Skip to comments.Sarah Palin's Charisma
Posted on 12/03/2010 1:38:02 AM PST by Scanian
click here to read article
Guess I'm just a soft headed liberal in that respect....
The same way various things are today labeled, "bipartisan" when three RINOs in the House vote with the democrat majority? States with eugenics laws all had state legislatures with large democrat majorities. If you want to say that there were "progressive Republicans" who went along you're probably right but that doesn't make it a true "bipartisan" effort by any means.
There were, indeed, some prominent Republicans who supported such initiatives, some even wanting them enacted on a national level. Most of those advocating such laws were very wealthy and very much opposed to allowing continued immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe in spite of the fact that they preferred to employ them rather than non-immgrants in their mines and factories. That some the same wealthy individuals supported a good many things the Republican party would never adopt as a part of their platform pretty well shows what sort of "Republicans" those folks were just like you now find nominal Republicans who are, in fact, nothing of the sort.
Sorry, that's a statement, not evidence.
30 states passed laws requiring compulsory sterilization of "unfit" people, which seems a reasonable surrogate for "eugenics."
I looked up several states. SC, obviously controlled by Democrats, had no such law.
1/3 of all the sterilization were performed in CA, which passed its law in 1909. I've been unable to come up with information on which party controlled the legislature that year.
It ain't a big deal, but I don't believe your "eugenics is evil and only Democrats wanted it" meme is accurate.
Eugenics was not a highly controversial idea in the early years of last century. It was more kind of a generalized ideal that most took for granted.
Eugenics did not become particularly controversial till the Nazis took it to its logical extreme.
Much of the theory behind eugenics is actually difficult to refute. If there is any genetic component to intelligence, which the scientific evidence indicates there is, at somewhere between 50% and 75%, then if lower-intelligence people reproduce at a higher rate, the average intelligence of the group will decline over time. And in our society lower intelligence individuals reproduce at a MUCH higher rate than the more intelligent.
And the establishment as well.
Apparently the Governor of SC, myself, and you, all use differing sources.
"Well perhaps there is a finger of fate pointing, or if you prefer God representing. To have a person on the political stage at this moment in the history of the USA who just happens to be named Palin. An accidental choice but there she is. And thanks to D's knowledge an eerie coincidence. But not to dismiss D's call for independent action to look it up, I can't resist. This from the Concise English Dictionary: a new birth; reincarnation, a second creation, regeneration, unmodified inheritance of ancestral character, the new formation of a rock by re-fusion. McCain wrought more than he realised. Now clarion call to entrenched self serving "Republicans" to top that word and the clear implications."
Spread this one around folks. I have thought for some time that she is God-ordained because of the way she continues to pull off the impossible.
You appear to be right.
BTW, the article you link to says the science behind eugenics “has been disproven.”
The basic contention of eugenics is that if less-intelligent people have more children than more intelligent people the average intelligence of the group will go down.
Not only has this hypothesis not been “disproven,” it has never been effectively challenged. Eugenics over-reached itself in many ways and trampled individual rights, but it became a pariah cause for political not scientific reasons.
Western society is presently involved in a society-wide experiment to determine the validity of eugenics. We massively subsidize births to low-intelligence people and discourage them among high intelligence potential parents. Eventually we may get some idea whether the eugenicists were right as to where this leads.
The sources on “eugenics” are extremely muddled at this point, the muddling having started during the seventies and gotten worse since. The best thing to do is pick out a couple of individuals who were advocates for it, get biographies and autobiographies of them and follow the notes and references therein. I’ve found some states where there were eugenics laws but they were neatly tucked away in things like regulations for rehabilitation or asylums, and a number of other things not nearly so obvious.
I would have to get down to some older notes to be much help finding sources myself since it’s been several years since I was reading a lot on the subject. Suffice to say, you can find an awful lot of what I call “apologist” materials on the web most of it apparently trying to put a better face on ideas of the past in hopes of reviving some or all of the same practices. Since there are, in fact, some things that are passed on genetically many people think it’s a reasonable approach to have such programs in some cases. The real problem is that I don’t recall finding a single program that limited itself to applying drastic measures for only medical purposes. Just look at the way dyslexia was handled by the Kennedy family, people with plenty of means to pay for care, and you see where the “elite” might apply extreme measures for anything from multi-generation auto mechanic inclinations to ADD.
I don't think it's much of an experiment since it's right in line with the idea of making pliable and easily led workers and serf classes. Sanger is a good source on that as is, as I recall, Dewey but I could be wrong on Dewey. Anyway, the idea of limiting the birthrate among the more intelligent but less pliable of "the masses" is one of the ingredients in some of the earliest eugenics writings.
“Sarah Palin is a once-in-a-lifetime phenomenon in politics. She is a charismatic constitutionalist. It’s the combination that’s so vital. Reagan had it. It scares the Democrats to death.”
“And the establishment as well.”
You can throw the LSM in to the mix as well.
I did not know you were experiencing health issues.
Hang in there FRiend! Life is a precious gift from
our Creator, God.
All prayers are appreciated!
I will be praying for you. Please pray for me also.
Since God does give us all (everything), I will be asking for
another scan which looks even better than the last.
Don't have the answer.........but we'll go to our grave thinking the same way......God Bless you too!
I haven’t talked much about it here.
But now that the prayers of FRiends (and those of others, of course) have been heard by the Lord, I can mention that things are going quite well with the cerebellum.
Yesterday’s scan was very good-—the chemo appears to have done it’s job, with God’s help.
Thank you for praying!
Thank you for the report. I shall continue in prayer for you. Please keep me updated.