SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Sat, 21 Jul 2012 10:25:34 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_885a3.b50ae03.3d3c15dd_boundary"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (618 bytes) , text/html (1175 bytes)
That Progressivism is not a "movement," in Filene's estimation  anyway, 
does not suggest the lack of ideological affinity among those who  called 
themselves Progressive.  That eugenics played a large role in  Progressive 
thought is undeniable to anyone who takes the effort to read the  literature.  
This has been well documented by, among others, Tim Leonard,  and my book 
"Order and Control in American Socio-economic Thought," makes the  case as well.  
(Although Tim has written far more on the issue.)  I do  not need to 
associate Progressivism and eugenics -- they achieved that  connection all by 
themselves.
 
CM
 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2