Friday, January 4, 2008
posted by Spencerblog at
This comment has been removed by the author.
Actually, you are wrong David.While many liberals abhored the idea of racial purity many didn't.Including feminist icon and Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger.As Rodosh notes in his review:"Turning to what he calls liberal racism, Mr. Goldberg offers readers his finest chapter. It is a devastating picture of how liberals adopted eugenics — a basic part of Nazi doctrine — which was not, as some liberal intellectuals have argued, an outgrowth of conservative thought. Fans of Margaret Sanger, perhaps the single most important feminist hero of the 20th century, will never be able to think of her in the same way. Mr. Goldberg dissects her hidden views of eugenics. "A socialist and birth-control martyr, she favored banning reproduction of the "unfit" and regulation of everyone else's reproduction. She wrote, "More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief issue of birth control." "She opposed the birth of "ill-bred, ill-trained swarms of inferior citizens." Her words reveal her motive in advocacy of birth control. She sought to remove "inferior" people from being born to poor people, whose mothers by definition were "unfit." Sanger's partisans in Planned Parenthood, the group that stemmed from her work, will be shocked to learn that her publication endorsed the Nazi eugenics program, and that Sanger herself "proudly gave a speech to a KKK rally." That was not surprising, since she clearly viewed blacks as inferior. Hence her "Negro Project," in which she sought to urge blacks to adopt birth control."Deal with it.
Oh, and Happy New Year, David.Thanks for checking in.
"For Goldberg to dissect her "hidden" views he needs to just either make stuff up or over-emphasize her interactions with some groups or quote out-of-context statements that are clearly in opposition to her fully quoted positions on various matters."Wow, that seems to be your full time job against George Bush and the war!
Diano, Your attempt to white-wash Sanger's pro-eugenics record is certainly heart-warming. But are you seriously suggesting that Sanger didn't support state regulation to realize her sterilization schemes? You believe that she wanted to rely on nothing more than education to persuade the "ignorant" not to have children? The woman was, after all, was an avowed socialist. She would be the first socialist of her time to advocate less power to a central, socialist government.That you acknowledge that we should take into account the differences in the cultural attitudes of the times is dead on. Would that you do the same for less "progressive" historical figures.I don't blame FDR for expressly saying Asians were inferior to whites and that the mixing of those two races should be should be discouraged. Or Abraham Lincoln for stating that the Negro race was obviously inferior to the white. They were, after all, victims of their times too.But you miss Goldberg's main point, which is not that all liberals are fascists but that some (many, actually) are quite susceptible to fascist behavior and programs.Whatever Planned Parenthood has become, it was created by a woman who advocated sterilization of the intellectually inferior and black people. How do you dismiss her infamous "Negro Project"?As she once wrote: "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population."She must have meant that she just wanted to weed it out a little.You say she was "not perfect" or "correct in all her positions." I should say not.
David,Don't you think your time would be better spent finally getting your "consulting" (caugh IT caugh) companies website up and running?
Wrong again, Davey.All sorts are susceptible to wanting to boss others around and using the authority of the state to achieve power and their goals. Lincoln suspended habeus corpus but he was no conservative tyrant or fascist; FDR had Japanese Americans incarcerated during WWII, incuding my Uncle Ben and his parents. Today's so-called liberals are the greatest advocates for government-sancationed race discrimination (i.e. affirmative action) and they are the biggest practitioners of identity politics. Sanger's views on race weren't conservative or liberal, they were racist. Period.
There are no greater intolerant racist TODAY than Liberals and blacks. Period. Weep, spin, slant, lie all ya want... you will not change this truism.
Dave,You're right, the 5 minutes a day I check Spencer's blog page and post here and there shows just how unemployed and worthless I am. Lets not get into the way more posts you've produced than me, or how you actually do research into your posts and mine are 2-3 minute blurbs on my thoughts. So by your own argument about me, you have proven you are even more worthless than me. I guess we both live really sad lives. Nevertheless, I do real consulting, so I win.
Davey,Nice job avoiding the argument. I already read Chris Kelly's "review" of Liberal Fascism at Huffpo. Thanks for posting it, though, because all it does is call on liberals to ignore the book.For some very understandable reasons he doesn't even deal with its substance.He just bashes Goldberg for pointing out the lameness Woodrow Wilson's presidency and departs the field.Kind of like your defense of Ms. Sanger. Fine. But don't call that a "review." There must be more thoughtful ones you can link to.Bring 'em on.
Speaking of toilet paper, who else saw David D’s weeping letter about Sestak’s votes on the war in the DT the other day? What an emotional simp. Apparently some folks are not only traitors to their country but to their own kind too when their fragile feelings are hurt. Sheesh, talk about a lack of loyalty… I wonder if Dave will be voting for Rosie O or Michael Moore in the coming Shrill Donkey primary?
Another week attempt by David to dismiss instead of argue and persuade. He has a partisan soulmate in Kelly.Reminds me of this advice given to 1st year law students: When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, pound the table.Or in this case, hurl a couple of insults and skaddaddle.
R is me. And you're grasping, Dave. The discredited ideology is your beloved Libism. How any hetero white male with a shred of self respect could subscribe to that emotional mess is beyond me. Pathetic.
Who else finds it lusciously ironic that Liberal Dave would employ such dishonesty in the very thread where he just lectured us about the evils of specious argument?! Lol… So much for “honest debate” from the Left. I guess it’s not really that ironic after all. I don’t recall ever espousing a philosophy of keeping down the rights of others, LD. You are an all too present sign of the failure of education and decency in our society. Translation: Unlike you, I have resisted the brainwashing and have not been politically corrected.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Create a Link
View my complete profile
Subscribe toPosts [Atom]