The 5 Most Widely Believed WWII Facts (That Are Bullshit)

VegasGuy

Star
OG Investor
By Jacopo della Quercia Feb 11, 2010
Cracked.com

They say history is written by the winners, but the truth is even stranger than that. In reality history is often written by popular opinion, or wishful thinking, or crass politics.

That's why so much of what we hear about an event like World War II--whether from textbooks, movies or something you overheard a smart-sounding guy say--is just plain bullshit.

#5.
America Won the War Single-Handedly


Claimed By:
Hollywood, WWII-shooters, Cold War politics and chauvinists.

Sixty years of World War II movies, and a decade of WWII video games, have made one thing clear: If it wasn't for America, you'd all be speaking German right now, baby! U-S-A! U-S-A!


How America fights a two-front war.

Why it's Bullshit:


Because it's like thinking that while many X-Men contributed in their own special way, defeating Magneto really came down to Iceman.

Cool party!

There are two radically different histories of WW II, the one that was actually fought, and the one where the US kicked everyone's assess. Guess which one Cold War-era classrooms were allowed to teach? Here's a hint: It's the same one Hollywood chose to film.

World War II wasn't just a clever name. It was a global conflict that included epic acts of heroism by non-Americans like the storming of Madagascar, the Battle of Westerplatte, the Battle of Moscow, the Battle of Kursk, the epically badass Kokoda Track, the pilots of the Polish Underground State, the details of El Alamein or the HMS Bulldog. Of course, Americans never hear about any of those unless, as in the case of the classic submarine film U 571, the characters are just straight up switched to Americans. To quote George S. Patton: "Americans love a winner," which you know because you saw Patton, the film that portrayed Field Marshal Bernard "Rommel-killer" Montgomery like a buffoon simply because he was British.

Cheerio, guv'na!

However, there is one Zangief-sized elephant in the room that America loved to leave out of conversation until the end of the Cold War: the Soviet Union. The "Great Patriotic War" as they called it was the single largest military operation in history, and home to perhaps the biggest turning-point of the war: the Battle of Stalingrad.

Understand, the Russia versus Germany part of the war wasn't just a little more important than the part the USA was involved in. It was "four times the scale" of the whole Western front, larger than all other phases of the war put together. The Soviet military suffered eight million soldiers dead, more than 20 freaking times the number of U.S. casualties.


Suck it up, Damon.

Sounds pretty brutal for a John Wayne movie? Try figuring in another 13.7 million dead civilians.

It's tragic how many kids in the West never heard these stories growing up. One platoon leader in the Red Army named Yakov Pavlov personally rigged a Stalingrad apartment building with enough landmines, rifles and mortars to hold off half the Nazi army. The building was under fire day and night and even had some civilians in the basement, but the fortress never fell. Pavlov himself picked off one dozen tanks from the beast.

Our history books should not have been denied such awesomeness.

#4.
Winston Churchill Was the Universally Beloved Leader of the Good Guys


Claimed By:
Biographers, [English] historians, skewed opinion polls and people who have never heard of British Raj


Why it's Bullshit:


Churchill was great at giving wartimes speeches, and no doubt was an effective cheerleader for England while the Nazis were bombing the shit out of London. But his popularity didn't extend very far beyond a psychological concept called the "rally round the flag" effect, which significantly reduces criticisms of a character/government post-crisis. Remember when George W. Bush's approval ratings shot past 80 percent after 9/11?

It didn't last, and Churchill immediately was booted from office just months after Germany surrendered. Why?

Churchill suffered from an insatiable urge similar to "bloodlust" in Warcaft to keep fighting WWII for as long as he felt like it. Since this meant millions of men would be dying for his ego, it made him quite unpopular within the British military. Churchill's craziest scheme: A preemptive invasion of Russia on July 1, 1945 with the help of re-armed German forces. Yes, he wanted to start World War III before we had even started shoveling the rubble of WWII. It was his aptly-named Operation Unthinkable, and even his closest supporters thought it was batshit insane.

As for Churchill the Prime Minister, Brits began experiencing a bit of an "oh shit" feeling when it hit them that they might be stuck with the nutcase in peacetime. Winnie didn't make this anxiety any easier for himself, calling his Labour opponents "Gestapo" even though they served key posts in his war cabinet. Thus Britons promptly responded in 1945 by kicking his enormous ass out of office in one of the most spectacular electoral defeats in history.

Nevertheless, Churchill did enjoy high approval ratings from his people... that is, if you ignore the 400 million inhabitants of British Raj, present-day Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar and, the big one, India. By Churchill's own standards, these people were part of the British Empire (including all those poor villagers in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom), yet he was a fierce opponent to any kind of Indian autonomy.

The country was forced into World War II, and its leaders arrested if they protested. Churchill even took a hard-line against Mohandas Gandhi, going so far as to advocate" letting Gandhi starve to death" during his hunger strikes.

Fuck you, Gandhi!

#3.
If The Nazis Had Just _________, Germany Would Have Won The War


Claimed By:
Just about everybody.

The idea is that Nazi Germany was a military juggernaut for a brief period in the 40s, and that the entire planet would have collapsed if it wasn't for one or two minor blunders.


If only he remembered to put oxygen in that helmet...


Why it's Bullshit:


To say that Hitler sleeping late decided the war ignores the fact that he needed supernatural good luck to do as well as he did in the first place. For instance, it was blind luck that he avoided assassination in 1938, before he could even get his war plans off the ground. And it's a pretty safe bet he never would have gotten very far if his father hadn't changed his name from the far less catchy Schickelgruber.

But the major reason Hitler was never this close to making your grandparents goose step through Time Square: The Soviet Union. Today, it's widely believed that Hitler, or really anyone's, chances of winning a war against the Soviet Union were on par with a snowball in a cage match with a chainsaw wielding Mike Tyson in hell.


What 11 time-zones of Joseph Stalin looks like.

Yes, Hitler plowed through Europe and had the UK on the ropes, and could have done more. It didn't matter. Stalin was waiting on the other side, and Hitler was never going to win that war. It was just a matter of how much of Europe he would control at the moment Stalin eventually crushed him.

But had it been through a nuclear bombardment of Berlin or through a continued war of attrition, Joseph Stalin was going to be in the winner's corner of WWII, no matter what.


Behind all those trucks is a battalion of motorcycles to ramp them.

If all of this makes it sound like we think Hitler was kind of an idiot, well, that brings us to our next myth...

#2
Hitler Was an Evil Genius


Claimed By:
The [Alternate] History Channel , Nazi admirers, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

Hitler, in addition to being the go-to example in every bad debate, has sort of become history's supervillain. Hitler was the Lex Luthor to the non-Aryan Superman.


Why it's Bullshit:


Since there are no cheap shots when it comes to Hitler, let's get this out of the way: Do you have any idea how hard it is to get rejected by an art school? Chris Ofili got into art school, and he painted a Virgin Mary using fecal matter.

Yet Hitler failed his entrance exam. Twice. And his cognitive failings continued long after academia. The guy was like the polar-opposite of Charlie Brown: shitty at everything, yet unbelievably successful.

His Munich Beer Putsch was basically one enormous "let's get arrested!" day event, yet he somehow got away with serving only a few months for "high treason." While in jail, he wrote a book so shitty that it makes Stephen King's Christine look like Wuthering Heights, and yet it made enough money that Hitler was able to buy a Mercedes from the royalties while he was still imprisoned.

As a politician, he was a famous speaker despite his silly accent; had trouble breaking 40 percent in the polls despite "thinning" (assassinating) opposition. We'd accuse him of witchery were we not so sure he would have fucked that up too. :)

His contributions as a military tactician included allying Germany with a living cartoon character.

Benito Mussolini: This dude existed.

Like George Lucas bent on world domination, Hitler simply gets too much credit for the decisions made by people around him. Germany's successful invasion of France, for example, had nothing to do with Hitler's planning. His contribution was the part where he let 300,000 Allies escape at the Battle of Dunkirk, and where he singlehandedly blew The Battle of Britain with every advantage going for him, canceling the invasion of Britain in what would be the first real turning point of the war.

In short, Hitler was that asshole who knows absolutely nothing about Texas Hold 'Em, yet kept winning every round because the bastard had more luck than brains. You never hear about the bumbling shenanigans he lucked his way out of for the same reason they never used Forrest Gump as a Bond-villain: It doesn't make for a good story.

#1.
FDR Knew About Pearl Harbor Ahead of Time


Claimed By:
Conspiracy theorists, amateur historians, political opponents and The Freaking History Channel.

Allegedly President Franklin D. Roosevelt had advance knowledge about the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor, and deliberately let it happen so that Congress would declare war against Japan and Germany. In short, FDR on December 6, 1941 was like Vizzini from The Princess Bride, deeply engaged in a roundabout battle of wits with unsuspecting American lives.

"But really it is I who surprised JAPAN!"


Why it's Bullshit:


First of all, the only reason why this rumour exists is because it was a smear used against FDR by his political opponents. The 1944 Republican nominee for president, Thomas E. Dewey, nearly made it an issue in his campaign. It was only after Army Chief of Staff General George C. Marshall explained what a dick move that would be that Dewey abandoned it.

But besides that (and the complete lack of evidence for it), the whole scenario just doesn't make sense. It'd be like FDR crashing a biplane into the Hindenburg just so he could light a cigarette he had no intention of smoking.

Yes, U.S. code breakers anticipated something to happen on December 7 (December 8 in Japan), but thought an attack on Pearl Harbor was unlikely since the Japanese had been staging diplomatic talks with the U.S. since late November. Only a paranoid lunatic would have anticipated that the peace talks were, in fact completely fraudulent, and that Japan had secretly deployed a strike force (under strict radio silence) right outside of Hawaii in the week before December 7.

In short, American intelligence expected an attack on the Philippines, Singapore, Hong Kong, the Dutch East Indies, Midway, Wake Island or Guam if the peace talks fell through. They didn't expect Japan to attack everything on the menu including the U.S. Pacific Fleet docked at Pearl Harbor.

Besides, FDR was no Dick Cheney, and selling his war against Germany was far from a sure thing, since it wasn't Nazi planes that attacked Pearl Harbor. Opposition still enjoyed the support of prominent American Nazis bigwigs such as Henry Ford, and the U.S. Army was so weak at the time that they had to train with wooden guns.

Truth be told, had Hitler not declared war on the U.S. four days later, FDR would have had one hell of an uphill fight getting Americans to fight, even with Pearl Harbor.

So to recap, America, the hero (actually Pippen, or possibly Rodman to Russia's Jordan) of the war, might not have joined the beloved (reviled drunk) Churchill, had it not been for the maverick decision (one of countless tactical errors) by the diabolical (borderline retarded) Hitler. Bang up job, History Channel! :lol:

-VG
 
It started off strong and ended weak as hell.

If The Nazis Had Just _________, Germany Would Have Won The War

Germany would never have "won" the war but to say the Soviet Union was some GOD-like warpower is crazy.

Stalin had trouble beating Finland. Who the hell is afraid of the Fins?

The two major reasons the Nazis didn't capture Moscow was because of fuel and winter fighting. It wasn't because of the Soviets superhuman-fighting prowess.

In fact, after the Soviets won both Moscow and Stalingrad, it still took them YEARS before they got to Berlin.

The Nazis got defeated by oil, coal, and food as much as anything else.

Hitler Was an Evil Genius

I don't know what Art School has to do with leading a country, but it is dismissive to say Hitler wasn't on top of his game.

That dude knew politics, diplomacy, banking, government finance, military planning, and information gathering.

How do you assemble the most efficient military force in Euorpean history without being some kind of genius?

FDR Knew About Pearl Harbor Ahead of Time

This is coming from the same people that say 9/11 couldn't possibly be an inside job and that the government would never be involved in something like that.

The writer needs to read some history books.
 
The fact that people are constantly defending the Nazis in some shape or form shows that White Supremacy has won the argument amongst some.
 
The fact that people are constantly defending the Nazis in some shape or form shows that White Supremacy has won the argument amongst some.

You speak as if Nazism is the only form of White Supremacy ever practiced. That itself is a big part of the problem.
 
You speak as if Nazism is the only form of White Supremacy ever practiced. That itself is a big part of the problem.

I don't know how you got that from my brief comment. Nazism does seem to be glorified mostly by younger people, more so than any other type of white supremacy. I think possibly due to the Nazi's are associated with technology. As if Nazi's and white supremacy were responsible for the advanced military hardware. The Germany war machine has gotten a lot of attention. What is not made apparent is the fact that Germans in general have a history of technical innovation.
 
I think the fact that he feels that the United States entry into the war didn't change the momentum/win the war makes this thread weak.
 
#3.
If The Nazis Had Just _________, Germany Would Have Won The War


Claimed By:
Just about everybody.

The idea is that Nazi Germany was a military juggernaut for a brief period in the 40s, and that the entire planet would have collapsed if it wasn't for one or two minor blunders.


[snip]

His contribution was the part where he let 300,000 Allies escape at the Battle of Dunkirk, and where he singlehandedly blew The Battle of Britain with every advantage going for him, canceling the invasion of Britain in what would be the first real turning point of the war.

So, there were no "if only Hitler had..." moments, yet the author goes on to mention one such moment???
 
I didn't know about the 8 million lost by the Soviets.

That is like killing everyone in Atlanta, Tulsa and Oklahoma city.
 
ummm maybe its cuz I've been Colin Powelling myself since I could walk....

but aren't all five of these "facts" you speak off.... like, common knowledge? I mean, I've never met anyone who has repeated or believed any of these "facts". :smh:

funny thing is, I've met 3 people in my life who didn't know the life cycle of a housefly, and didn't even know they were believing in spontaneous generation. go figure.
 
I didn't know about the 8 million lost by the Soviets.

That is like killing everyone in Atlanta, Tulsa and Oklahoma city.

6 million Jews

8 Soviets

3 million (others) so called Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally or physical disabled (so called undesirables)

also many "mixed raced" were sterilized

The Nazis were really ones to admire weren’t they!
 
6 million Jews

8 Soviets

3 million (others) so called Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally or physical disabled (so called undesirables)

also many "mixed raced" were sterilized

The Nazis were really ones to admire weren’t they!

Yeah, we all know the United States has no history of destroying civilizations, wiping out species, or engaging in forced labor.

Where do you think Hitler got his inspiration?
 
Where do you think Hitler got his inspiration?

Obviously the United States. The Nazi brand of eugenics was an accelerated version of American eugenics. For quite some time, eugenics laws were perfectly legal in America. In fact, Margaret Sanger's views of trying to wipe out undesirable races (albeit with birth control) inspired Hitler and they were said to be pen-pals. Go figure.
 
Obviously the United States. The Nazi brand of eugenics was an accelerated version of American eugenics. For quite some time, eugenics laws were perfectly legal in America. In fact, Margaret Sanger's views of trying to wipe out undesirable races (albeit with birth control) inspired Hitler and they were said to be pen-pals. Go figure.

It's funny how some don't want to look at the evil of the United States but fall all over themselves calling other countries evil, because of their brainwashing and indoctrination in the American "education" system.

Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, and the French all saw what the US had done to achieve it's material wealth.

It's just that Hitler was the most desperate about following the American model because it lacked a Navy (like Britain), access to foreign markets (like France), lacked natural resources (unlike Russia), and was landlocked and surrounded by enemies (unlike Italy).

Germany had to act, one way or the other. And, the model they used to achieve success was the United States (rampant racism, eugenics, genocide, labor camps, separate but equal, etc.).
 
Obviously the United States. The Nazi brand of eugenics was an accelerated version of American eugenics. For quite some time, eugenics laws were perfectly legal in America. In fact, Margaret Sanger's views of trying to wipe out undesirable races (albeit with birth control) inspired Hitler and they were said to be pen-pals. Go figure.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Parenthood

source: The Truth about Margaret Sanger

Sanger and Eugenics

Eugenics is the science of improving hereditary qualities by socially controlling human reproduction. Unable to foment popular opposition to Margaret Sanger's accomplishments and the organization she founded, Sanger's critics attempt to discredit them by intentionally confusing her views on "fitness" with eugenics, racism, and anti-Semitism. Margaret Sanger was not a racist, an anti-Semite, or a eugenicist. Eugenicists, like the Nazis, were opposed to the use of abortion and contraception by healthy and “fit” women (Grossmann, 1995). In fact, Sanger’s books were among the very first burned by the Nazis in their campaign against family planning (“Sanger on Exhibit,” 1999/2000). Sanger actually helped several Jewish women and men and others escape the Nazi regime in Germany (“Margaret Sanger and the ‘Refugee Department’,” 1993). Sanger's disagreement with the eugenicists of her day is clear from her remarks in The Birth Control Review of February 1919:

Eugenists imply or insist that a woman's first duty is to the state; we contend that her duty to herself is her first duty to the state. We maintain that a woman possessing an adequate knowledge of her reproductive functions is the best judge of the time and conditions under which her child should be brought into the world. We further maintain that it is her right, regardless of all other considerations, to determine whether she shall bear children or not, and how many children she shall bear if she chooses to become a mother (1919a).

Margaret Sanger clearly identified with the issues of health and fitness that concerned the early 20th-century eugenics movement, which was enormously popular and well-respected during the 1920s and '30s, when treatments for many hereditary and disabling conditions were unknown. However, Sanger always believed that reproductive decisions should be made on an individual and not a social or cultural basis, and she consistently repudiated any racial application of eugenics principles. For example, Sanger vocally opposed the racial stereotyping that effected passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, on the grounds that intelligence and other inherited traits vary by individual and not by group.

In 1927, the eugenics movement reached the height of its popularity when the U.S. Supreme Court, in Buck v. Bell, held that it was constitutional to involuntarily sterilize the developmentally disabled, the insane, or the uncontrollably epileptic. Oliver Wendell Holmes, supported by Louis Brandeis and six other justices, wrote the opinion.

Although Sanger uniformly repudiated the racist exploitation of eugenics principles, she agreed with the "progressives" of her day who favored

• incentives for the voluntary hospitalization and/or sterilization of people with untreatable, disabling, hereditary conditions

• the adoption and enforcement of stringent regulations to prevent the immigration of the diseased and "feebleminded" into the U.S.

• placing so-called illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, and dope-fiends on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct

Planned Parenthood Federation of America finds these views objectionable and outmoded. Nevertheless, anti-family planning activists continue to attack Sanger, who has been dead for over 30 years, because she is an easier target than the unassailable reputation of PPFA and the contemporary family planning movement. However, attempts to discredit the family planning movement because its early 20th-century founder was not a perfect model of early 21st-century values is like disavowing the Declaration of Independence because its author, Thomas Jefferson, bought and sold slaves.

Sanger's Outreach to the African-American Community

In 1930, Sanger opened a family planning clinic in Harlem that sought to enlist support for contraceptive use and to bring the benefits of family planning to women who were denied access to their city's health and social services. Staffed by a black physician and black social worker, the clinic was endorsed by The Amsterdam News (the powerful local newspaper), the Abyssinian Baptist Church, the Urban League, and the black community's elder statesman, W.E.B. DuBois.

Beginning in 1939, DuBois also served on the advisory council for Sanger's "Negro Project," which was a "unique experiment in race-building and humanitarian service to a race subjected to discrimination, hardship, and segregation” (Chesler, 1992). The Negro Project served African-Americans in the rural South. Other leaders of the African-American community who were involved in the project included Mary McLeod Bethune, founder of the National Council of Negro Women, and Adam Clayton Powell Jr., pastor of the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem.

The Negro Project was also endorsed by prominent white Americans who were involved in social justice efforts at this time, including Eleanor Roosevelt, the most visible and compassionate supporter of racial equality in her era; and the medical philanthropists, Albert and Mary Lasker, whose financial support made the project possible.

A passionate opponent of racism, Sanger predicted in 1942 that the "Negro question" would be foremost on the country's domestic agenda after World War II. Her accomplishments on behalf of the African-American community were unchallengeable during her lifetime and remain so today. In 1966, the year Sanger died, the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. said:

There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger's early efforts. . . . Our sure beginning in the struggle for equality by nonviolent direct action may not have been so resolute without the tradition established by Margaret Sanger and people like her.

Charges of racism against Sanger are most often made by anti-choice activists who are unfamiliar with the history of the African-American community or with Margaret Sanger's collegial relationship with that community's leaders. The tangled fabric of lies and manipulation woven by anti-choice activists around the issues of class, race, and family planning continues to be embroidered today, more than three-quarters of a century after the family planning movement began.

Published Statements That Distort or Misquote Margaret Sanger

Through the years, a number of alleged Sanger quotations, or allegations about her, have surfaced with regularity in anti-family planning publications. The following are samples of especially pernicious distortions, misattributions, or outright lies that Margaret Sanger's enemies continue to circulate.

“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief issue in birth control.” A quotation falsely attributed to Margaret Sanger, this statement was made by the editors of American Medicine in a review of an article by Sanger. The editorial from which this appeared, as well as Sanger's article, "Why Not Birth Control Clinics in America?" (1919b), were reprinted side-by-side in the May 1919 Birth Control Review.

“The mass of ignorant Negroes still breed carelessly and disastrously, so that the increase among Negroes, even more than the increase among whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit, and least able to rear their children properly.” Another quotation falsely attributed to Margaret Sanger, this was actually written for the June 1932 issue of The Birth Control Review by W.E.B. DuBois, founder of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Taken out of the context of his discussion about the effects of birth control on the balance between quality-of-life considerations and race-survival issues for African-Americans, Dubois' language seems insensitive by today's standards.

“Blacks, soldiers, and Jews are a menace to the race.” This fabricated quotation, falsely attributed to Sanger, was concocted in the late 1980s. The alleged source is the April 1933 Birth Control Review (Sanger ceased editing the Review in 1929). That issue contains no article or letter by Sanger.

“To create a race of thoroughbreds . . .” This remark, again attributed originally to Sanger, was made by Dr. Edward A. Kempf and has been cited out of context and with distorted meaning. Dr. Kempf, a progressive physician, was actually arguing for state endowment of maternal and infant care clinics. In her book The Pivot of Civilization, Sanger quoted Dr. Kempf's argument about how environment may improve human excellence:

Society must make life worth the living and the refining for the individual by conditioning him to love and to seek the love-object in a manner that reflects a constructive effect upon his fellow-men and by giving him suitable opportunities. The virility of the automatic apparatus is destroyed by excessive gormandizing or hunger, by excessive wealth or poverty, by excessive work or idleness, by sexual abuse or intolerant prudishness. The noblest and most difficult art of all is the raising of human thoroughbreds (1969).

It was in this spirit that Sanger used the phrase, "Birth Control: To Create a Race of Thoroughbreds," as a banner on the November 1921 issue of the Birth Control Review. (Differing slogans on the theme of voluntary family planning sometimes appeared under the title of The Review, e.g., "Dedicated to the Cause of Voluntary Motherhood," January 1928.)

“The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” This statement is taken out of context from Margaret Sanger's Woman and the New Race (1920). Sanger was making an ironic comment — not a prescriptive one — about the horrifying rate of infant mortality among large families of early 20th-century urban America. The statement, as grim as the conditions that prompted Sanger to make it, accompanied this chart, illustrating the infant death rate in 1920:


Deaths During First Year
1st born children 23% 7th born children 31%
2nd born children 20% 8th born children 33%
3rd born children 21% 9th born children 35%
4th born children 23% 10th born children 41%
5th born children 26% 11th born children 51%
6th born children 31% 12th born children 60%

“We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” Sanger was aware of African-American concerns, passionately argued by Marcus Garvey in the 1920s, that birth control was a threat to the survival of the black race. This statement, which acknowledges those fears, is taken from a letter to Clarence J. Gamble, M.D., a champion of the birth control movement. In that letter, Sanger describes her strategy to allay such apprehensions. A larger portion of the letter makes Sanger's meaning clear:

It seems to me from my experience . . . in North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, and Texas, that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors, they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table. . . . They do not do this with the white people, and if we can train the Negro doctor at the clinic, he can go among them with enthusiasm and with knowledge, which, I believe, will have far-reaching results. . . . His work, in my opinion, should be entirely with the Negro profession and the nurses, hospital, social workers, as well as the County's white doctors. His success will depend upon his personality and his training by us.
The minister's work is also important, and also he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation, as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs (1939).


“As early as 1914 Margaret Sanger was promoting abortion, not for white middle-class women, but against 'inferior races' — black people, poor people, Slavs, Latins, and Hebrews were 'human weeds.'” This allegation about Margaret Sanger appears in an anonymous flyer, "Facts About Planned Parenthood," that is circulated by anti-family planning activists. Margaret Sanger, who passionately believed in a woman's right to control her body, never "promoted" abortion because it was illegal and dangerous throughout her lifetime. She urged women to use contraceptives so that they would not be at risk for the dangers of illegal, back-alley abortion. Sanger never described any ethnic community as an 'inferior race' or as 'human weeds.' In her lifetime, Sanger won the respect of international figures of all races, including the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.; Mahatma Gandhi; Shidzue Kato, the foremost family planning advocate in Japan; and Lady Dhanvanthi Rama Rau of India — all of whom were sensitive to issues of race.

The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy

This is the title of a book falsely attributed to Sanger. It was written by Lothrop Stoddard and reviewed by Havelock Ellis in the October 1920 issue of The Birth Control Review. Its general topic, the international politics of race relations in the first decades of the century, is one in which Sanger was not involved. Her interest, insofar as she allowed a review of Stoddard's book to be published in The Birth Control Review, was in the overall health and quality of life of all races and not in tensions between them. Ellis's review was critical of the Stoddard book and of distinctions based on race or ethnicity alone.
 
I've read Planned Parenthood's view on Sanger. It was good to read that. People can debate over her quotes (misquotes, fabricated quotes, or quotes taken out of context). Yet her actions, such accepting invitations to speak in New Jersey for the Ku Klux Klan (admitted in her own autobiography), quotes about population control (example: "All of our problems are the result of overbreeding among the working class, and if morality is to mean anything at all to us, we must regard all the changes which tend toward the uplift and survival of the human race as moral"), championing sterilization as a vital option for downtrodden peoples ("give dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization"), and so forth make this a very complex debate. Whether she intended or not, she influenced Nazi eugenics.
 
I've read Planned Parenthood's view on Sanger. It was good to read that. People can debate over her quotes (misquotes, fabricated quotes, or quotes taken out of context). Yet her actions, such accepting invitations to speak in New Jersey for the Ku Klux Klan (admitted in her own autobiography), quotes about population control (example: "All of our problems are the result of overbreeding among the working class, and if morality is to mean anything at all to us, we must regard all the changes which tend toward the uplift and survival of the human race as moral"), championing sterilization as a vital option for downtrodden peoples ("give dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization"), and so forth make this a very complex debate. Whether she intended or not, she influenced Nazi eugenics.

you do know that Muhummad Ali actually spoke at a klan gathering too right?
 
you do know that Muhummad Ali actually spoke at a klan gathering too right?

I had no idea about Ali speaking at Klan rallies. Apparently in the case of Sanger, after speaking at a female gathering, she was later flooded with more (a dozen or more) offers to speak at future engagements. Whatever Ali was doing, I doubt he was being asked and invited to come back for more (like they agreed with his message and wanted more).
 
Back
Top