I understand you are not defending George, but I think that his discriminatory
writings were widely used at the time, though not in the 20th cent, and hence he
was famous for them then. I am not sure why the dispute over the term
"famous?" I mean the average, middle of the road person who took a couple of
sociology or polic sci courses in undergrad school probably has heard that Marx
wrote Capital but wouldn't have ever heard of the Gotha Program..... maggie
J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. wrote:
> Maggie,
> But George had influence because he was
> already famous as the author of the best selling
> book on economics in the US in the nineteenth
> century. Noboby would have paid any attention
> to his anti-Chinese rantings if he had not already
> been famous. And he is famous for what he was
> famous for, even if he got a lot of attention in that
> day for his anti-Chinese activities.
> Please do not presume that I am defending
> George at all in terms of his writings. It is simply
> a fact of what he was famous for. If somebody
> sells the best selling book on something in an
> entire century, then that will make them pretty darn
> famous. He was much more famous then as an
> economist than he is today, just as he was more
> famous then for his anti-Chinese writings than he
> is today.
> Barkley Rosser
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Margaret Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:34 PM
> Subject: [PEN-L:7785] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: de Soto
>
> >Barkley, we'll have to disagree. I will try and find the cites I used to
> use in
> >class. Henry George may not be famous for his anti-Chinese sentiment
> today, but
> >he was very famous for it in the nineteenth century. As I said before, his
> >writings were well enough known that they were used as the basis for the
> laws
> >which disallowed Chinese citizenship until the twentieth century. Of
> course,
> >the Chinese exclusion acts are not taught in school as part of the standard
> >history...... and rarely referred to by historians or economic historians
> (other
> >than Asian writers). However, I used some passages from Henry George which
> were
> >rabidly anti-Chinese in my micro classes when I talked about race, class,
> and
> >gender. I think the author of the book I used was Tanaka, I have to look
> it up
> >when I get a chance. The actual situation which led to a lot of H. Georges
> >writings was a strike by shoemakers in New England. The owners of the shoe
> >factories rented Chinese indentured rail workers and brought them east to
> break
> >the strike. This led to tremendous anti-Chinese sentiment, and Henry
> George led
> >the way. The Chinese rail workers were all indentured servants, and in the
> >country only to work. The minute they stopped working they would be
> deported,
> >so they did not have the rights of citizenship to protect them. However,
> rather
> >than uniting with this disparity, George attacked the Chinese as less than
> >human. maggie coleman
> >
> >J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. wrote:
> >
> >> Maggie,
> >> It is also most certainly not true that Henry
> >> George's "main claim to fame" is his anti-
> >> Chinese writings. Heck, I had never even
> >> heard of them before you mentioned them,
> >> and I have even read most of Progress and
> >> Poverty, his most famous book (and the
> >> biggest selling book in the US on economics
> >> in the 19th century). I certainly have heard
> >> about his arguments for a single tax on land
> >> many times.
> >> This is not to defend any bad things he said
> >> about Chinese or other groups. I concur with
> >> Jim about a lot of the old leftists (although
> >> where George should be placed in the political
> >> spectrum is a rather murky business).
> >> Barkley Rosser
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Date: Sunday, February 04, 2001 5:02 PM
> >> Subject: [PEN-L:7751] Re: Re: Re: Re: de Soto
> >>
> >> >I wrote: > Henry George? he was a leftist (of sorts),
> >> >
> >> >Maggie wrote:
> >> >>Jim, Jim, Jim, do NOT get me started on Henry George.
> >> >
> >> >Yeah, I knew about George's bad side. A lot of old leftists were bad,
> >> >especially on issues of racism, sexism, nationalism.
> >> >
> >> >could you explain the Mechanics' views more? are they sort of like
> US-based
> >> >Ricardian socialists?
> >> >
> >> >Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
