Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiRoosevelt: Words That Inspired
Seventy-five years ago, our nation was in the midst of one of the most dangerous and troubled periods in its history.
In March 1933, about 15 million Americans -- 1 in 4 workers -- were unemployed. Five million American families -- 1 in 7 -- were barely surviving on an inadequate patchwork of private charity and public relief.
In the little more than three years since the stock market crash of October 1929, more than 4,600 banks had failed. On March 3, 1933, a "bank holiday" was declared across the country and every remaining bank was either closed or about to be. The American economy was at a complete standstill.
When Franklin D. Roosevelt stood on the steps of the Capitol at noon, 75 years ago today, to take the oath of office as the 33rd President of the United States, a nation -- and the world -- was hanging on his every word. Never before or since had so much been riding on an inaugural address.
"This great nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper," Roosevelt began. "So first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance."
With those words, Roosevelt calmly outlined the depths of the crisis facing America and appealed to Americans not to lose faith in themselves or their nation.
"Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money," he said. "It lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits. These dark days will be worth all they cost us if they teach us that our true destiny is not to be ministered unto but to minister to ourselves and to our fellow men."
Roosevelt called for a greater role for government than had ever been seen before, and for more collective effort than had ever been seen before in peacetime in America. At a time when some openly speculated whether our nation would be better off under communism or fascism, Roosevelt never lost his faith in democracy.
"If I read the temper of our people correctly, we now realize as we have never realized before our interdependence on each other," he said. "We do not distrust the future of essential democracy. The people of the United States have not failed. In their need they have registered a mandate that they want direct, vigorous action. They have asked for discipline and direction under leadership. They have made me the present instrument of their wishes. In the spirit of the gift I take it."
"Millions of his countrymen were anxious, and hungry, and afraid," wrote Harry Hopkins, one of Roosevelt's key advisors, in 1946. "With that one speech, and in those few minutes, the appalling anxiety and fears were lifted, and the people of the United States knew that they were going into a safe harbor under the leadership of a man who never knew the meaning of fear."
But words always need to be followed by deeds.
What followed Roosevelt's words were 100 days of the most intense legislative effort ever seen in Congress.
Within 36 hours of his inauguration, Roosevelt took control of the nation's currency and banking system and called Congress into a special session to deal with the many crises -- shuttered factories, abandoned farms and millions of broke, unemployed Americans who could not find work anywhere.
Much of what came to be known as the New Deal was forged in those 100 days that followed Roosevelt's inaugural speech. There was a whirlwind of activity and not every program was successful. But when something didn't work, he tried something else. Through it all, he spoke honestly and directly to the American people and let them know what was happening and why.
The New Deal could be seen as the backlash to the rampant speculation of the 1920s and the conservative belief that a free market will always do the right thing. Experience tells us that it rarely happens that way. Roosevelt saved capitalism from itself, but the capitalists always resented him for it. Conservatives still scoff at the idea of the common good.
For the past 30 years, conservatives have tried to discredit Roosevelt's idea that government should act as a countervailing force to protect ordinary people from the harsh extremes of capitalism.
Now, as we watch rapacious free marketeers engage in behavior that would make the robber barons of the 19th century envious and watch the economy sink toward recession, we can see that the balance between public purpose and private gain needs to be restored.
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have too much," Roosevelt said in his second inaugural address. "It is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
That approach to government was Roosevelt's greatest legacy, and even after 75 years of attacks from conservatives, that legacy still shines brightly.
As historian Henry Steele Commager wrote after Roosevelt's death, "Under the New Deal, the noble term 'commonwealth' was given a more realistic meaning than ever before in our history."
© 2008 Reformer
37 Comments so far
Show All"One reason capitalism has never worked is because we have never really tried it" FDR said that too.
Markets work governments don't
Hoover's protectionist moves in the 20s and the creation of the FED to allow fractional reserve banking created the nightmare of the 30s FDR didn't save capitalism he created socialism in a capitalistic economy. The greedy suckers like JP Morgan who could snap his fingers and get a politican in his back pocket was a failure of government not capitalism
The New Deal policies were built on the concept of "the common good". No American should suffer hunger and homelessness. When we provide legitimate aid to the poor, they do, indeed, move forward (note: Prior to welfare "reform", some 80% of recipients used aid for under 5 years, utilizing education and job skills training, voluntarily quitting welfare and becoming taxpayers, more than repaying the welfare aid that they had received.) It was these policies that built the once-powerful middle class, giving the US a period of growth, prosperity, and world leadership.
Fearing fear is a good slogan, but it leaves a lot unsaid. These days, ignorance is a much bigger problem. To start to alleviate this one, start here - Banketeering - how the banks have been stealing trillions from you, and the tap is still running http://www.rudemacedon.ca/dlp/box/box01-money.html
Lorax,
Thanks for your reminder...
Seems to me that self-describing 'liberals' are often as guilty as self-desribing 'conservatives' at remembering history as 'the memory of states' as Zinn points out in People's history (quoting Kissinger)...
Why people can't look back in time and extract that FDR was both a hero and villain depending on from whose perspective we look at is beyond me. From the eyes of a Japanese American whose entire life was de-valued, torn apart, terrorized as they were rounded up in concetration camps...
To those who suffered through the various casuaties of the nuclear arms race that he gave legitmacy too...
To those workers who challenged the notion that capitalism could be 'fixed' by government spending without being transformed into something that people had power over--a democratic socialism if you will or even a social democracy...
FDR was no hero...
And yet of course, today, he looks like one--as he is remembered (just like conservatives remember Reagan) for the good he did not the evil...
Folks, the problem, in both cases, is the mythology of the moral and charismatic leader saving the day in dark times. People's movements, organized from below, from the bottom up have always acted as the impetus for change and we should take note at this time that we need to not get drawn into politics as followers but rather we all must organized together as equals and place demands on this system as we build new ones to replace it...
Well done Lorax for challenging historical liberal and conservative amnesia...
I read a great book by Paul Krugman, "The Conscience of a Liberal" in which he discusses to great length the effects of the New Deal and how it was slowly torn asunder afterwards, barely being touched by Eisenhower because the beauty of it was still so strongly felt, and gradually denigrated by the capitalistic powers that be by using their powers of propaganda and strong access to the media.
I have often wondered at how well the propaganda works. Consider the word capitalism, whose root is capital. It is held high now and considered to be a great trait to excel at it.
Conversely, socialism, whose root is "social" has been turned into a dirty word. As long as we keep letting them take words away from us, like liberal, we are fighting a losing battle. Roosevelt's New Deal was based on liberal ideas. He was a liberal and I am too. And proud of it.
RSJ - "I have never figured out why the materialistic greed of the Bushes and Cheney's isn't treated like the psychological abberation it is."
To me a hugely important point. If you read Frank's (psychiatric psychoanalytic viewpoint) Bush On The Couch you can glean some insight into the developmental aspects of the sadistic callous hoarding mentality; Pinkola-Estes audio Warming The Stone Child compliments it well in this regard.
The challege lies, as I guess it always has, in increasing ones human talents, including compassion, while doing "battle" (facing the frustrations maturely) within the daily and nightly human inter-relations; increasing awareness and organic function, for better while recognizing the worst, in every human inter- action. (breath deep - in and out - listen, look, and feel honestly)
Boy, and I thought I was tough on these guys. You folks have your history, even the parts you argue over. Whaddayou make it? Maybe 5% maybe 7% follow the thread?
I don't think anybody mentioned, he could never get an anti-lynching bill passed during his entire Presidency. Something about the Dixiecrats who put him in office. Kind of tells you things. That said, his legacy was without equal in our history.
90% tax on earned income over $6 million (adjusted up from the 30's for inflation.)
53% tax on unearned capital gains income.
50+% tax on mega-estates (Mr. Walton, Mr. Gates, Mr. Rockefeller et al)
The Wagner Act
Department of Labor (remember when they were supposed to work for the benefit of working people?)
Glass-Steagal
The SEC (remember when they weren't part of the criminal enterprise?)
The FDA (remember when they weren't part of the criminal enterprise?)
By 1964, a mere 30 years of the Legacy, we had the greatest distribution of wealth ever seen in the history of the world. The end of poverty in this country was in sight. Lifetime stable employment was on the horizon and our Ruling Class both in numbers and relative wealth was nearly moribund. But we had a choice to make.
If we wanted to end poverty in the US and if we wanted Lifetime Stable Employment, we had to do two things: We had to make a place for everyone at the table, and we had to reject war and conquest as a way of life.
You know our history. We chose exclusion and WAR. We got our Ruling Class back like a terminal case of gonorrhea. The choice is still out there to be made, YOYO or WITT?
Obama is not structurally capable of opposing the Masters. He just doesn't have it in him. He wants to be a plastic Savior, a Buddy Jesus. If he makes it to POTUS, and survives Inaugeration, well, I suspect you know what a Dim Congress and Senate will do to an Outsider. Same thing they did to Jimmy Carter. They fucked him. Every time he turned his back. Tell me BHO has it in him to pull out a metaphorical Gerber Shorty and set to work, or perhaps a metaphorical .44 magnum and place the working end against a couple of temples. The Overseers are nothing if not sharks. If we attack them they unify and employ the Power of the State to destroy us. If left alone, they carve each other up for meat, while America burns.
And this time we've got the NRA and not the New Deal. Huey Long would have never been allowed a political career today, not even in Louisiana. Arbeit Macht Frei.
Peace.
Let's put FDR in perspective. The US had been overplundered by the rich and poverty was rampant. Communist ideas were all around and Huey Long was breathing fire and pressing for radical reforms. FDR was the compromise candidate who beat Huey Long. Long was much more radical and the people were becoming more receptive to the radicals. Roosevelt did what he did because he had to, otherwise the Huey long wing would have eaten him up. He was running after the ball, really. Huey Long was assasinated 2 years after losing to Roosevelt and was never again a problem. Roosevelt had style, charm, and treated the people warmly. Like Al Capone. And he did what he had to do. He was also a liar, a cheat, violated his oath of office, lied the country into war and was guilty of war crimes. Huey Long was the better man, FDR was the compromise to placate the people without changing the basic philosophy like Long may have. Over all, in my opinion, FDR was as bad as Lincoln, but not as bad as Bush.
MIMICcS, please do yourself a favor and read the suggested material offered by "CeeMiracles". While you are at it, throw away those books you have containing rhetoric by Father Coughlin, James Mundt and others that spouted hate and tried to mislead this country into a real Fascist state!
Oops, I was referring to RSJ's posting of the 1944 FDR speech listing a "second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all".
COMarc: Since Obama says little to nothing about what he'll do, and backpedals away from what he says when questioned ... Obama will have no mandate to do anything when elected.
O'Bama will get no mandate from the people because the people don't give mandates. The people are enslaved. O'Bama will get only orders from his corporate masters.
MiMiCcS - You seem to have read a rather one-sided history of FDR. He did do some things that were highly controversial, but the Congress and the people who still had a voice stopped some of these things cold.
The first week FDR came into office the banks were almost completely bankrupt, people were hungry, an incredible number were homeless, there weren't any jobs to be had for the unemployed.
He made bold decisions. Closed the banks to stop the run on cash withdrawals and called it a bank holiday. In a few weeks he made miracles, and he told the public what he was doing and why, and he also told them if something didn't work, he would try something else.
Hoover who he succeeded as president was certainly not a bad man, but he and the Congress dithered. Hoover believed the markets would right themselves. He believed in waiting for the cyclical changes to kick in and that gradually The Depression would ease. He made it a point to dine well at night, leaving the lights of the White House blazing so those living in hovels around the Capital District would take heart, be inspired and be comforted with the normal routine of the President sitting down to a good dinner every night. He thought it was a good idea, and he wasn't being mean. But he was out of touch.
Roosevelt was creative, canny, very intelligent and bold when he needed to be bold. He'd been through enough himself to know that you can't just lie down and wait for things to get better.
I would highly recommend the late William Manchester's book: The Glory and the Dream, a History of the United States from 1932 - 1972.
The first chapter is called "1932-The Cruelest Year."
I think when you read of those times, you will come to appreciate FDR's genius and his concern and caring for the suffering, frightened people of America at that time.
Manchester doesn't let Roosevelt off the hook either, but covers those moments when he veered off base and tried to do things that were over the line.
As I've said in other posts about the very few Presidents I deeply appreciate and respect, they weren't perfect men, but they did their best. Often that best was quite remarkable.
peace ...
Worth repeating from RSJ's posting of the 1944 FDR speech:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
FDR's list is more specific on economics, but these "civil rights" are generally reflected in progressive platforms such as the Green Party platform and should be made permanent. The implementation should not follow FDR's Keynesian top-down public works programs but should instead be bottom up, starting with civic and economic education for the people, so the people know their rights, and know how to secure them, instead of "superman" coming to their rescue. The people have to learn how to shift individual exchange/association away from the power centers. The people have to start demanding from the markets what is in the better interest of their society and this will create local jobs, local wealth and prosperity and the people will know how to keep it. This in turn gives the people political power which allows their common sense and decency to rule the land. By the way, FDR wasn't any "superman". He was pushed by the rabble threatening a socialist revolution.
In his campaign in 1932 he promised "I propose to you that the government, big and little, be made solvent and that the example be set by the President of the United States and his cabinet...Stop the deficits! Stop the deficits!......[I will] reduce the cost of government operations 25 percent" He also called for a sound gold currency. In 1933 he proceeded to do exactly the opposite.
FDR inauguration speech.
"I am prepared under my constitutional duty to recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the midst of a stricken world may require.
But in the event that the Congress shall fail to take one of these courses, and in the event that the national emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me.
I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis. . .broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe."
Meaning if Congress did not give him what he wanted, he would do it anyways. He was referring of course to the 1917 War Powers Act as amended in 1933 which allowed him to use these powers against Americans. It is still in effect today.
He was the leader in Executive Orders issued by far, over 3700. Of course, those were tough times and he served almost 4 full terms, but he was indeed a unitary Executive, ala Bush.
He created the FCC in 1934 and used it to control news programs from radio broadcasts (broadcast negativity and stations were threatened with losing their license)
He stole our gold, gave nuclear technology to the Soviets, allowed the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbour (our first 9/11) to get us into the war, interned Japanese and some German and Italians in relocation camps, passed the fascist National Recovery Act which was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court (he then tried to break up the supreme court and appoint his own judges), recognized Stalins Soviet Union in 1933 after he murdered millions of his own people and before Hitler was a threat, denied Jewish immigration at the height of the Holocaust, turning boats away at the boarder.
The New Deal socialist program was mean to have been offset by the NRA fascist program, but since the NRA was repealed, only the New Deal is remembered by most.
He led the marines into Haiti in 1915 to do a regime change (following orders). His administration of Haiti led to thousands of deaths and a public outcry when it came public in 1920. He was accused of perjury at the same time by a Senate sub-committee in 1920 over an investigation of his use of decoys to entrap homosexuals in the Navy, but no charges were brought due to he suddenly contracted Polio.
Many actions today by Bush are justified by the actions FDR took in the Depression and War. The next Depression won't bring you a New Deal though, just more fascism.
So when Bush is asked how history will treat him, he smiles and says it depends on who will write the history. Hoping of course it the same guys who write Wilsons and FDR's history.
That said, if FDR had survived a bit longer, this world today might be a better place. The cold war served only the British interests, their last hope to salvage their Empire by keeping us in a state of perpetual war that would weaken our economy over time. We would not have had the Cold War in my opinion if FDR had been allowed to live, and China would not have went Communists, and we probably would not have nuked Japan. Maybe he died of natural causes, maybe not.
Awhile back, I went and read FDR's acceptance address to the 1932 Democrat convention. I was struck by the huge differences between that speech and typical Obama speech.
The difference was the specifics. Right near the beginning FDR promised to take the time to explain and talk about all of the policies he was proposing. And then, to kick off his campaign as the Democratic nominee, he went through very specifically what he was proposing. I think this was the speech where he used the tern "the New Deal". If it wasn't, those specific would be very familiar to anyone who knows history as the New Deal.
FDR could spin beautiful and powerful phrases as well as Obama does. His line about 'nothing to fear but fear itself' still echoes through the ages. But the difference is that FDR was being very specific about what he'd do if the nation elected him as President. He wasn't just a bunch of hot air about 'hope' and 'change', he laid a new direction out for the country and promised to lead the country there if elected.
This by the way is exactly HOW he could accomplish his 'hundred days'. He'd already told the country what he wanted to do and the country gave him a mandate to do that when it elected him. Since Obama says little to nothing about what he'll do, and backpedals away from what he says when questioned (see Obama advisors telling Canada not to pay any attention to Obama's talk about NAFTA as its all just politics), Obama will have no mandate to do anything when elected.
One thing about Obama, he ain't no FDR. At least not from what we've seen so far.
theLorax says:
FDR was one of the most infamous war criminals and terrorists of all time, second only to Hitler. After lying to America that he would 'keep us out of war', FDR was directly responsible for aiding China and cutting off Japan's oil supply which led to Pearl Harbor (which it is likely that he knew about and deliberately allowed to happen). FDR ordered Japanese-American immigrants locked up in concentration camps with no legal counsel. FDR advocated the contruction and use of atomic weapons designed specifically to kill civilians (which makes him a terrorist). He died before he could slaughter Japanese civilians with his weapons, but his second in command carried out his extermination plans.
The author says he "spoke honestly to the American people". That has to be a joke. The media was flooded with anti-japanese propaganda. There's no way that he was "honest and forthright".
It's important to remember history "For it is the doom of men that they forget"
++++++++++++++++++
Sorry, fella', you've got just a few bits and pieces of the real history of the times and what Roosevelt did or did not do.
First, of all I lived it, and second of all, history is something I've been reading and studying since I've been a little girl.
You've got to remember Great Britain, London and the Blitz and all the other nations being attacked, swallowed up and/or destroyed by one, Adolph Schickelgruber a/k/a Hitler a/k/a the Führer and his huge, well-equipped, highly-trained Nazi armies, airforce and navy. China was already attacked by Japan. Japan, under the control of the military, and its very well-equipped airforce, navy, and army also had big plans as Hitler did.
Roosevelt was fully aware that the U.S. people did not want to go to war. World War I and The Great Depression was a good reason to return to isolationism.
Roosevelt had a close relationship with Churchill. Churchill begged him to come into the war. Roosevelt did everything he could to assist with such programs as Lend-lease ... which began to wake up the U.S. economy as factories were busy building ships and other big-ticket and smaller-ticket military items to lease or sell on credit to England and other countries.
There was plenty of intelligence on what was going on in Japan; what was missed was that the Japanese had already done a practice run just short of Pearl Harbor. The Marianas were where it was speculated the Japanese would attack if they were going to attack at all, but certainly not as far as Pearl Harbor.
England was going down. A big swath of Europe was already under Nazi control as were parts of Africa. And Hitler did have his own vision of most of or the total globe under Naziism and those of the Aryan "race."
Looking at the big picture if nothing were done and most of Europe was under Naziism, the consequences, which I'm sure you can figure out, were quite serious for the United States even though it was surrounded by vast oceans. The U.S.S.R. had signed a pact of neutrality with Hitler, and the government under Joseph Stalin, could have gone either way ... more toward Hitler or more away from Hitler.
Emperor Hirohito in Japan was a sweet-faced, figurehead God, but ineffectual in his power. Tojo, is the general, U.S. dart games were invented for at that time. I remember. Some of the military of Japan dissented, but others like Tojo had their raging warrior dreams of conquest. The Japanese Navy was second to none.
My seventeen-year-old brother was stationed in Pearl Harbor. He'd lied about his age to join the Navy. And the reports we got later from him and others stationed there was that a huge number of battleships were docked in the harbor and the planes were almost all out on the field, like "sitting ducks." The rumors later was that Roosevelt knew and wanted full-scale destruction by the Japanese as the ploy to enrage and arouse the public. But it was more likely that there was intelligence that The Mariannas were going to be attacked and our ships and planes would be ready to sail and fly from Pearl Harbor if it was the case we were going to war with the Japanese.
So, yes, Roosevelt decided ... agonizingly so ... to bait the Japanese by withholding oil... and its interesting to read the information about the Japanese diplomats knowing that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked and the time of the raid. They left a meeting with U.S. personnel just shortly before that happened.
But, as it turned out, it was not The Marianas that were attacked, but Pearl Harbor, and the destruction of ships and planes and the carnage was horribly more than was expected.
I remember exactly where I was when Roosevelt came on the radio ... "... day of infamy ... " and we were at war with Japan, and then Germany declared war on the U.S., and the rest is history ...
It was uphill all the way initially for the U.S. Navy in the island wars in the Pacific against the Japanese. Jimmy Doolittle's incredible surprise attack with planes from naval carriers on Tokyo much later was a turning point. The morale of an Invincible Japan plummeted.
In the meantime, the U.S. war plants geared up and it was astounding what was turned out 24/7 by men who, for whatever reason couldn't be drafted, and by an enormous number of women who went to work for the first time.
As far as the internment of Japanese - Americans who were law-abiding, good citizens, yes, that was a terrible thing. No argument. Yet, I would have to say, at the time I grew up, both the propaganda against our Japanese enemies and the attitudes toward those who looked different and who were not white were still very ignorant [they still are in many places here in the U.S.] and prejudiced, plus there was enormous fear. Japanese and German subs were around in unexpected places and propaganda in films and on the radio was heavy, heavy-duty.
I am of German extraction, and I know that my mother and father were objects of acted-out hatred during W.W.I. There was the same kind of hatred toward kids that I knew who looked oriental or who had oriental relatives in WWII, and sometimes if you were of German extraction, the name-calling would happen occasionally too.
Muslim peoples in the U.S. are experiencing the same kind of hatred because of 9/11 and the wars in the Mid-East. And suspicion leading to arrests and disappearances of Muslim peoples in the U.S. have also been rampant. And we do torture as a given now.
And I'm in no way trying to justify what happened to the U.S. citizen-Japanese or Japanese-extraction peoples.
But war makes for craziness of all kinds, as I'm sure you would not disagree.
And the atomic bomb? No one knows what Roosevelt would have done or when he would have done it? Truman's estimate was that the lives of American soldiers would be saved if this new weapon was used. Given the terrain of Japan and the willingness to hold out and fight and die for the Emperor no matter what, the casualties for American G.I.s, air force and navy personnel likely would have been extremely high in trying to secure the nation of Japan.
No one knew until the first bomb was dropped what would happen. It was a horrifying revelatory moment and a turning point of perspective for the whole world. [Unfortunately, in some quarters, we seem to have forgotten the consequences of using these terrible weapons, and the newer versions are far more lethal.]
Truman was on a ship on his way back from The Potsdam Conference with Stalin and Churchhill when the second bomb was dropped. Harold Stimson, the then Secretary of War, evidently made the decision. There were standing orders written some time before that the Secretary of War could make this decision if the President was incapacitated, out-of-range of communication, etc..
"The buck stops here," Truman frequently said. Nothing was made public that the Secretary of War had made the decision. That could have made the Secretary or the President or both look pretty bad. But, allegedly those orders were written before the first bomb was dropped, and speculation is that Truman might not have ordered the second one.
Later a shaken Truman from seeing the devastation on film and in photographs said that never, never, never should this weapon ever be used again.
I'd have to say, theLorax, thank providence for Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Most of what Harry Truman did and stood for was pretty damn good, and some things he did were incredibly courageous and absolutely right.
Imperfect men they were, as they all are. But they loved our country and they cared about the people and they did their best.
Truman's big mistake, he said, was signing into law the creation of the C.I.A., which had been on Roosevelt's desk when Truman unexpectedly became president. He later said that it was a potentially dangerous agency with too much license within the Federal government, a shadow government and difficult to monitor, like putting the foxes in the henhouse.
If I had my drothers, theLorax, I'd opt for an FDR or a Harry right about now.
peace ...
Out here in Denver, we are blessed with perhaps one of those beautiful outdoor amphitheaters in the world. It sits in the foothills of the Rocky mountains, and at night it looks out over the lights of the city. The amphitheater is called Red Rocks.
If you go in the entrance up at the very top, there's a plague commemorating the WPA workers who built Red Rocks.
Thank you Brattleboro Reformer for your article On President Franklin roosevelt. In these depressing times it is a gift to recall those long lost times. It is also wonderful to read some truth instead of whatever "Lorax" reads.
"Union Guy" and "Poet" certainly see the light that brings a chapter in American history, that had some very bad times that were brought on by greed. President Hoover thought we could wait it out and that all would be normal again. In the meantime I could hear my Mother sobbing in the next room, wondering how she would get us breakfast and sending us off to school in a clean shirt and tie and asking us to run home for lunch, because it was cheaper than packing something. I wonder if "Lorax" ever hung around the butcher shop waiting for a bone that Mom could make a soup with.
Then came Franklin D. Roosevert! Then came the N.R.A. It meant shorter hours for those who had jobs, it saved a lot of Bankers asses, a lot of people could still keep their homes, etc. Then the CCC camps. A lot of the trails and bridges in my state were built by those guys and they were happy to have done it. I could go on and on. The changes that the Cons have made were certainly not in our, (working people) interest, they have been made for more corporate growth.
Lorax, go to http:miller center.com and listen to history.
What the Conservatives have not caught on to is- when their economy spirals uncontrollably into the ground, all they will have left is the knowledge of how to use people, do some calculations, paper money and Gold bullion. Try eating that with salt and pepper D bags.
Survival of the fittest eh? come near my garden and food stocks, I'll kill the greedy stupid fuckers.
In 1939 the only Americans who wanted to go to war with Germany were already fighting with the Republicans in Spain. After the horrors of WWI, the nation was in no mood for another foreign war.
FDR Campaigned on "neutrality" as well as "prosperity". Yet, he was able to forsee the dire consequences of a Nazi Empire ruling Europe and a Japanese Empire ruling Asia.
As dreadful news came in from Nanjing, Paris, and Dunkirk, the public mood began to change... but not fast enough for FDR. He increase recruitment into the U.S. armed forces, arranged the Lend-Lease Deal for Britain, and defied Congress by sending American Navy escorts with the convoys to England.
So, was he dishonest, or far-sighted? Courage in leadership is seldom recognized at the time it is exercised.
When a nation is weak, it takes courage to stand up to a stronger rival. When a nation is strong, it takes courage to refrain from using force.
Bush never had that kind of courage. I think Obama does.
Frank1569, good comment and absolutely true -I have never figured out why the materialistic greed of the Bushes and Cheney's isn't treated like the psychological abberation it is.
TheLorax, if FDR had not responded to the Japanese invasion of China, such as the rape of Nanking, would that have then made him a good guy in your book? If he had let hundreds of thousands of Chinese die at the hands of the Japanese Empire without lifting a finger, would that have been a noble act? Besides, the Japanese were going to attack us anyway -- they had to in order to establish the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, e.g.: putting Asia and most of the Pacific Ocean under the thumb of the Japanese Empire.
This is a great speech by Roosevelt, but perhaps his greatest one, and a good blueprint for the Dem Party today, is the SOTU he gave in 1944:
Franklin D. Roosevelt
"The Economic Bill of Rights"
Excerpt from 11 January 1944 message to Congress on the State of the Union
It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.
source: The Public Papers & Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Samuel Rosenman, ed.), Vol XIII (NY: Harper, 1950), 40-42
Listen to the above address.
Giving speeches like FDR's gets you the label of 'radical' or 'extremist'.
So we get the wraith-like Obama, where catching a phrase of substance is like photographing a ghost.
Or Clinton - where substance is like a circular hole being fit around a triangle shaped peg.
Amen unionguy and whatfools!
FDR was far from perfect but he turned on his familiar class priviliges as a member of an elite "old money' dynasty in NY and that takes a guy with guts.
Those old familiar friends and associates never forgave him his "indiscretion" of being for all the people and not just them. The rest of the nation more than made up for it with a great outpouring of support and love because they too understood his sacrifice.
If you want to get a sample of that great affection and love as well as his real fighting campaign style go listen to his 10/31/36 campaign speech at Madison Square Garden less than a week before the '36 election. Talk about an "October surprise".
You can find the speech at:
http://millercenter.org/index.php/scripps/digitalarchive/speechDetail/24
i think that maybe FDR's polio and JFK's Addisons disease were similar stumulae that gave these otherwise priviliged men of the idle liesure class a conscience and a fatalistic outlook that whatever would happen would happen and they set their minds to do good and did have some fine successes.
For a guy that didn't have a leg to stand on Franklin did alright by us. Does the Creator still make men like him?
The Run Away Train
The run away corporate powered plunder train
a club house of cards still pumping gain
built on inflated debt and paupers sweat
is riding on the rails again
The levers on the levers couldn't check
the long drawn out impending wreck
till the ghost conductor 29 called out
next stop is you ain't seen nothin yet
FDR was one of the most infamous war criminals and terrorists of all time, second only to Hitler. After lying to America that he would 'keep us out of war', FDR was directly responsible for aiding China and cutting off Japan's oil supply which led to Pearl Harbor (which it is likely that he knew about and deliberately allowed to happen). FDR ordered Japanese-American immigrants locked up in concentration camps with no legal counsel. FDR advocated the contruction and use of atomic weapons designed specifically to kill civilians (which makes him a terrorist). He died before he could slaughter Japanese civilians with his weapons, but his second in command carried out his extermination plans.
The author says he "spoke honestly to the American people". That has to be a joke. The media was flooded with anti-japanese propaganda. There's no way that he was "honest and forthright".
It's important to remember history "For it is the doom of men that they forget"
Will we have to experience another CRASH to get any real and substantive change? This is the problem: another CRASH similar in effect to the Great Depression will leave this nation, armed to the eyebrows, in violence and chaos. The populace will not sit back, as they did in the thirties, and wait for government action. We will probably most closely resemble the former Yugoslavia as it disintegrated at the end of the 20th century. The military and police will quell this violence with one of the hardest and cruelest iron hands ever seen in history. Blood will flow. As a result of all this, we will wind up with a president who will be a mixture of Stalin and Elmer Gantry. The United States will become a gulag of death and misery.
There are a couple comments that are way off the mark.
First of all, FDR had massive coatails, bringing in 60% of congress as supporters. Further, there was a huge labor-led people's movement that was his main base of support. His programs would, or could, never have been brought into being without the active support of the CIO, Unemployed Councils and the huge Anti-Fascist Movement.
Further, I think some younger folks have a deep misunderstanding of that period, and believe that the choices that history put before forces were between "socialism" and "capitalism." Nothing could be further from the truth! The choices were between programs that brought some relief to a struggling people vs. reationary attacks on the people. The New Deal took up the demands of the wide labor-led people's movement, jobs programs to rebuild our infrastructure, labor's right to organize, social security, public spending for the people, etc, and passed them, making those demands their own. This was absolutely positive! It strengthened organized labor's ability to fight for the people. The demands of the people aimed in a socialist direction. However, there was never a point at which we were ready to establish a socialist republic here.
Certainly it was true that the New Deal did collapse under corporate, redbaiting attack after WWII. Taft-Hartley and other anti-labor laws, along with the McCarren Act and other McCarthyite legislation pushed labor's gains back somewhat.
It is the nature of the class struggle that the contending forces push forward, are forced back, but the "general direction" is toward more progressive, pro-labor conclusions. That looks like a tough sell right now, after 2 decades of constant movement to the right, the collapse of the main countries of socialism. However, there are also counter, pro-socialist, pushes, as Latin America builds socialist leaning regimes, labor and the worker's parties regain strength. It is veery possible that we are just preparing to move into another period of rapid revolutionary changes.
frank 1569: Amen!
If one is addicted to alcohol, they are labeled an Alcoholic; if one is addicted to drugs, Drug Addict; gambling, Gamboholic; stealing, Kleptomaniac.
But if one is addicted to hoarding as much wealth as possible with no thought to the pain and suffering left in their wake, they're called Successful Capitalists.
Addiction: a recurring compulsion by an individual to engage in some specific activity, despite harmful consequences to the individual's health, mental state or social life.
Greed-o-holism is a mental illness no "leader" or fancy speeches can cure. And until we identify it as such, and start treating it, nothing will change, and God-lovin true blue American Patriots will continue their efforts to screw the rest of us out of every possible penny.
Curmudgen99: We stand to lose it now...and in a big hurry.
FDR had friends in his appointments, but few friends outside. The depression fueled desparation in Congress, but not loyalty to the New Deal. FDR never grew appreciable coat-tails, and upon his death the conservatives within and outside his administration began ousting supporters of the New Deal as "Communists," a housecleaning in which HST acquiesed. The aborted coup of 1934 revived in 1945 and has continued its inexorable march since then, waylaid only briefly by the martyrdom of JFK.
"Capitalism" was banished from the public discourse by the end of WW II to be replaced by the term "free enterprise," a term first used by Lamott DuPont in a speech to NAM in September, 1942. Because not much in the way of enterprise had come out of it, the term "free market" took its place in the late 1970s. If free enterprises failed to blossom, that was because free markets could not support them. We are left to face the horrible truth: that renaming things can alter their appearance, but not their characteristics.
elmeztisogordo: At least people were working at meaningful tasks helping society and had a place to live and food to eat.
Sorry, I'm not impressed. Roosevelt "inspired us" to let capitalism live on
so that his successor, Ronald Reagan, could morph it back into the malignancy it really is...and give HIS successor, Bush, the chance to turn a republic into an empire.
We need real change, not a change of the capitalist's mask.
For those who asren't afraid to get angry and inspired at the same time give that FDR first inaugural a listen at:
http://millercenter.org/index.php/scripps/digitalarchive/speechDetail/24
Think about our declining stock market, the subprime lending crisis, our extravagent wars without end being paid for by money borrowed from the wealthy and paid back to them with interest!), homelessness, and poverty. It's all there and the speech shows that FDR had (and we have) the answers to restoring the nation's morale and purpose.
Where is our FDR and an overwhelming filibuster-proof Congress and Senate today? All are awaiting election.
I heard Hillary use the phrase "race to the bottom" yesterday while she was campaigning in Ohio. I was impressed. It was the first time I've heard it during this particular horserace. Is she a closet New-Dealer? I mused. How does she really feel about NAFTA? Will she oppose much of her husband's Presidency and the whole onslaught of government against the people? Or was it the silent reverie of a lifelong-frustrated progressive? Has any candidate used the term "common good" or "commonwealth"? The last time I heard it was from Gary Hart. In my town they named the plaza containing the new Wal-Mart, "The Warren Commons".
The conservatives have moved the body politic so far to the right, they can mock Roosevelt's concept of government openly in the terms they use as they starve any program or policy that helps the working poor.
It is a simple question of what values we use while making our decisions.
Rich people want us to base all of our decisions on market values because then the people with the most money will always have the most value.
Religious people want us to base all of our decisions on religious values because the religious leaders will then have the most value.
Dictators want all decisions to be based on who is the strongest so the people with the most weapons will have the most value.
Roosevelt wnated all decisions based on a democratic process where all of our values could be considered and applied to our problems. This did not make the single value fundamentalist types very happy.
The History Of The FDR years has been anything from water down to outright change.
The facts are without FDR and his socialism, America would never have recovered. Yes it took years and a World War to make use the most prosperous nation in the world,but we did it thanks to most Americans banning together as one .Helping one another.
Look at the Way Americans sacrifice and worked together during WWII.
CONSERVATION was far from a dirty word then.
We just did it. And Reuse And Recycling were naturall things to do>
Hell even the poorest bought war bonds. How many today even think of doing that?
Even chariities like The March Of Dimes started with FDR.
How about all the electric service FDR created for America. His building parks ,Dams and roadways. His supporting artist and writers doing government service jobs.
Hell most people today are up in arms even paying teacher salaries with their taxes
Yep the special interest sure did a job on FDR. Just like they did on Bill Clinton and now Senator Hillary Clinton.
Oh I believe they will win out again. and either a Sellout like McCain Or A Puppet Like Obama will sit in the White House, And all of you will keep complaining about Hillary what ever happens.
Frankly I am glad my heallth is on a downhill slope. It will be you that will have to see your grand kids suffer because you never trusted even your neighbors.