anonymous
  • anonymous
Why was “racial fitness” and Social Darwinism in the early 20th century so popular during the era?
History
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
chestercat
  • chestercat
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • anonymous
It meshed very well with the political and social Progressivism of the era, which centered around the believe that history is "progress" and both man and society can be perfected, and that we should strive to do so. Quite a number of Progressives (e.g. President Wilson) were virulent racists, and others (e.g. Margaret Sanger, found of Planned Parenthood and early contraception advocate and suffragist) endorsed eugenics. Opposition to racism and eugenics, and Social Darwinism generally, was rooted in "classical liberalism," which is what we generally call conservatism now, ironically enough. After the appalling results of the applications of "scientific" theories of the improvement of man in Stalin's USSR and Hitler's Germany, these ideas became anathema, and were more or less quietly dropped from the Progressive's idea box. Or sort of. They've actually become replaced with sort of a "stealth" version, where the idea is that man is perfectable not by biology -- by appropriate breeding -- but by external means, by education. Nowadays you find the heirs of Progressivism touting education as the universal solvent for human iniquity. Educate a man, they will tell you, and you can turn even the worst character into the best. Conversely, if you fail to educate him, or educate him wrong, you will turn even a saint into a monster. Conservatives still believe that neither breeding nor education will do that much to alter the character of individual men -- that this is, to a great extent, a mystery thing that we cannot trace 100% to genetics, to parenting, to education, to social mythology, or to experience (although a little bit to all of them). Therefore, while the progressive seeks to perfect man and design a society for this perfect man, the conservative believes man will always be imperfect, and seeks a society that can function well even when its members are flawed.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.