It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nicola Tesla. Stifled Hero.

page: 15
137
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Seems like an opportunistic attempt to tarnish the name of a great visionary just because he happened to hold controversial views on certain topics. The big E label has been used to discredit people before, transforming them from heroes to villains at the blink of an eye due to stereotypical assumptions.




posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

While Tesla may not have personally sterilized anyone he did advocate the practice and certainly made no efforts against it.


Yes as he he sat there by his hotel window and spoke to his Dove-wife, he was capable mentally of being a social advocate against sterilisation.....



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Seems like an opportunistic attempt to tarnish the name of a great visionary just because he happened to hold controversial views on certain topics.

Or perhaps, something a bit different than that.


The big E label has been used to discredit people before, transforming them from heroes to villains at the blink of an eye due to stereotypical assumptions.
You get the point. But not the medium of transmission.

The medium




edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 

Possible I suppose. The interview was in 1937.
It's possible he did not adopt eugenics until his declining years.
Or maybe he just pretended to advocate compulsory sterilization because Edison began fighting eugenics in 1904.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
The work of Nicola Tesla is often presented on ATS. The man is usually characterized as a stifled genius who's inventions would have set mankind free of the bonds of corporate and government greed and evil.

There is no doubt that he was a very talented man. While his grasp of more advanced science was often wacky (a firm believer in "ether"), his use of existing science did allow him to produce some ingenious inventions. It is true that our dependence upon electricity has much to do with his work.


But was Tesla really working for the good of all mankind? Maybe not. His writing seems to indicate something else. Here is a statement from the man himself:

The only method compatible with our notions of civilization and the race is to prevent the breeding of the unfit by sterilization and the deliberate guidance of the mating instinct, Several European countries and a number of states of the American Union sterilize the criminal and the insane. This is not sufficient.

www.pbs.org...
Those European countries he was taking about were those like Nazi Germany. Our hero was a eugenicist, in favor of selecting who should should be allowed to have children and who should not. For him "mankind" was a limited set of humans.

He didn't like fat people either, or those who dressed funny (in his opinion)

Tesla could be harsh at times, openly expressing disgust for overweight people, such as when he fired a secretary because of her weight.[187] He was quick to criticize clothing. On several occasions, Tesla directed a subordinate to go home and change her dress.[169]

en.wikipedia.org...-188

Do we really want to idolize a eugenicist? Was Tesla really working for the common man? Who knows what the true target of this inventive genius was?
edit on 8/3/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/3/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Eugenics were quite popular all over the world at the time he lived, while we see it wrong today he was just holding an opinion that was popular with a majority of people. Presidents, senators, representatives, celebrities, they were all in favor of eugenics too. It was a very widespread opinion that we only moved away from as knowledge of genetics improved.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


He went bonkers my dear, He had OCD and died a total recluse. I can tell you my father also has a photographic memory, he is in his late 80s now, and the thoughts he spouts out over the last 10 years have gotten more and more bizarre .... and are nothing like how he raised us to think.

Tesla was mad.
There is no denying that. I say let him rest in peace.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Rich Z
 


Surely you cannot deny that they might not be the same type of yardstick?

Can't deny that. Was Tesla just going with the crowd?
Can you deny though, that there were those at the time who did not accept the idea of eugenics?
From a early post in the tread:

Comedy, especially farcical exaggeration, became a powerful tool for antieugenics filmmakers in particular, beginning in 1904 with Thomas Edison's The Strenuous Life, or Anti-race Suicide, a four-minute film satirizing contemporary pushes for increased fertility among the white, educated upper classes.

books.google.com...


edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Irrelevant. WHO exactly WAS the crowd you refer to? The basis of your argument is that at any time in history EVERY SINGLE person thought the same exact thoughts about issues? How do you KNOW what was a majority opinion or not? How long was the yardstick then compared to now?

Tesla lived in a time where there was NO expectation that every word he put down on paper would become available to the entire world. Most people would have been shocked to discover that their papers were collected and collated, then made available to the entire world at the cost of a few mouse clicks. Quotes from him that you are basing your argument upon could be nothing more than the idle musings of an overactive mind following paths of thought simply for the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, rather than an effort to make a personal ideological stand. Were those thoughts even meant by him to be made public?

Seriously, I think we would all be shocked today (or not...) at things that our "leaders" are thinking behind closed doors in secrecy. But this is in an environment now where people have come to expect that even your deepest darkest secrets can reach the audience of the entire world if you are not careful.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Rich Z
 


What else makes a person great other than what they DO that they will be remembered by?
I see. Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner, and not a particularly benevolent one. He considered his slaves to be a good investment, breeding them for sale.
As I said, no longer do I respect the man. But he was just a product of his times, right?
www.smithsonianmag.com...

While Tesla may not have personally sterilized anyone he did advocate the practice and certainly made no efforts against it.

edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


I see. And if YOU have not personally made any efforts to curtail eugenics in any form, are you not also just as guilty? Or are you attempting to correct that oversight with THIS particular thread?

As for your claim of "advocacy", exactly how did he ACTIVELY advocate that stance beyond which could possibly only be just idle chatter and musings? The difference between a mountain and a molehill might be difficult to detect based on perspective not being correctly applied.

BTW, do you or your spouse (if applicable) practice any sort of birth control? Presuming that you are heterosexual, of course, otherwise it's a moot point.

What about the entire concept of birth control? Should individuals be allowed to engage in their own personal mini-eugenics program concerning themselves?

Isn't the entire act of procreation a selective process whereby a person will select a mate and exclude others as being unfit? If someone selects a mate based on looks, habits, personality, etc., are they not selecting based on probably genetic influences and thereby excluding others that do not meet this criteria they have chosen?

Why do people undergo blood tests before getting married? Are those blood tests REQUIRED?

Heck, this whole argument might as well be a condemnation of Adam and Eve for engaging in incest. Of course, push come to shove, this might actually explain a LOT about the human race.

But point of the matter, this is a "holier than thou" attitude of today being projected upon someone in a time when such thoughts weren't quite as holy.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Seems like an opportunistic attempt to tarnish the name of a great visionary just because he happened to hold controversial views on certain topics.

Or perhaps, something a bit different than that.


The big E label has been used to discredit people before, transforming them from heroes to villains at the blink of an eye due to stereotypical assumptions.
You get the point. But not the medium of transmission.

The medium
edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
As a poster here (in this thread of all things) I've been following this. Up until now I have to say that Phage has had a good of view;
"A persons deeds may be great while the person themselves are rotten" (I'm completely paraphrasing this whole thread) I can completely agree with this thought. Now though, you have lost me?

Are you stating that are using the Socratic method? If so to what ends? (are you trying to see if others can be forced through a logic maze to change their opinions about something, Is this an attempt to strengthen your own opinions about this topic, or is this just a thought exercise to see how people think?)

Don't get me wrong, it's a good topic, and it's important to understand the difference between reality and heroic fantasy. Your questions from the opening post though still needs to be answered:

1 Was Tesla really working for the good of all mankind?
2 Do we really want to idolize a eugenicist?
3 Was Tesla really working for the common man?
4 Who knows what the true target of this inventive genius was?

In my view:

1 It would seem that Tesla was working for the good of himself (though it could easily be said that he could have been working for the benefit of some Cult)

2 Like it or not we all can be accused of practicing eugenics. Who doesn't look for "their" ideal person to be with? Galton suggested that only people of distinction and wealth should be allowed to reproduce (isn't this how the royal families all ended up marrying within their own bloodlines?)
In everyday life people are looking for a mate that has a specific set of qualities that they want their off spring to have. While some people may not want children, the driving factors for them to select a mate is still based off of this basic instinct. SO is it right to idolize a eugenicist? I say no, but I also say that like everything else in life moderation seems to be the best policy on this issue.

3 Tesla may or may not have believed this. The question that we need to ask is what did he consider "Common Man"? It's possible that the "Common Man" he worked for was those that he saw fit to live in this world, while those people that he didn't see fit should be wiped from the face of the Earth (this could explain his "Death-Ray" idea) On the other hand he may have been only working for the Cult (IF he was in one). This is a question that we can never know the answer to since Tesla never told anyone about his motives (or if he did that/those person/people have never said anything about it)

4 This is the greatest question in this thread. We can through logic remove people and groups from this list, but since we don't know the size of the list we are removing names from we are left with this one question.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Rich Z
 


I see. And if YOU have not personally made any efforts to curtail eugenics in any form, are you not also just as guilty?
Possibly. But then again. I'm not often hailed as a hero to mankind. Not that I know of anyway.


As for your claim of "advocacy", exactly how did he ACTIVELY advocate that stance beyond which could possibly only be just idle chatter and musings?
Perhaps you should read the entire interview. It does sound to me as if he had spent some time with his musings.


BTW, do you or your spouse (if applicable) practice any sort of birth control? Presuming that you are heterosexual, of course, otherwise it's a moot point.
None of your business. Nor is it your business to mandate that I do. It is a personal choice.


What about the entire concept of birth control? Should individuals be allowed to engage in their own personal mini-eugenics program concerning themselves?
Absolutely.


Isn't the entire act of procreation a selective process whereby a person will select a mate and exclude others as being unfit? If someone selects a mate based on looks, habits, personality, etc., are they not selecting based on probably genetic influences and thereby excluding others that do not meet this criteria they have chosen?
Yes. I think a person should make their own choice in mates. What does that have to do with eugenics which includes compulsive sterilization?


Why do people undergo blood tests before getting married? Are those blood tests REQUIRED?
Not that I know of. Not where I live at least. Not sure what that has to do with eugenics though.


But point of the matter, this is a "holier than thou" attitude of today being projected upon someone in a time when such thoughts weren't quite as holy.
And yet there were many who strongly disagreed with the notion of eugenics.

edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Guyfriday
 


Are you stating that are using the Socratic method?
A feeble attempt perhaps.


If so to what ends? (are you trying to see if others can be forced through a logic maze to change their opinions about something, Is this an attempt to strengthen your own opinions about this topic, or is this just a thought exercise to see how people think?)
Excellent questions. Primarily the former, perhaps some of the latter, not so much the middle. Dark Ghost hit upon the train of thought which was my main target.

Your answers to the direct questions are well thought out.
1) I am in complete agreement.

2) I disagree. A major principle of the eugenics movement was that some were unfit to reproduce and that those people should be, and many were, subjected to compulsory sterilization. That is a far cry from people selecting their own mate (regardless of the criteria they use). By his words, Tesla would remove the right of people to select their own mate. A direct contradiction to what you have expressed.

3) Correct. We can only infer what he meant but his statements about "undesirable parents" and the "unfit" tends to indicate that he did consider an element of society (including "criminals and insane") to be worthy of making their own reproductive choices. That would imply that he did not consider those he deemed "unfit" to be of equal stature to "normal" (his word) people.

4) I agree. It is an unanswerable question and it is based upon the assumption that there was a "target". But, going by his statements, is it unreasonable to think that he have have considered the utility of his inventions in furthering the cause of eugenics? An early post by another member made included this suggestion.

edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:03 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:12 AM
link   

edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Guyfriday
 


Are you stating that are using the Socratic method?
A feeble attempt perhaps.


If so to what ends? (are you trying to see if others can be forced through a logic maze to change their opinions about something, Is this an attempt to strengthen your own opinions about this topic, or is this just a thought exercise to see how people think?)
Excellent questions. Primarily the former, perhaps some of the latter. Dark Ghost hit upon the train of thought which was my main target.

Your answers to the direct questions are well thought out.
1) I am in complete agreement.

No comment needed


2) I disagree. A major principle of the eugenics movement was that some were unfit to reproduce and that those people should be, and were, subjected to compulsory sterilization. That is a far cry from people selecting their own mate (regardless of the criteria they use). By his words, Tesla would remove the right of people to select their own mate. A direct contradiction to what you have expressed.
It is possible that Tesla was merely agreeing with the Buck vs. Bell case that was heard in the US Supreme Court in 1927?

The core nature of eugenics is the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)

So under that definition, then yes you are correct. Under the basic theory of selective breeding though, we all can be accused of the practice (though as I stated before, to a small degree)


3) Correct. We can only infer what he meant but his statements about "undesirable parents" and the "unfit" tends to indicate that he did consider an element of society (including "criminals and insane") to be unworthy of making their own reproductive choices. That would imply that he did not consider those he deemed "unfit" to be of equal stature to "normal" (his word) people.

After looking into this affair a little better, it would seem that Tesla may have been working towards the attention of the American Breeders Society. It would have provided access to both money and resources he needed for his research.


4) I agree. It is an unanswerable question and it is based upon the assumption that there was a "target". But, going by his statements, it it unreasonable to think that he have have considered the utility of his inventions in furthering the cause of eugenics?


edit on 8/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
It would seem that there was a "Target", but what was it? (or whom)



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 04:38 AM
link   
So basically you have anointed yourself judge and jury for historical morals. Not only this, but you can apparently read the mind of a man who passed on decades ago to deduce his real intentions.

Frankly i dont think you have a great grasp of societal development throughout history, Phage. Even a cursory understanding of history would show that different generations and different eras lead to far different morality; morality itself and acceptable thought are societal constructs. This is true whether you are looking at scientific ideas such as eugenics, social issues such as promiscuity and violence or even economic and financial theory (ie i'd wager that today's mainstream economic theories will not be remembered fondly; there's a reasonable chance that the concept of outsourcing to cheap countries today might even be seen as slavery to a future generation).

Dollars to donuts something you strongly believe in today will be frowned upon by a future society, and would have been frowned upon by a past society. If you were a man of Tesla's stature someone in a few decades would be creating a thread in the equivalent of cyberspace claiming "Phage was a terrible person, he actually believed in climate change and wanted to punish the population" or something similar.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 04:47 AM
link   
reply to post by geobro
 




he was a better man than many i do not think he electrocuted any elephants or directly killed anyone and never got a nobel prize unlike obama who has helped in the deaths of many . he was into the kabbala with his rotas /sator??


Oh man, forgot about the elephant.
That was when Edison was trying to prove the dangers of Nikola Tesla's alternating current and the safety of his competing direct current by experimenting on an elephant which was watched by about 1500 witnesses


When the day came, Topsy was restrained using a ship's hawser fastened on one end to a donkey engine and on the other to a post. Wooden sandals with copper electrodes were attached to her feet and a copper wire run to Edison's electric light plant, where his technicians awaited the go-ahead.

In order to make sure that Topsy emerged from this spectacle more than just singed and angry, she was fed cyanide-laced carrots moments before a 6,600-volt AC charge slammed through her body. Officials needn't have worried. Topsy was killed instantly and Edison, in his mind anyway, had proved his point.


And what Obama got the Noble Peace Prize for, I haven't the foggiest idea.
Many people are still baffled by that.


The announcement drew gasps of surprise and cries of too much, too soon. Yet President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday because the judges found his promise of disarmament and diplomacy too good to ignore.

Boy, if only they knew......:shk:

--------

ETA: I would like to also add that wasn't the mind set back in those times different than today?
In other words, people then [early 1900's] didn't see any thing wrong with thinking a certain group of people were superior than others. Of course today, 2013, that is highly frowned upon and not accepted.





edit on 5-8-2013 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 05:25 AM
link   
Since it seems like people don't get the point of this thread (and I feel I 'oh so do') *Phage, correct me if I'm wrong...

People have raced in here to defend their messianic figure with arguments of insanity ("cookoo like cocao puffs"), arguments of pigheadedness ("no that never happened you're lying"), arguments by generalization ("everyone did it back then"), arguments of subject misdirection ("eugenics is la la okay in my books, back then eugenics meant ice cream, are you saying Tesla isn't the greatest man in the world?") and other arguments.

But while drowns in their attempts to defend the holy one of UFOs and mysterious free energy to which by urban legend he was just dying to get out to the masses, one considers all the total crap we have suffered over the past few years when Tesla went from respected engineer of the past, renowned and known by all academics for his contributions, to someone who *Snipped* fairy dust and was the smartest man in history, forgetting his talking parrot ghost named Hershel that told him the time of day. This often was masked in derogatory hatred against the satanic-like described Edison.

Yep, to which I refer are statements like the following (The really good ones are highlighted in white):

Pro Tesla or Anti-Edison





Nothing more I HATE in history then this collaboration. Edison was a greedy evil bitch ran by the PTB that have been enslaving us FOREVER. Tesla was a genius with a good heart who would have changed this world for the better.


...there is only one man for me that answers all of the above and that is nikola tesla

...has to be Tesla without a doubt the man was a genius

You can say that Edison was a better businessman but thats like comparing Donald Trump to Mahatma Gandhi. Sure they influence a lot of people and Trumps the better businessman but one is a Capitalist, and the other is for humankind. Who is the better man

Edison a exploiter enemy of humanity
Tesla a champion of humanity.


Tesla was a humanitarian scientist, who wanted his discoveries to give the people things like free wireless electricity.

....Tesla was much more brilliant than Edison could have ever wished to be.




Yup,

Nikolito Tesla. The master of free energy, misunderstood altruistic genius who accepted royalties when he could get them, who wish to kill and cull the fat and stupid people, the retards, the one's not cut to the fabric of his cloth. He was the greatest Jesus since Jesus who wished he could be Hitler and it's a shame no one remembers him except the people who see his statues, read his name in science textbooks the world over, know what a Tesla Coil is, read, are literate, high school education, can use the internet, have been on a forum before, visited YouTube.. You know, that kind of thing.

The lost genius of Tesla and his talking parrot ghost Hershel.
edit on 5-8-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-8-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-8-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Off course I m not sure but I think Tesla was a very sensitive person. It' s the fate of high sensitive and highly gifted persons to be used by others.

About eugenics: he was a child of his time.

About women: In a world leaded by men he had very strange ideas about women. And just like Alfred Wallace he may be put aside just because this idea. He found women to be superior than men.

A strange idea but may be true. By the way a few weeks ago there was a discussion on ATS about women and men (something like: Is feminism going too far) and I don t find that topic any more ... strange, but I must say I have very little time to search and to post on ATS. Allthough I love ATS.

Something I think: the discussion about women and their so called superiority is a taboo and a very dangerous topic because a lot of men hate the idea that women would be superior.

So may be Tesla (and Wallace) two superior men (in a time speaking about superior women was almost a crime) were pushed aside because of their meaning about women.

www.tfcbooks.com...



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Guyfriday
1 It would seem that Tesla was working for the good of himself...


I tend towards this answer as it appeared that he was striving for continued financial and business success with his patents and inventions and how he spent his royalties and income lead me to believe he was not as altruistic as some make him out to be.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Dear God the number of people who find it morally acceptable to consider classifying certain people as worthy of living or reproducing and others as not!

Wow. Just wow!

The most entertaining ( and telling ) part is that none of these people seem to see themselves as the potential "undesirables" who might fall victim to such rules. The obvious implication is that they see themselves as superior.

Have fun with that.

Regarding Tesla being the recipient of hero worship: Heroes, in my way of thinking, are most often more myth than they are reality. Many legendary names come down to use stripped of all but one or two stories... and yet we repeat these same names generation after generation. If the act is great enough, it tends to wash clean all else from history.

So, then, the question becomes... Were the accomplishments of Tesla great enough to warrant such status?

My personal opinion is "No, they were not."

I do realize that Tesla has become the great science based catch-all for the conspiracy community ( Much as Area 51 and the Knights Templar are for other subjects ) and that many among us consider him nearly the modern analog of a Christ. But so very much of that falls into the realm of creative thinking and not historical fact. Tesla was a very brilliant man - but he did not change the world. He merely was born with the right mind and at the right time to be part of a change that was going to happen with or without him.

Thus, in my opinion, the future will likely forgive Tesla his eugenics based biases... Not because they will excuse those views as cultural norms for his period and not because he will remain an idolized and untarnished hero... But, rather, they will gain enough perspective to place him in his proper place in history as a very skilled engineer who happened to see what was coming and helped to usher in the electric age.
edit on 8/5/13 by Hefficide because: Issue with tense



new topics

top topics



 
137
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join