[Up] [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sinclair babes shipped as slaves

>Steve wrote
>> >Were the powerful in Australia wrong to do
>> >what they did? Not necessarily when they
>> >did it. I think it's very difficult to judge the
>> >past with views generated in the present.
>John wrote
>> That part I agree with.

[ Excess quotations omitted. ]

Certain dictators in certain African states did that, too, as recently as
20 years ago.  There are reputed examples more recently than that.

Following your line of thought a bit farther, what that we do now will
be considered indefensible a hundred years from now?  Quite a few things,
I imagine.

As far as human nature, homo sapiens is a creature that evolves as much
by culture as by biology.  Chattel slavery, for example, was considered
normal throughout much of human prehistory and history, yet nowadays the
few surviving examples are considered by most of humanity and even by
most governments to be detestable anomalies.

I do still think that even though Sir John Sinclair had good intentions,
he should have been able to forsee at least some of the effects of his
agricultural policies.

The Australian ministers who promoted the child
imports and the British ministers who facilitated them
are easy to tar, because the victims were children.

But let's not forget that the Clearances, promoted and accellerated by
Sir John's innovations, affected entire families, including children.

I suppose my point is that intentions may not be as important as effects.


John S. Quarterman <jsq@quarterman.org>
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html