration movement (on the right).
The eugenics movement was basically implementation of the so-called theory of evolution in an attempt to improve society by weeding out the so-called unfit.
0 x
Convert to Anabaptist truth early 2019; now associated (friend) with the Apostolic Christian Church of America.
