OMG Politics, I'm over it already.
- Thread starter sunvalleylaw
- Start date
- Status
mongooz
.
treason against a oppressive unjust monarch......i got no problem with that.
rhino
Kick Henry Jackassowski
You can try and put words in my mouth all you want to. It doesn't mean I said them.
I think Sanger was a brilliant woman who did alot of good for the progressive movement. There are also plenty of people who think she represents something more sinister. Those folks have called for a statue of her to be taken down from the Smithsonian.
What you or I think about it is totally beside the point I was trying to make. If you go back, I was responding to the a specific comment about statues of Confederate generals being compared to Nazis and actually said I didn't think we needed to debate the cause of the Civil War. Minds are made up and aren't likely to change, and that's ok.
I only brought up this example, because I think it proves my point pretty well. People are complex, this includes historical figures. Presumably these are the types of questions that should be dealt with by those elected to public office. Which brings us back to the original point of this thread, fuck 2016's presidential race shit show.
Sanger was most certainly a racist - she openly identified with the eugenicists of the day. They believed that inferior humans were breeding at a rate such that the superior humans would be overrun or genetically diluted in the near future.
That said, Sanger seemed to have a kind heart, and was motivated by the abject poverty and suffering of poor women and children (of which she believed to be proof of their inferiority). She was deeply disturbed by the fact that poor women were forced to bear child after child - even though the children would suffer and die from disease or hunger before the age of three or four. More so, she found it horrifying that poor women would resort to back-alley abortions in attempt to escape that fate. I find it ironic that the pro-life crowd attempts use Sanger's views in their attempts to vilify planned parenthood. Sanger was very much opposed to abortion - it was one of the main motivators for her to start what would become planned parenthood.
Sanger saw getting contraceptives into the hands of the poor and minorities as the solution to both problems.
That said, Sanger seemed to have a kind heart, and was motivated by the abject poverty and suffering of poor women and children (of which she believed to be proof of their inferiority). She was deeply disturbed by the fact that poor women were forced to bear child after child - even though the children would suffer and die from disease or hunger before the age of three or four. More so, she found it horrifying that poor women would resort to back-alley abortions in attempt to escape that fate. I find it ironic that the pro-life crowd attempts use Sanger's views in their attempts to vilify planned parenthood. Sanger was very much opposed to abortion - it was one of the main motivators for her to start what would become planned parenthood.
Sanger saw getting contraceptives into the hands of the poor and minorities as the solution to both problems.
LeftyTom
I am not just another pretty face.
Don't go Trump on me......details please.
rhino
Kick Henry Jackassowski
One mans hero is another mans terrorist. It just depends on which side of history your on.
King George was hardly the oppressive unjust monarch we were taught about in school. Taxes were levied on the colonies to pay for The Seven Years War which started because the colonies were complaining about not having protection on the frontiers which wound up setting off a powder keg between two world powers.
I forget what the rates were now, but people in England were paying huge amounts of taxes. After the war, parliament decided to tax the colonies who basically weren't paying at all.
Flamencology
You don't deserve koa.
By most criteria... The Nordic countries, Germany, the U.K., Canada...
mongooz
.
agree to disagee, then.
LeftyTom
I am not just another pretty face.
Pish posh....
Flamencology
You don't deserve koa.
Beyer160
Vagabond Of The Western World
No, because they won. History is usually written by the victors, unless you're talking about the CSA.
Taxation without representation is tyranny.
Also quartering soldiers in private homes.
mongooz
.
FIFY
Flamencology
You don't deserve koa.
Then Allied soldiers in WW2 brought tyranny to Europe.
mongooz
.
from what i've seen on tv and accounts i've read, most of the allied troops were welcomed into homes that they were liberating from the nazis. some of the best meals the troops had during the whole war were in private homes. the towns people had parades for them, with what little they had left. hardly tyranny.
Beyer160
Vagabond Of The Western World
Were Allied troops forcibly quartered in private homes in friendly countries? I know they were in enemy countries, because fuck them.
mongooz
.
well now.....maybe we shouldn't have been so pushy on the nazis.
(sarcasm)
jp_nyc
Kick Henry Jackassowski
They were, but as others have noted, not without reason.
And some of them were slavers or worse. Jefferson most likely an affair with a woman who was in no position to refuse consent, so he was likely a rapist on top of being a slaver. Of course he was also one of the most important thinkers of the enlightenment, the Mozart to Franklin’s Bach, which is a pretty big contribution to human civilization. And his owning slaves was in part due to financial circumstances foisted upon him by the crazy laws of Britain at the time (he unwillingly inherited his father-in-law’s massive debt). The confederate generals don’t have that going for them.
Help!I'maRock!
Mediocringly Derivative
I don't want my history written by rutabagas.
- Status