Open Theism Discussion Board
  HomeLog InRegisterSearch the ForumHelp
   
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > Something I Read Today...  Forum Quick Jump
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

One Love
Registered Member




Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
 
   Posted 3/27/2010 8:17 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Arthur de Gobineau
 
 
When Gobineau returned to France in the later years of the July Monarchy, he made his living writing serialized fiction (romans-feuilletons) and contributing to reactionary periodicals. He struck up a friendship, and had voluminous correspondence with, Alexis de Tocqueville, who brought him into the foreign ministry while he was foreign minister during the Second Republic.[1] Gobineau was a successful diplomat for the French Second Empire. Initially he was posted to Persia, before working in Brazil and other countries.
 
He came to believe that race created culture, arguing that distinctions between the three races - "black", "white", and "yellow" - were natural barriers, and that "race-mixing" breaks those barriers and leads to chaos. He classified the Middle East, Central Asia, the Indian subcontinent and North Africa as racially mixed.
 
Gobineau also questioned the belief that the black and yellow races belong to the same human family as the white race and share a common ancestor. He was a devout Catholic and assumed the Bible to be an accurate account of human history, so he did not doubt that the Bible speaks of Adam as the progenitor of the white race, but doubted that the colored races were descendants of Adam[3][4], since ".. nothing proves that at the first redaction of the Adamite genealogies the colored races were considered as forming part of the species"[5].
 
Gobineau believed the white race was superior to the other races in the creation of civilized culture and maintaining ordered government. However, he also thought that the development of civilization in other periods was different than in his own and speculated that other races might have superior qualities in those civilization periods than in his own. Nonetheless, he believed European civilization represented the best of what remained of ancient civilizations and held the most superior attributes capable for continued survival. His primary thesis in regards to this theory was that European civilizational flowering from Greece to Rome and Germanic to contemporary sprang from, and corresponded to, the ancient Indo-European culture, also known as "Aryan". Gobineau originally wrote that, given the past trajectory of civilization in Europe, white race miscegenation was inevitable and would result in growing chaos. He attributed much of the economic turmoil in France to pollution of races. Later on in his life, with the spread of British and American civilization and the growth of Germany, he altered his opinion to believe that the white race could be saved.
 
...
 
Hitler and Nazism borrowed much of Gobineau's ideology, though Gobineau himself was not particularly anti-Semitic.
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------
 
 
Talk about selective exegesis.  And this guy was a progenitor to one of the darkest times of human history.  A devout European Catholic who believed in the Bible...and the blessed Mother Mary...
 
Yeah...gotta love the institutional chuuuuuuuuurch...yeah...
 
 
Heh.  I just have two words:  "Azusa Street"   icon_bandit
 


Lord Jesus, have mercy.

Back to Top
 

Tom
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
 
   Posted 3/27/2010 8:22 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Totally with ya D. What a confused guy.

Tom


KIXYTΘEMTA

Back to Top
 

Similitude
Registered Member


Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
 
   Posted 3/28/2010 12:10 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Hugh Ross doesn't think Neanderthals and Homo Erectus were descendants of Adam. Some theists don't even believe there was an "Adam." Is there a difference in the moral implications of Hugh's view and Gobineau's view? I don't see any. What matters ethically (as opposed to exegetically) is whether Gobineau believed he should love all volitional beings as himself. It is bad if we infer wrongly who is the strong and who is the weak. Because scripture tells the strong to bear the infirmities of the weak and the weak to not mis-judge the strong. So the distinction between personal strengths and weaknesses is REAL. But one person may be both stronger in one respect and weaker in another as compared to another human being. Being "weaker" doesn't imply being weaker in EVERY respect. The Meyer's-Brigg's analysis is an example of this very SOFA.



 

Post Edited (Similtude) : 3/28/2010 12:13:40 PM (GMT-5)

Back to Top
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
   
Forum Information
Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:00 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads