2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

[Aridas]

No. Not any kind of progressive I'm familiar with.

It's fair to say that progressives early in the last century weren't the only ones, given that eugenics was rather well accepted all around. Quite a few progressives did support it, though. Naturally, that's one of the many things that have changed in the last century.

 

[BobTheCoward]

It's fair to say that progressives early in the last century weren't the only ones, given that eugenics was rather well accepted all around. Quite a few progressives did support it, though. Naturally, that's one of the many things that have changed in the last century.

What were their names?

 

[Aridas]

From wikipedia

One of the most prominent feminists to champion the eugenic agenda was Margaret Sanger, the leader of the American birth control movement. Margaret Sanger saw birth control as a means to prevent unwanted children from being born into a disadvantaged life, and incorporated the language of eugenics to advance the movement.

Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood.

FDR was apparently supportive of eugenics, as well. There, that's 2 fairly big names.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

From wikipedia



Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood.

FDR was apparently supportive of eugenics, as well. There, that's 2 fairly big names.

Yeah right, because access to birth control equates to eugenics.

 

[kellyb]

Yeah right, because access to birth control equates to eugenics.

Sanger actually did want to use birth control for eugenic reasons. She was a creep like that. But this is a more legit, less controversial one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Fisher

Irving Fisher (February 27, 1867 – April 29, 1947) was an American economist, statistician, inventor, and Progressive social campaigner. He was one of the earliest American neoclassical economists, though his later work on debt deflation has been embraced by the Post-Keynesian school.[1] Joseph Schumpeter described him as "the greatest economist the United States has ever produced",[2] an assessment later repeated by James Tobin[3] and Milton Friedman.[4]

He also defended eugenics, serving in the scientific advisory board of the Eugenics Record Office and as first president of the American Eugenics Society.[28]

 

[angrysoba]

There aren't many nations in history that declared God was against them.

When I am king - by divine right - I will declare my kingdom against God!

 

[Belz...]

Because I don't want to assert a position that will incur a burden of proof.

Yeah, you'd have to do some work to have a discussion about it. Can't have that!

 

[Matthew Best]

No, my position is that if a child misses that much time with no reason given then there is a suitable threat for jail.

But in the case in question there was a reason given, and you still said it was a good thing she was threatened with jail.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Yeah, you'd have to do some work to have a discussion about it. Can't have that!

I simply don't have the many hours to devote to research on the subject to make a claim on it.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Tulsi Gabbard has reached the 65K donations it takes to take part in the Democratic primary debates.

So we can look forward to some bimbo asking her why she is an Assad apologist. And maybe some serious topics brought by her. Very nice. So the primary purpose of my signature has been reached and maybe I'll change it to something different until it's time for Tulsi to kick Teh Donald in the orange butt.

Although I quite like it. FTR:

ALOHA

 

[BobTheCoward]

Tulsi Gabbard has reached the 65K donations it takes to take part in the Democratic primary debates.

So we can look forward to some bimbo asking her why she is an Assad apologist. And maybe some serious topics brought by here. Very nice. So the primary purpose of my signature has been reached and maybe I'll change it to something different until it's time for Tulsi to kick Teh Donald in the orange butt.

Although I quite like it. FTR:

ALOHA

Do you think Gabbard represents a plurality or some other significant number of Democrats?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Do you think Gabbard represents a plurality or some other significant number of Democrats?

Tulsi Gabbard has everything it takes to become US president except the support of the establishment.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Tulsi Gabbard has everything it takes to become US president except the support of the establishment.

What about support from Democrats generally?

 

[Childlike Empress]

What about support from Democrats generally?

Define "Democrats".

Bob, again: Not with me.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Define "Democrats".

Bob, again: Not with me.

Let's go with primary voters.

And to be fair, most candidates are going to lose the primary. So the standard isn't ability to win. I'm just trying to figure out if you regard her as a democrat.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Sanger actually did want to use birth control for eugenic reasons. She was a creep like that. But this is a more legit, less controversial one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Fisher

I would like to point out that you have to be very careful with what you actually believe about Sanger. Filthy lying Christians have flooded the world with misinformation about her. You really have to be careful with your sources when researching her.

 

[BobTheCoward]

From wikipedia



Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood.

FDR was apparently supportive of eugenics, as well. There, that's 2 fairly big names.

First of all, where does it say Sanger was a progressive?

 

[theprestige]

I think there was a progressive wave, from the late 1800s until about 1950 or so, that was focused on using the state to reform humanity. "Progress" in this period was progress towards the goal of making better humans. This wave crested with Marxism-Leninism in the Soviet Union.

Marx had predicted that humanity would evolve naturally into a better form. In turn, this better humanity would build a better society - the worker's paradise. Lenin proposed that it should be possible to trigger this evolution artificially: Build the better society first, and build the better humanity from it. This experiment failed miserably, and with horrific results.

Since the 1950s, there has been another progressive wave, more intent on reforming the state itself, but also still desiring to reform society, and ultimately to reform humanity into something better.

Anyway, that's what we see among "first wave" progressives: People who dreamed of a Better Humanity, and who saw the state as the proper agent to make that Humanity. Thus eugenics as a tool of progress.

Thus also the enthusiasm for new, more totalitarian forms of government. Fascism and communism were seen as progress, as innovations that would take humanity to the next level, beyond what liberal democratic systems could achieve. Fascism fell out of favor not because progressives recoiled from the idea of the state molding its citizenry towards a goal, but because everyone recoiled from Adolf Hitler's obscene perversion of the idea.

Even today, there are American progressives who still see the totalitarian state as an agent of progress.

And progressive denunciation of the Soviet experiment has always been surprisingly diffident.

 

[Belz...]

I think there was a progressive wave, from the late 1800s until about 1950 or so, that was focused on using the state to reform humanity. "Progress" in this period was progress towards the goal of making better humans.

Unfortunately we couldn't rebuilt them. We didn't have the technolgy.

 

[kellyb]

Tulsi Gabbard has everything it takes to become US president except the support of the establishment.

I'd like her to be Secretary of State.

Very glad to know she'll be in the debates.