“Great is the power of steady misrepresentation; but the history of science shows that fortunately this power does not long endure.” ~ Charles Darwin.
I don’t think you’d see this mentioned in a school textbook for some reason.
Nothing can force the planters to treat negro freedom save from the comic side. To them the thing is too new for thought, too strange for argument; the ridiculous lies on the surface, and to this they turn as a relief. When I asked a planter how the blacks prospered under freedom, his answer was, “Ours don‘t much like it. You see, it necessitates monogamy. If I talk about the ‘responsibilities of freedom,’ Sambo says, ‘Dunno ’bout that; please, mass’ George: me want two wife.’” Another planter tells me, that the only change he can see in the condition of the negroes since they have been free is that formerly the supervision of the overseer forced them occasionally to be clean, whereas now nothing on earth can make them wash. He says that, writing lately to his agent, he received an answer to which there was the following postscript: “You ain‘t sent no sope. You had better send sope: niggers is certainly needing sope.”
Bear in mind, this mode of speech was the polite way at the time.
It’s bizarre to contrast this with the textbook model of – everyone was happy and accepted it, the former slaves were overjoyed and industrious and chomping at the bit to become Oreos. The cultural transition didn’t seem to be something they wanted, in some cases.
It seems black people had just as much trouble assimilating into America then as other groups today.
This is amazing.
If she be tolerably handsome, and has any share of cunning, the apprentice or her master’s son is enticed away and ruined by her. Thus many good families are impoverished and disgraced by these pert sluts, who, taking the advantage of a young man’s simplicity and unruly desires, draw many heedless youths, nay, some of good estates, into their snares; and of this we have but too many instances.
Yes, the poor young men.
Knowing that Defoe wrote the phrase “pert sluts” intentionally gives me life.
It’s like one gigantic rant, I’m serious.
Some more artful shall conceal their condition, and palm themselves off on young fellows for gentlewomen and great fortunes. How many families have been ruined by these ladies?
That’s a good point, we have too many pert sluts passing themselves off as ladies, and the male equivalents.
when the father or master of the family, preferring the flirting airs of a young prinked up strumpet, to the artless sincerity of a plain, grave, and good wife, has given his desires aloose, and destroyed soul, body, family, and estate. But they are very favourable if they wheedle nobody into matrimony, but only make a present of a small live creature, no bigger than a bastard, to some of the family, no matter who gets it; when a child is born it must be kept.
Men are dumb.
This is how the r-genes spread.
Adultery is a mortal sin because it reduces the fitness of your legitimate children, that you owe the duty to (and nobody else has to pick up after). The money that goes on the bastard should be invested in your real spawn. You owe no religious, moral duty to the children of a mother you never married (when the oath for the duty is sworn and signed). In purely religious terms, the marital union is the only place of obligation, above anything else.
This acceptance of bastards would explain how aristocracy becomes decadent – the genes come from adultery.
Notice: it’s a class thing, he is equally enraged by the follies of men behaving below their station.
The Romans had a law called Jus Trium Liberorum, by which every man who had been a father of three children, had particular honours and privileges. This incited the youth to quit a dissolute single life and become fathers of families, to the support and glory of the empire.
I’m linking to this for a simple reason.
People get the timelines wrong.
It happens often enough that I’ve seen it hundreds of times.
No, fascism existed in this country prior to Hitler’s rise in the 30s.
Yes, the Second World War quickly put paid to it.
It’s a complex period of history that schools would do well not to ignore. Especially from their perspective.
The Guardian keeps saying things like “fascism should never be allowed to take hold on these shores” or some other bollocks.. it predates postmodernism. Stop it now.
Yep, the Jew took the credit for something.
I am shocked.
(Okay so maybe Freud just let them say it without correction but that’s still taking someone else’s credit). Freud cited this guy in his writings (might’ve been the basis for many theories) and didn’t really bother correcting the public.
That or people who credit Kinsey* (Twink BDSM enthusiast on the taxpayer dollar of his office basement with a keen interest in child sexuality) with “inventing” sexology. A century later.
No, it was Krafft-Ebing.
Forget Freud. Today, we’re snooping around the personal archives of Richard von Krafft-Ebing, a 19th century psychoanalyst and sexologist extraordinaire who history has often been forgotten despite his groundbreaking research in sexual pathology. His chef d’oeuvre is undoubtedly Psychopathia Sexualis, the book that made jaws drop across Europe in 1886 and the first-ever scientific study on sexual deviation. “For almost one hundred years,” explains psychologist and sex researcher Dr. Joseph LoPiccolo, it “stood as the world’s most informative volume on the subject of sexual deviation.”
Krafft-Ebing’s research preceded Freud’s by decades, and Sexualis included over 238 case studies exploring “sexually deviant activities” like sadism, masochism, fetishism and more. Plus, he coined the term “anilingus”.
Deviance and degeneracy? This guy made it science.
they’re actually the only archives we have from the eccentric sexologist (whose seminars were described as “showy,” “glamorous” and “highly sensational”).
*fraudulent data aside
This guy is like the Tesla of sexology to Freud or Kinsey’s Edison.
Also Ellis. Havelock Ellis.
This is like how people remember Freud as inventing psychology when he actually invented psychiatry (as a medical doctor). William Wundt invented psychology.
They remember Newton’s studies but think Goethe was a poet.
They don’t know who Emilie du Chatelet was but remember Voltaire.
They know Pavlov and not William James.
Nobody ever ever ever EVER talks about Sir Galton.
One of the greatest minds of all time. Newton would be impressed with Galton.
Nobody mentions it.
Francis Bacon is superior in all ways to Albert Einstein.
Sir Scruton is a living example of ignored genius.
If the people who fought against the Nazis (for the right to stage a re-enactment) didn’t find it offensive, nobody else has the right!