Each Thursday, your Crap Archivist brings you the finest in forgotten and bewildering crap culled from basements, thrift stores, estate sales and flea markets. I do this for one reason: Knowledge is power.
The Lone Star State: A School History
Author: C.R. Wharton
Date: 1932
Publisher: The Southern Publishing Company
Discovered at: Submitted by a Dallas Junior Crap Archivist
Representative Quote:
"Thousands of the flower of Texas' manhood had been left on the battlefields while mothers, widows, and orphans mourned them throughout the desolate land. Freedom of the slaves meant the loss of one-fourth of the property owned by the people of Texas." (page 224)
It turns out that all of American history is decided by Texas, the state that nobody's supposed to mess with even though it used to get its ass stomped by Mexico. Last year the State Board of Education stunned America by suggesting that Thurgood Marshall and Cesar Chavez be stripped from text books. Then, the governor got so mad about poor people maybe getting health insurance that he fantasized about secession, which sounds crazy only until you remember that in its first 15 years of statehood Texas managed to quit both Mexico and the U.S. because that's what patriots do.
Dentist Don McLeroy, of the Texas Board of Education, recently explainedthat his decision to edit brown folks out of textbooks has something to do with freedom: "We have an obligation to Texas to make sure [students] understand the original principles upon which America was founded." The Board votes this month on the changes.
To help them out, your Crap Archivist has boned up on how textbooks explained the principles upon which Texas was founded. Here's how The Lone Star State: A School History describes the early Texans' conflicts with Mexico:
"It was impossible for two peoples of different racial origins, speaking different languages, and having different religious views and laws, to mix without trouble."
And here is author C.R. Wharton on Native Americans:
"The Spaniards should have known from common sense that there was about as much possibility of civilizing the Indian as there was of taming lions and tigers."
"The Indians were troublesome and stole everything they could."
"The Indians did not like to work and often ran away or, in savage fashion, raided the missions and killed the priests ... the Indians were lazy and neglected crops and herds."
Wharton was wrong to write these things because today we know that the Native Americans should not be mentioned at all.
Eventually, "people from the U.S. came and claimed the land after years of savagery."
Texas became a state, and then quit to be a Confederate state, and then became a regular state again. As the proposed schoolbook standards make clear, that meant only one thing: The federal government must be limited. For example, after the Civil War, Washington forced Texas' Native Americans onto reservations, where they subsisted on meager government aid. Wharton made clear that this was unfair to everyone.
"Nor did this handling of the Indians suit the white people. They worked hard to make a living without the assistance of the government and they resented the government's aid to the Indians."
Damn that special treatment!
Wharton may complain about other races, but that doesn't mean he's interested in them. His first chapter concerns the earliest Spanish explorers and ends with this sentence:
"One hundred and forty-two years went by before a white man came again."
The next chapter picks up exactly 142 years later. Some fifty pages after that, once he's described the failure of Spanish missionaries to convert the natives, Wharton announces:
"We are now at the real beginning of Texas history. All that happened in the three hundred years after Pineda sailed our shores and Cabeza de Vaca tramped from Galveston Island to the Rio Grande was of little importance."
The lesson is one the State Board has taken to heart: The parts of history that bore you don't matter.
That also applies parts of the world your people haven't made it to yet!
Anyway, the tyrannic federal government told Texans that the black people they could no longer own now had the right to vote. The results:
"The negroes had been given the right to vote and the 'carpet baggers' controlled them and their votes for selfish reasons."And:
"When the 'carpet baggers' arrived, they deceived and pampered the negroes and soon had them loafing about the country in idleness, homeless and helpless. Southern farmers could not get them to stay at home and work."Why does this all sound so familiar?
Wharton believes things got worse.
"These 'carpet baggers' even gave the negroes uniforms and guns, thereby making the latter very impudent and causing whites much annoyance."The solution?
"Finally, a mysterious order of the southerners called the Ku Klux Klan came into existence to scare the negroes into behaving. They rode throughout the country at night clothed in white robes and high hats telling the negroes they were 'haunts' from the dead of the battlefields."
The book's one other Klan reference:
"The political situation was complicated by the activities of the Ku Klux Klan, a fraternal order organized in a system of secret clubs or lodges just after the World War. Hundreds of thousands of people had joined the order and it gave support to Judge Felix D. Robertson, of Dallas, for governor."
Speaking of governers, the only explanation for these boys' beards must be that the ZZ Topp hot rod can travel through time.
Assorted Ironies:
Change "colonists" to "Texans," and this statement could fit right in to tomorrow's textbooks:
"The colonists hoped for a day when they would govern themselves and have their laws written in English."
"The Mexican government was very liberal with the colonists, made them large grants of land, and did not require them to pay taxes. Commerce was unrestricted and special grants were made for gins, saw-mills and other special businesses."
Tensions between Texan colonists and the Mexican government escalated when president Bustamante passed a cruel 1830 law "prohibiting further immigration from the United States." Wharton gets so worked up about this he might as well work for La Raza:
"Such an act would have kept relatives and friends of the settlers from joining them in their new homes."
ALSO:
Your Crap Archivist loves heaps of things about Texas. Here's one:
The mighty Studies in Crap e-mail list updates you whenever a new SiC post hits. Sign up at studiesincrap@pitch.com.
Showing 1-50 of 68
There is only one race: human. This was proven many years before this
textbook was written. The fact that some people still don't know that,
even today, is proof the textbook censorship has been working.
people from the U.S. came and claimed the land after years of savagery
Excellent Seller, Fast shipment, Item as described, will shop again ... A A+++|fitri357
Thank you! Bag is PERFECT! Super fast shipping! Awesome Seller!|tennisplayer600
Great thanks , very happy.|ricciolini
Excellent Seller, Fast shipment, Item as described, will shop again ... A A+++|fitri357
Thank you! Bag is PERFECT! Super fast shipping! Awesome Seller!|tennisplayer600
Great thanks , very happy.|ricciolini
This is very useful information. I need to say I love reading this article lots. It can help me to become better grasp about the subject. It is all well and good written. I’ll definitely find this specific content incredibly intriguing. I really hope you could supply more one day.
If the Mexican people were upset that he had given away Texas last time, they were about to be given a far greater shock: Their invasion of the United States ended up costing Mexico the aforementioned states of California, etc al.
"Just say no to people that cherry pick their quotes to fit a agenda." Like you white supremacists do? It's clearly obvious you're one of them, after all, Mikey boy.
What historians.............oh, you mean the quacks whose writings on race would've been approved by such pro-genocidal eugenicists like Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, etc.? Those 'historians'?
The people who insist homogeneity{especially artificially induced homogeneity} is a savior of any civilization seem to be many of the same people who said that Hitler was 'saving' Europe from the 'Jewish menace' or that the 'Zionist cabal' is forcing us to 'mix' our races, etc............don't fall into that trap, John.
LOL.
If you honestly think that 2 different groups of people will always automatically want to start killing each other the moment they make contact, or that all Native Americans were lazy, or that all white people are ubermenschen, or that 'carpet baggers' were using 'lazy' 'Negroes' to 'destroy' the South, etc..............well, fine, but keep that shit to yourself, boy.
Education isn't anywhere near perfect now...........but it was positively totally f***ed up 100 years ago. We are a bit fortunate, I think.
I want to address this �entitlement� fallacy:
This springs from a long-smouldering sense of outrage at the �gringos� & Norte-Americanos which in turn arises from events in the 19th century which are largely unknown, misunderstood or cynically twisted for political advantage. The accepted dictat now is that every Mexican has a legitimate �right� to be on land which was part of an Atlantis-like mythical landmass called Aztlan at some magical period in history which never existed.
The truth is widely different: When Mexico gained its independence from Spain in 1821, after 11 years of struggle, it comprised an enormous swath of land including, as we all know, the territories which are now California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and of course, Texas. What seems to have been forgotten is that it also included modern Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Costa Rica and Panama. (This becomes important later, so just remember it!)
Within a year of independence, Mexico�s �bright, new democracy� had been tossed away in favor of the dictatorship of General Agust�de Iturbide who had fought against the Spanish and had himself crowned Emperor for his troubles. When Iturbide dissolved a noncompliant congress and decided to rule by decree, a number of other would-be dictators made common cause amongst themselves to establish a �republic� (in other words replace Iturbide with themselves) and ousted Iturbide in 1823. A leader of this insurrection was Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Even the briefest research will show that between 1823 and the Texas Succession in 1836, Mexico had 8 coups or radical changes in the presidency, none were the result of actual open or fair elections. At the end of this period, Santa Anna had made himself autocrat and had centralized all power, abrogating the earlier, �liberal� constitution and replacing it with his own in 1836. His views on the subject were quite clear: �A hundred years to come my people will not be fit for liberty. They do not know what it is, unenlightened as they are, and under the influence of a Catholic clergy, a despotism is the proper government for them��
This act sparked uprising and rebellion throughout the Mexican Empire and many of the provinces set up their own governments with the intention of creating their own independent satrapies including Yucatan, Guanajuato, Durango, Michoacan and, of course, Texas (Coahuila y Tejas).
(At this point a quick word about the Anglo immigrants in Tejas is necessary. In the 1820s, the �new� �Mexican Empire� was bankrupt and the idea arose to invite Norte Americanos to immigrate into border territories in the hope that they would improve the economy with what was perceived (in a case of racial profiling I would posit) as �Yankee� industriousness and ingenuity. It would also create a larger manpower pool for militias with which to combat the Indians; the �original� inhabitants�to be distinguished from the Spanish and Mexican invaders, conquerors and immigrants. It is vital to note that these North American settlers where INVITED, nay begged, in some instances, to move into Mexico's foreign, sovereign territory.)
So, Santa Anna�s repudiation of the 1824 �liberal� Constitution led to widespread revolt. He led his armies in a brutal extermination campaign against the various rebellious provinces, slaughtering unarmed peons or ill-equipped scratch-force militias who had dared oppose his authoritarianism. In late 1835, the settlers (Mexican and Anglo both, it must be noted) in Tejas also rose in revolt and declared independence in March of 1836. Shortly afterward Santa Anna stormed the Alamo and three weeks later massacred rebels at Goliad. On April 21, 1836, however he was soundly defeated and was, himself, captured at the Battle of San Jacinto. As the Head of State of Mexico he concluded the Treaty of Velasco by which he, himself, and in his official character as chief of the Mexican nation �acknowledg[ed] the full, entire, and perfect Independence of the Republic of Texas."
Santa Anna was, upon his return to Mexico, of course, promptly overthrown by yet another government coup which proceeded to repudiate the Treaty of Velasco. This same government however, promptly gave him command of the army two years later when the French landed a military force in Veracruz (for reasons which are beyond the present scope but which included Mexican repudiation of another treaty). Once again the �Napoleon of the West� was defeated in battle, but managed to use the army to again seize power and make himself autocrat. He managed to defeat another rebellion and once again launched another military invasion of the now independent Texas in 1842�which was again unsuccessful but which had the effect of hastening Texans to join the United States, an annexation in 1845 neither anticipated nor desired by the autocrat. He was exiled to Cuba in 1845.
The latest Mexican government, again repudiating the Velasco treaty and refusing to recognize the independence of Texas, its annexation by the United States, or any of the borders between the two sovereign countries based on that Treaty, broke diplomatic relations with the United States and proceeded to invade the United States in 1846 with a 2,000 man army which attacked United States forces in April of 1846.
The result was a disaster for Mexico. Not unlike the Argentine-Falklands fiasco in the 1980�s the Mexican Government started what it hoped was to be a popular war, with the intent of shifting focus from its own graft, corruption and incompetence and what it got instead was an absolute drubbing by the small, comparatively professional American army. A drubbing moreover made worse by the return from exile of Santa Anna who proclaimed himself autocrat again and savior of the country. If the Mexican people were upset that he had given away Texas last time, they were about to be given a far greater shock: Their invasion of the United States ended up costing Mexico the aforementioned states of California, etc al. in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo which gave undisputed (until recently) control of Texas, California etc. to the United States. In return, the United States paid $457,373,077 (in modern dollars) to Mexico and paid off another $81,450,000 in Mexican debt. Thus ended the war begun by Mexico.
The vast majority of Mexicans living in those barren, inhospitable and unproductive regions ceded to the United States STAYED in those territories and became American citizens, preferring the freedom and stability of living under the United States Government to any sort of racial-nationalist identification with �Mexican Pride.� There was no �trail of tears� of weeping refugees pushing handcarts southward through the snow, being harried by Cossack-like dragoons, no displaced persons huddled in refugee camps.
As to Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua et al., Mexico lost those portions of its �Empire� within two years of its �independence�, far sooner than the Tejas uprising stripped it of that northern province. I am unaware of a loud and vibrant protest on the part of any Mexicans insisting that the nation-states of the former �Federal Republic of Central America� be returned to its �historic-racial control� nor have I heard that there are millions of Mexicans illegally crossing the borders of Guatemala et al. demanding or being accorded privileged status on the backs of the taxpayers of those independent countries.
So much for the legendary Arcadia of Aztlan and White Male Oppressor Guilt� During its turbulent history, Mexico seems to have lived up to Santa Anna�s cynical assessment of it. Besides changing governments during the 19th century with greater frequency than most of its citizens changed clothes, it consistently refused to abide by any treaties and agreements which any of the revolving-door governments signed and to which they agreed. This included agreements with England, Spain and France in addition to the United States. The ex-officio policy for most of the 20th century was to foster the misguided belief that the evil gringos had invaded and stolen land from the valiant Mexicans, never admitting or acknowledging that their own political and military incompetence and downright stupidity and greed were the causes, coupled with a persistent inability to create and maintain a stable government.
Now, having exported this deformed, deranged, dangerous and wrong view of history across the border; carried in the bellies of pregnant mothers and in the eyes and hearts of every illegal who views North America as his �manifest destiny and birthright�, the �New Left� has given cache to this revisionist nonsense and urges, in the name of Liberal Guilt that it be made canon and allowed as a legitimate element of foreign and domestic policy.
BREAKING NEWS FOR THE COMMENT SECTION;
Everyone in the western world have freedom of speech, it's not american pattented or anything. The level of freedom you are so proud of, and revere beyond imagining, is a horrible lie because it is always put against people with no freedom instead of the logical, people with the same, and in many many many many cases more freedom.
Freedom of speech is important, but its hardly the only value worth fighting for. Freedom of speech means nothing if you are slaves on the street of your country.
NO ONE has unlimited freedom.
Abraham Lincoln was one of the founders of the Republican Party.
And Texas is no longer the "Don't Mess with Texas" state. There are so many illegals here who throw their trash on the roads that it now a trashy state. Wish we had Sheriff Joe here.
Mal, I wouldn't correct James on just who founded the KKK, but instead mention that the Democrats and Republicans were both VERY different groups back then.
Hello webmaster could I be permitted to quote some of the details from this post if I post a link back to your original post?
It is very unfortunate that Huck Finn and other books are being removed from schools, yet they introduce all kinds of trash teaching our children things that are against what we support or believe in!
Yes, Huck Finn uses slang that many would consider inappropriate, but rewriting history is ridiculous! That is how they spoke back then.
James, I would reveres your caps a bit. The KKK was founded by SOUTHERN Democrats.
Funny how you mention the KKK, but never say that it was actually founded by southern DEMOCRATS. Quite a conflict of interest there, I would say. One might even call that "hypocrisy."
Things haven't changed that much in Texas. An organization known as The Texas Freedom Network "A Mainstream Voice To Counter The Religious Right," - http://www.tfn.org - is working tirelessly to correct that.
From their site:
"Call to Action: Social Studies Under Siege"
"Last year far-right extremists on the State Board of Education wanted to teach students that evolution is a lie. Now they are rewriting history by claiming that separation of church and state is a myth and Phyllis Schlafly is more important than Thomas Jefferson. But the Texas Freedom Network is fighting back!"
One may well say, "I don't live in Texas, what has that to do with me?"
Texas orders more books for its public schools than any other state. Since book publishing companies need to cut as many corners as possible to remain profitable, clearly they can't afford to create separate textbook versions for each state, so whatever Texas approves for publication, becomes the template for the other states as well.
Since textbooks are revised, nationally, only every ten years, the Texas Religious Right - that gave us the unforgettable G. Dubya Bush - if they prevail, will decide what your child, in any other state, will learn for the next ten years.
That scares me to death, and I'm fearless --
pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
Mike Sugar, you mean progressives are tricking the stupid today just like carpet baggers tricked Negroes in Texas?
I don't think you're a racist and I don't think all Tea Partiers are, either. I do think that your certainty that people who disagree with your are trying to trick the stupid is silly and paranoid. Isn't it possible, even likely, that people who disagree with you just happen to see the world differently?
@Other Mike, You don't get it and you have been suckered in by the author of the article. In no way do I support the text book. It is nothing more than propaganda of the time, and trying to purport that the book is somehow representative of conservatives or modern day Texas is also nothing more than propagandist lies.
The author of the article is deceptively alignign an 80-year old text book with conservatives, tea partyists, and Rush Limbaugh. Stupid people fall for this trickery and freely give away their freedoms, their self-determination, and their personal accountability.
Growing federal government, departure from the constitution, greed, and corruption are destroying this country. And from where I sit it looks a lot like Political Correctness is the instrument by which socialist reformers repeatedly trick stupid people into ignoring Logical Correctness, and manipulate them into supporting policies that weaken America.
I agree with the "patriots" that America is the greatest nation on earth. Mostly because you're absolutely free to say what you want to say.
So, if you really believe all this shit, stand up and say it, under your own name. Debate. Organize, and get Palin elected in '12. Just stop blaming "PC" for your own olive-sized balls.
ZZ Topp? The little band from Texas who sells baseball cards? Jeez, how hard is it to Google something and use a reference correctly?
Back to Journalism 101 for somebody. Hope the textbook is accurate.
Old text books would will sound racist, the older the more racist. Now I've lived in the North and the Midwest. Now I live in Texas. I never really cared for living here, but this seems to be one of the only places where jobs still seem to be available. I used to wonder what all this Texas pride was about and now I'm starting to understand.
I also wonder how many years you have lived in Texas, Allen? I still make it to various cities in the north several times a year and look forward to each trip, because I prefer living there over Texas. I can positively tell you that racism is everywhere, it's human nature to look for others to blame.
Could it be that you are applying a stereotype to a whole of people? Of course old textbooks are funny, racist, and in many ways wrong, but they offer a valuable incite into the way people thought during the period. Humanity changes, even in Texas.
Threads like this really make the bile rise in my throat.
It's obvious the political climate in the country and the continued rise of Obama-phobia is further emboldening these racist roaches to come out into the light. Instead of slinking off into the dark corners afraid to be seen, they now come out wearing their racism as a badge of honor all in the guise of fighting political correctness.
Yet, if you look at what they defend they're not really attacking political correctness they're merely trying to enforce their own form of correctness. Anything that dissuades them from calling others inferior is attacked as PC while deriding anything that attacks their beliefs as anti-white racism (see: Mike's post above).
The only thing this post and its subsequent comments demonstrate is that a significant portion of White culture is one predicated on lies, mythology and savagery.
They accuse others of being savage when their own history is one of unwritten savageries so sanguine that it would make the most unrepentant terrorist pale with shame.
Their laziness is demonstrated by their lack of critical thinking, as they readily accept the lies and myths fed to them by others without a regard for facts that contradict their parochial worldview.
That said:
@Mike Sugar, I suggest if you're going to save "stupid people" you start with yourself. This isn't about Political Correctness; This is about truth versus lies. You want to believe in lies? Then by all means, continue believing the slop written in that book, but don't be surprised when one day you realize you've become an anachronism (assuming you're not one already).
It's people like you, and the others who believe that load of codswallop you call history, disgust me and make me ashamed that you call yourself an American.
People like you need to be made to understand the gravity of the history you ignore and take for granted.
In a way, the German people are better off now after the fall of Hitler and the NAZI regime, they at least share a sense of collective guilt.
You and other misguided Americans, like children unsure how to acclimate to feelings of discomfort, rage at others, you rail against "political correctness" for making you feel bad about things that you SHOULD be ashamed of.
My advice to you: stop believing in lies, stop living in a mythological world that doesn't exist.
The truth will set you free.
This comment threat should be covered in next week's Studies in Crap.
HIGHLIGHT: "What were the Indian textbooks of that time like?"
REALIST'S crying defense where he compares a property deed to a textbook is some true wisdom and deep thinking. He must be Palins retard child.
1930's? Don't forget Texans were still lynching blacks, taking pictures and sending them out as post cards.
I remember being taught this crap in the 70's. Texas History was required in Texas. The teachers were no less tolerant, and a lot less literate.
For centuries (and still today) religion has has been used as an excuse to do horrible and stupid things.
Political Correctness is the modern day religion for people who think they are too enlightened for religious faith. PC is every bit as damaging to civilization as any religion has ever been. Stupid people who can't think for themselves or form their own genuine opinions use PC as an excuse to promote stupid ideas without understanding or thinking through the consequences. They are in love with the idea of being progressive, and blindly espouse anything that sounds progressive.
There is a reason we have to call it "Political Correctness" - it's because it's almost always totally distinct and different from "Logical Correctness". Laws and rules should be used to enforce Logical Correctness. Whenever anyone tries to use Politicall Correctness to dictate your thoughs, speech, or actions, they are stealing your freedom and destroying the underpinnings of this country.
Signed - USA Patriot trying to save stupid people from themselves
Does your measure of "...get its ass stomped by Mexico" include where Texas engaged over 1400 Mexican troops in a battle that lasted only 18 minutes?
Do you often judge a whole war based on one battle? Because the history books I read, as racist as it may seem, still say Texas won.
So yea, don't mess with Texas.
There is only one race: human. This was proven many years before this textbook was written. The fact that some people still don't know that, even today, is proof the textbook censorship has been working.
You can't imagine how ignorant you are, or how obvious your ignorance is to everyone else and that's truly sad. If you had any guts you'd face up to the truth.
This is a perfect example of what is wrong with PC.
It is like a lawyers brief for the dishonesty of human beings to have full power to cause trouble and stoke up hatred
Nothing is more unjust than to judge the people of the past by the standards of the present
You do not question the facts of this old textbook - you just don't like the fact that it does not speak in happy-clappy PC inclusive language that you approve of.
You don't like the fact that it sees texas as a colonial state created by white settlers who had to stand and fight for every inch of it. But that is how the Texans of the time saw it - some still do.
What were the Indian textbooks of that time like?
or the Mexican ones?
fuck niggers spics and other piece of shit races towel head heathens, i will personally shit down all their mouths.
I'm white. My best friend's black. And we're both intelligent enough to have racial conversations without getting our feelings hurt.
He said to me once something to the effect of, "When did the world change so that an opinion suddenly became a racist view?" He has many 'opinions' of white people as I have 'opinions' of black people. They are OPINIONS, but when stated in mixed company they inevitably become 'racist slander' instead.
Like the light skinned guy from Africa who identifies as an "African-American" though he is white enough to practically be albino. My black friend laughs his ass off, and I smugly accuse him of being a 'racist.' But that is a clear reference to our point that the term 'racism' is the modern-day scapegoat for losing out on an intelligent conversation. If you're point is not the top dog then your argument is that I must be a racist.
Maybe it's just me, but I took the article to mean, "Hey, look how ridiculous this textbook from the 30s was. Now compare this to the changes proposed by the Texas Department of Education."
nice find/good article. people shouldn't confuse this with thinking that a person or group should feel the need to burden the guilt of past generations stupidity but that the same time, like the quote says - "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it".
78 years isn't old. The second amendment, now that's ancient, and we can let that just go away.
"No one can say anything real anymore."
You don't say. Then how come every comments section of every remotely political web article is chock-full of hipster racists? Almost always anonymous. Speaking of cowardice...
Admit it: In 2010, this is a funny read. Time, indeed, makes fools of us all, and currently happens to be eroding "white culture." Rome didn't fall because of "PC." It's time was simply up. Suck it up, pussy boy.
Political Correctness has cut off america's balls. No one can say anything real anymore.
Racism occurs because:
"It was impossible for two peoples of different racial origins, speaking different languages, and having different religious views and laws, to mix without trouble."
That's real. Get over it.It's amazingly clear that the author of this article hates white people. Just say no to people that cherry pick their quotes to fit a agenda.
I smell a butt hurt Troll.
Every state had the same shit if not worst kind of text book blame the author and the State board not the entire state.
Every one you just been trolled
You know what is even scarier?
Imagine it is now the year 2088, and our great-grandchildren get their hands on a textbook written in the year 2010. I'm sure they will be equally as aghast at some of the "ridiculous" and "bizarre" and "backwards" views that we hold today, just as we look back at people from 1932, and I'm sure just as someone from the 1932 looked back at people from the mid-nineteenth century.
One thing is certain: Time has a way of making fools of us all. It's all a matter of perspective.
like
dislike
