This is not my subject of interest as I know from my limit experience in historical debates that they are no win situations. Most of us are not armed with a deep knowledge of history and the CONTEXT of the period when that history was happening. Context I would define as trends, world views, social trends, social beliefs etc.
Example would be the American Eugenics Movement (note that Eugenics was not limited to the US). Throw this into GOOGLE and see what pops up.
Sad story is that back in those old days this was a driving belief that shaped history. Lose this context of history and the events make no sense. Well, will seem clearer IMHO if one IS aware of this.
Thus the context of the everyday thinking is invaluable in understanding how people behaved. This will unlikely be discussed in High School history books or even in d discussions about the historical events.
I am going to throw something here as some food for thought.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'As early as 13 weeks gestational age, the fetus is showing individual behavior and personality traits that continue on after birth (Piontelli, 1992). She observed four sets of twins by ultrasound periodically over the course of the pregnancies. Each set of twins seemed to manifest a unique relationship together: one set was loving, another contentious, and another was passive. One pair consisted of a brother who was active, attentive, and affectionate, and his sister who would passively follow his lead. The boy in this pair kicked and wrestled with the placenta, actively pushing for space and looking disgruntled. However, at times he would reach out to his sister through the membrane separating them, caressing her face or rubbing her feet with his. His sister would reciprocate when he initiated contact.
Piontelli conducted follow-up observation of the four sets of twins through age four. She found that behavior after birth for each child, and in the relationship between each set of twins, continued remarkably unchanged. The twins just mentioned continued to be affectionate with each other. At one year of age they would play together, touch, hug and kiss. The boy was self-starting and independent, and the girl passively followed his lead. The other twin pairs exhibited the same behaviors and relationship postnatally as they had in the womb. What accounts for the individual differences? One factor, of course, is the maternal environment in which each child lives. Another is its own genetic makeup. Could there be other factors that a child brings into the world--predispositions, prior agreements or commitments, or karmic debts? That question remains open for further investigation at another time.
')
More can be found here
Babies and their development
One can also read David Chamberlain to find out how VERY early the environment shapes those little creatures called babies.
Babies grow up to be leaders!!!!
