Posted on 03/16/2022 2:41:56 PM PDT by george76
Already mentioned the Zimmerman telegram. There’s a great book about it by Barbara Tuchman and also read her book The Guns of August.
Yes and no on that - there were some but not enough, it was a coal dust explosion afterwards that brought the ship down. Read: The Guns of August by Barbara Tuchman, it details it very well. The ship was a known liner and it was a deliberate war crime knowing that the ship was filled with civilians.
Thanks for posting this history, which many are not aware of.
IOW, the British were using the passengers as human shields.
Bottom Line is that Britain and France, just couldn’t accept that there was a new kid on the block.
I agree - never did like that sonofabitch!
HST, Sloe Joe is giving him a run for his money!
Read those two books I mentioned.
Philip Dru is an example, yes. Unfortunately it’s only a novel with shrouded themes and not a definitive statement of principles. Here’s the audiobook version FWIW.
https://librivox.org/philip-dru-administrator-by-edward-m-house/
Production details:
Running Time: 6:38:55
Zip file size: 191.6MB
Catalog date: 2011-04-20
Read by: progressingamerica
Yes, Theodore Roosevelt was a social justice-oriented progressive and yes, also, many of the agencies that comprise the totality of what is today’s administrative state was created at Roosevelt’s behest.
Where Roosevelt “gets away with it”, I suspect, is the fact that the administrative state in Roosevelt’s day was so disparate that it was malfunctioning. He started from zero and had to create it from scratch.
As a malfunction and incomplete platform, it has to be focused in on in order to be seen. What Wilson was able to accomplish is not nearly the same. Wilson was able to take advantage of the disparate parts that Roosevelt created and more completely turn them into a meat grinding regulatory machine.
We wouldn’t remember Wilson today the way we do if he would’ve been the first up instead of TR.
What I’m getting at is that progressivism begets more progressivism; each progressive has had previous/successive progressive’s work to rely on. Obama relied on -—> Clinton. Clinton, on -—> Carter. etc. etc. Wilson relied on -—> Theodore Roosevelt.
Theodore Roosevelt relied on -—> Nobody.
TR was the first progressive president. He had nothing before him to build on.
Progressives, I think, need for us as conservatives to mislabel them as communists. I think they desperately need it, actually. Any time we can go around tilting at windmills that's to the benefit of progressives.
In reality, progressivism and communism are deeply hateful of each other and staunch enemies. There's a lot of bad blood under that bridge and if you get near it it stinks of putrefaction. Palmer really hammers this point home. He's not the only one BTW, but as the primary lead of a Red Scare it's hard to ignore.
To say that because Palmer was a conservative simply because he was anti-communist - now THAT would be a huge mistake.
I've not heard this before. Where and in what way? The more specific, the better.
FDR was in Wilson’s cabinet, as were many of the principle figures of the New Deal. The New Deal was laid under Wilson, hatched by FDR.
Thanks.
However, this is largely historical revisionism. Progressive historians like Jason W. Stevens have worked very hard to seed history backward in order to justify their own existence and obscure their more obvious history as progressives.
Arguably the greatest feature of all of progressive ideology is bureaucracies and unelected administration coupled with a frustration bordering on hatred of the U.S. Constitution.
All of the things that Stevens names are small potatoes and are motivated by modern/current events to stoke the usual fights.
McKinley was assassinated after being caught up in the Spanish-American War. Note that T Roosevelt kept most of McKinley’s people.
And Progressives then were not exactly what we think of as Progressives today, by a long shot.
Some please explain this to the "JFK was more conservative than most Republicans today and would be a Trump voter if he were alive now" delusional wing of Conservative Republicans.
Fun fact about the otherwise uniformly awful Woodrow Wilson that I frequently site on here (and is simply ignored by FReepers who can't refute it): Wilson is a RARE example of a socialist RAT president who DID accidentally appoint a decent conservative to the Supreme Court, which (along with the example of JFK appointed White) proves the "RAT presidents NEVER make a mistake when appointing SCOTUS judges" talking point wrong.
Wilson appointment his A.G., James Clark McReynolds, to the Supreme Court, and McReynolds had been a loyal Wilsonite. Then McReynolds "evolved" to become more and more conservative on the court, and by the time of the FDR era, he was infuriating lefties by being part of the dependable bloc of the "Four Horsemen" who continuously struck down New Deal legislation as unconstitutional govenrment overreach.
No doubt Wilson would have teared his hair out over McReynold's betrayal, if Wilson hadn't suffered a massive stroke and died in 1921.
When Wilson first saw DW Griffith’s polemic laden “Birth Of A Nation’’ He was said to have remarked it was “Like writing history with lightning!’’
What a dipshit. Right down there with FDR (spit be upon him)
Cancer can be progressive too. That’s when it kills you.
His point is [somewhat] valid, but he learned the wrong lesson. It doesn't justify socialism to be as good as democracy; it condemns democracy to be as bad as socialism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.