Replies

Just because Jefferson's philippic was only removed because of two colonies that doesn't change much. Remember that. It was only two, not thirteen.

I'm not sure where you get that. Are you talking about the US Constitution, or are you talking about the Declaration of Independence? My recollection is that the committee assigned to write the Declaration of Independence objected to Jefferson's verbiage and made him strip it of the explicitly anti-slavery provisions. By the time it went to the larger body of representatives, it was in it's final form.

Your reference to "two states" sounds more like the debates on the US Constitution in which it was made clear by a small number of states that if slavery wasn't accepted, it wouldn't be ratified.

I have actually read some of the constitutional debate on the issue of slavery, and I have a bookmark for it on one of my other machines somewhere. They basically felt that the coalition was too important to be split apart over the issue of slavery, so the pro-abolition representatives relented.

All of it. Sanger, the wider eugenics quagmire, the role of bureaucracy, Wilson's legacy, TR's legacy, the hoax that the era even ended, that progressivism has anything to do with progress, the similarity between progressivism "progress" and Evolutionary Socialism.(there is no Darwin here.) Everything. Progressive era IRR. Journalism is a hoax. Universities are a hoax. The beginnings of progressivism with Henry George and Edward Bellamy. The domestic effects of WWI. I couldn't possibly list it all. Pretty much anything you can go see in a history book about the progressive era, it's not wholly truthful enough to be called the truth. It's all lies. The only wholly honest thing contained are people's names. They have a massive incentive to make sure nobody sees the era for what it is.

Whew! Far be it from me to defend progressivism, but surely it can't all be bad? And Teddy Roosevelt's legacy? I think the trust busting needed to be done.

Workplace safety rules and building safety rules were a good thing. Removing children from the workforce is a mixed bag, but I think most people today would regard it as a good thing. The creation of the pure food and drug act was a good thing. Health and sanitary conditions imposed on the meat packing industry was a good thing.

You are throwing it all out, and without better explanations I can't see it all as being bad. There were things the progressives did that were actually good for the people and good for the nation.

Yes, there was a lot of bad stuff done by the progressives, and I can sorta see how you might regard it as historical malpractice because nobody writes about all the stupid fascist type things they did.

Could you be a little more specific on one or two aspects of the progressive era you regard as historical malpractice?

Yes, Yellow Journalism was a bad thing, and we've endured it ever since.