Replies

x: "Nixon went through the Depression and WWII.
People in that generation might be more accepting of big government than those of other generations."

MCF #7: "IMHO, it was the 17th Amendment that really destroyed federalism."

progressingAmerica #39: "I agree, followed closely in its danger (in a different context) by the 16th Amendment.
Both of which (amendments) owe their existence to Theodore Roosevelt."

There were four candidates in 1912,
each more progressive than the next:

Hmmmmm... I'm starting to understand that there is a serious bug up some people's hindquarters to paint Teddy Roosevelt with the same "Progressive" brush as Woodrow Wilson, and yet I'm most reluctant to grant that they were just two peas in the same Progressive pod.

So far as I can tell, it's just more work of Democrat devils saying: "oh, do you like trashing our hero Wilson? Well, then we'll just trash the h*ll out of your hero Teddy Roosevelt!!".

But the basic, fundamental, root problem with all this kind of nonsense is, people are looking at Teddy Roosevelt through the lens of Franklin Roosevelt and saying, in effect -- "because Franklin Roosevelt did 'Y', therefore, 'Y' is what Teddy Roosevelt intended by 'X' ".
I just don't buy that.

Take, for example, the 16th Amendment -- Federal income taxes, on this thread blamed on Teddy Roosevelt, and yet:

An income tax was first proposed by a Democrat, the Father of the Constitution, Pres. James Madison as a temporary wartime measure during the War of 1812.
That war ended before Congress could pass the tax, but this pedigree suggests to me that an income tax was neither unknown nor abhorrent to our Founders and their Constitution.
During the Civil War the Republican Congress enacted a temporary wartime income tax which raised around $100 million of the war's total $5 billion cost.
That tax ended in 1872 under Pres. Grant.
As early as 1880, just eight years after the Civil War income tax ended in 1872, political groups began advocating a new graduated income tax:
- 1880 the Greenback Party (aka National Independent Party) called for an income tax, 8-hour work day and women's suffrage.
- 1892 the Populist Party Omaha Platform called for, along with an 8-hour workday, direct election of US senators, pensions for former Union soldiers, nationalized railroads and elimination of private banks, also a graduated income tax.
- 1908 the Democrat Party platform also called for a graduated income tax and direct election of US senators.
In 1912, Teddy Roosevelt's Progressive ("Bull Moose") Republicans supported the 16th Amendment, as did the other candidates, Wilson, Taft & Debs.
Roosevelt's support is listed as arising from his concerns about military threats posed by increasingly aggressive empires in Asia and Europe, producing a need for stronger US military forces.
In other words, TR saw income tax as a revenue source for a military necessary to maintain "peace through strength".

Which brings us to the question of, just how progressive were TR's Bull Moose Republicans and, whether they can be blamed for the explosion in Federal government powers and spending under TR's nephew-cousin -- Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal?

Teddy Roosevelt's Great White Fleet:

My answer is, I don't think TR could have imagined what FDR would do with the progressive reforms TR supported.
And a most curious aspect of this is that Franklin Roosevelt did not call himself a "progressive" but rather insisted he was a "liberal" -- with the distinction being "progressives" by the 1930s were considered ideologically anti-constitution, while FDR insisted that he & other "liberals" supported the Constitution, just needed to make some changes to help people suffering from the Great Depression.

In today's political landscape, among Democrats, 37% consider themselves to be "moderates" (i.e., Manchin), 51% call themselves "liberals" (i.e., Biden?) and 12% self-identify as the Progressive Left (i.e., AOC).

Bottom line:
This graph below is the problem with blaming Teddy Roosevelt in, say, 1908 for what Franklin Roosevelt and other Democrats did from the 1930s on.

Federal spending as a percentage of US GDP since 1790 (in 2023 = 22.4%):

"I'm starting to understand that there is a serious bug up some people's hindquarters to paint Teddy Roosevelt with the same "Progressive" brush as Woodrow Wilson"

Theodore Roosevelt founded the Progressive Party, the first major document in U.S. history that calls for a government takeover of healthcare. That is, universal healthcare to use modern lingo. Don't blame me for that though.

Since I'm such a nice guy, here is my recording of the 1912 platform of the Progressive Party, so you don't have to take time out of your busy day to go and read it. I did the hard part. You can do the easy part. See how nice that is?

https://librivox.org/short-nonfiction-collection-vol-091-by-various/

https://www.archive.org/download/snf091_2204_librivox/snf091_trooseveltplatform_progressiveparty_pa_128kb.mp3 (Direct mp3 download)

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Birth_of_the_New_Party/pwaIAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA303 (Text)

Oh, and Debs wasn't a progressive. He was a socialist. Next.

"So far as I can tell, it's just more work of Democrat devils saying: "oh, do you like trashing our hero Wilson? Well, then we'll just trash the h*ll out of your hero Teddy Roosevelt!!"."

I can see you didn't listen to the New Nationalism speech, which is something I had said everybody should do so they have more well rounded opinions. I don't understand why people like you put a guy up as your hero when you don't know a thing about his political beliefs and domestic record.

Here, go listen to it. Tell us how great it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzj9-cHMLwY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCtFyrisfvM

https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/the-new-nationalism/

If you don't know his positions, you might do well to do more research before picking a hero.

Now, you've read(heard) the platform. Now, you've heard what he believed in The New Nationalism. You were saying?

"So far as I can tell, it's just more work of Democrat devils saying: "oh, do you like trashing our hero Wilson? Well, then we'll just trash the h*ll out of your hero Teddy Roosevelt!!"."

I have no need to trash anybody. But I'd like to propose a hypothetical to you. Let's say I did want to trash the guy, what would that look like? Here's what I would do.

I would start out by talking about Theodore Roosevelt and eugenics. I would highlight the letter he wrote to notorious eugenist Charles B. Davenport. I would point out, that the direct MP3 audio for that letter can be found here, and also mention that this letter was on YouTube, one of the highest profile websites on the planet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl33G84FDF0 Which, you know, makes it highly accessible for everybody.

But I wouldn't stop there. I would post an image of the letter he wrote to Davenport, so people could see that it is real, and see the letterhead on it with the publication date, like this:

... followed by ending my post with the full text so that people can use their browsers to search the text in this window, also knowing that increases it showing up in generic search results. That is what I would do and how I would do it.

You know. Hypothetically speaking.

I am greatly interested in the two memoirs you have sent me. They are very instructive, and, from the standpoint of our country, very ominous. You say that these people are not themselves responsible, that it is "society" that is responsible. I agree with you if you mean, as I suppose you do, that society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind. It is really extraordinary that our people refuse to apply to human beings such elementary knowledge as every successful farmer is obliged to apply to his own stock breeding. Any group of farmers who permitted their best stock not to breed, and let all the increase come from the worst stock, would be treated as fit inmates for an asylum. Yet we fail to understand that such conduct is rational compared to the conduct of a nation which permits unlimited breeding from the worst stocks, physically and morally, while it encourages or connives at the cold selfishness or the twisted sentimentality as a result of which the men and women ought to marry, and if married have large families, remain celebates or have no children or only one or two. Some day we will realize that the prime duty - the inescapable duty - of the good citizen of the right type is to leave his or her blood behind him in the world; and that we have no business to permit the perpetuation of citizens of the wrong type. - Theodore Roosevelt

I've been at this against progressives for 15 years, writing about and recording the evils of progressivism to increase accessibility. It would be grossly negligent for me to exclude the guy who was the only presidential candidate for The Progressive Party. It might even be outright malpractice if I didn't even mention TR from time to time.