Capitalism's Savior (Everything You Believe About FDR Is False)

Wall Street Journal ^ | Wednesday, October 29, 2003 | CONRAD BLACK

[presidio9]

Those worried about the recent sluggishness of the American economy should look to the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt. When he entered office in 1933, unemployment was at 33%, there was almost no public-sector relief for the jobless, 45% of family homes had been -- or were in imminent danger of being -- foreclosed, and the Chicago Grain Exchange, the New York Stock Exchange and the banking system had collapsed. Almost no one was engaged in agriculture on an economically sustainable basis and the nation's food supply was apt to be severely interrupted at any time.

[JohnGalt]

FDR, America's Second Worst President, friend to Conrad Black and neoconservatives everywhere.

[RebelBanker]

Who do you consider worse? My vote goes to Abraham Lincoln, "the Great Centralizer" for the massive shift in power from the States to the Federal Government.

Your Humble Servant...

[headsonpikes]

I'm astonished at the sweeping nature of his support, and his entire omission of the court-packing threat, which amounted to an 'auto-coup', IMO.

FDR was no Lenin, but he was no Washington, either.

[JohnGalt]

Agreed.

FDR finished whatever was left of the Old Republic that Lincoln had not destroyed.

[presidio9]

Say John, my perfectly sane and rational fellow conservative, who would you put forward as America's absolute worst president? BTW, how do you feel about slavery?

[JohnGalt]

FDR governed as a fascist and was smitten with the worst tyrant of the 20th Century. The neoconservatives are trying to rehabilitate FDR's image and finally felt bold enough to launch their defense, I guess.

BTW, Richard Perle works for Hollinger Papers which is owned by Conrad Black.

[ex-Texan]

Sorry, but I must disagree. FDR was a great President for three terms but he should have retired and turned the job over to Harry Truman. Stalin ran circles around FDR because his health was failing rapidly. FDR's fourth term was a big mistake. But the country was at war and FDR had strong popular support.

I rate Teddy Roosevelt much higher than FDR but, then, he was my childhood hero.

[dix]

read later

[JohnGalt]

Lincoln, no doubt. Without his wholesale corruption of America's political insitutions and republican form of government, I doubt FDR would ever have been President, let alone the Federal Reserve, which caused the depression, formed in the early 20th Century with out Lincoln's War.

Slavery is a destrcutive influence on civil society (though slavery or indentured servitude allowed my ancestors to be on the first boat out of merry old England in 1620.) Those who made money off slavery, be it Rhode Island or Boston banks and insurance houses, or the actual sellers and abusers are likely still doing their time in purgatory or worse.

What do you think about abortion?

[presidio9]

I am 100% opposed to both abortion and slavery. Neither is a "States Right." Answer the question: Would we be better off if slavery had not been abolished.

[headsonpikes]

FDR governed as a fascist...

I would argue that he had lttle political choice. As Lord Conrad points out, there were numerous populist and 3rd party movements who were far more lunatic than the New Dealers. Not only Russians and Germans were infatuated with 'modernism' and 'progressivism'.

There were scarcely a handful of prominent Americans by the mid-30s who were fully, and vocally, in favor of the classical liberal principles which had governed the U.S. intellectually since its inception.

Now, there is a revival of interest in America's founding ideas, which we can only hope reaches critical mass before an over-reaching State closes off all escape from some form of national socialism.

[JohnGalt]

What a simpleton's question, but I will play ball.

The United States would be better off if the Constitution and the Old Republic's respect for 'states rights' was maintained and the two countries went their separate ways. The anti-conservative and illegally approved 14th Amendment was the root cause of so many of our troubles as conservatives attempting to maintain some semblance of culture.

Nothing was gained by eliminating slavery at the expense of 600,000 American lives so Northern factory owners could import yours and my starving Irish ancestors to work their miserable factories and live in their miserable tenements.

Which is worse to civil society: 30 million abortions and 20 million women living amongst us who contracted to murder their own children or 400,000 slave holders?

[JohnGalt]

No, the neoconservatives, of which Conrad Black employs, are trying to incorporate FDR in the pantheon of "conservative heros." And in no scenario can FDR be called a capitalist. He attmepted to use the command and control economy employed by the fascists which was a cozy relationship between industry and state aka mercantilism.

Here is Irving Kristol on the subject.

[TedsGarage]

FDR served only six weeks of his fourth term. Truman served the rest.

[presidio9]

Nothing was gained by eliminating slavery at the expense of 600,000 American lives so Northern factory owners could import yours and my starving Irish ancestors to work their miserable factories and live in their miserable tenements.

Idiotic. The Irish choose to come here and were better off than they had been in Ireland. Slavery is never a good thing and that is why you can not be taken seriously by any rational individual. Until you start with the premise that slavery was a supreme evil perpetrated by a small minority in this country no other rationalization you attempt to supply is valid.

[rdb3]

Read post #15.

Can you believe this?

[Restorer]

Who do you consider worse? My vote goes to Abraham Lincoln, "the Great Centralizer" for the massive shift in power from the States to the Federal Government.

Trouble with this theory is that almost all the power shifted right back to the states after the War, especially once the military occupation of the South was over. The major shift towards the condition we have today started with TR, accelerated under Wilson and really took off with FDR. It is just plain silly to blame it on Lincoln. There is a great deal of evidence that this devolution of power back to the states would have taken place much faster than it did had he not been murdered.

Power has to shift toward the center if a war is to be fought successfully, especially a civil war. Although I assume from your handle that you would have preferred that Lincoln not be successful in the WBTS .