[vannrox]

This is a great read.

[vannrox]

Modern man makes fun of the Greek and Roman myths of the ancient past. Yet, modern man is no more exempt from this cultural phenomenon than his more ignorant ancestors. Urban myths abound in modern culture. One of those myths surrounds the life and presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, America's 32nd President.

To this day, he is credited with pulling America out of the Great Depression. Yet, nothing could be further from the truth. Roosevelt was hardly a learned man. He knew little about economics either in theory or practice. He was indeed a great orator, but that was the extent of his gifts.

Due to his lack of philosphical roots, FDR was easily persuaded into being the mouthpiece for the latest fad in social and economic engineering - all of which failed to bring about economic recovery. Only by the "grace" of the second World War did the economy recover. And then there was Yalta, where FDR agreed to allow Stalin to add 750 MILLION human beings to his tyrannical and evil empire.

"Communism is the greatest threat to this country and Roosevelt helped put it there." --Senator Burton K. Wheeler (D-MT) in letter to John M. Gizzi, October 23, 1969 (From the Wheeler Papers, Montana Historical Society)

FDR: "Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle." (NOTE: This is a paraphrase of Karl Marx's Communist maxim, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.")

BOOKS:
	Admiral Kimmel's Story by Husband E. Kimmel
	America's Great Depression by Murray Rothbard
	Communism at Pearl Harbor by Anthony Kubek
	Final Secret of Pearl Harbor by Rear Admiral Robert A. Theobald
	The Revolution Was by Garet Garrett
	The Roosevelt Myth by John T. Flynn
	Roosevelt's Road to Russia by George N. Crocker
	The Sacrifice of Bataan
	The Yalta Betrayal by Felix Wittmer
LINKS:
	Links to Other FDR Sites
	Errors of History in Our 20th Century
	FDR: The Man, the Leader, the Legacy
	Great Myths of the Great Depression
	Person of the Century: FDR vs. Reagan
	Phony of the Century
	Victim of Roosevelt's Appeasement Speaks Out

[21twelve]

Talking about the New Deal (sound familiar!?):

“The effect was to keep people excited about one thing at a time, and divided, while steadily through all the uproar of outrage and confusion a certain end, held constantly in view, was pursued by main intention.

The end held constantly in view was power.”

[Miss Behave]

BTTT

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Note: this topic is from 6/15/2003. Blast from the Past. Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
· Google · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·

[Joya]

Thanks.

[silverleaf]

Can we bring this back???
It’s now 2009 and 1938 redux.

[XHogPilot]

bump

[Mmmike]

I saw that the New Deal was only superficially a reform movement. I had to acknowledge the truth of what its more forthright protagonists, sometimes unwarily, sometimes defiantly, averred: the New Deal was a genuine revolution, whose deepest purpose was not simply reform within existing traditions, but a basic change in the social, and above all, the power relationships within the nation. It was not a revolution by violence. It was a revolution by bookkeeping and lawmaking. In so far as it was successful, the power of politics had replaced the power of business. This is the basic power shift of all the revolutions of our time. This shift was the revolution. It was only of incidental interest that the revolution was not complete, that it was made not by tanks and machine guns, but by acts of Congress and decisions of the Supreme Court, or that many of the revolutionists did not know what they were or denied it. But revolution is always an affair of force, whatever forms the force disguises itself in. Whether the revolutionists prefer to call themselves Fabians, who seek power by the inevitability of gradualism, or Bolsheviks, who seek power by the dictatorship of the proletariat, the struggle is for power.

-- Whittaker Chambers, Witness, p. 472

[GoLightly]

BUMP!!!

[GoLightly]

ping

[21twelve]

Every once in awhile when I think it is appropriate I try to bump this old thread - and even older booklet (discussing FDR and the New Deal written in 1937) to the front.

With the passing vote in the house on the Cap & Trade I figured it was appropriate, once again.

An excerpt:

PROBLEM FIVE
WHAT TO DO WITH BUSINESS WHETHER TO LIQUIDATE OR SHACKLE IT

.....Business is in itself a power. In a free economic system it is an autonomous power, and generally hostile to any extension of government power. That is why a revolutionary party has to do something with it.....

How seriously the New Deal may have considered the possibility of liquidating business we do not know. Its decision, at any rate, was to embrace the alternative; and the alternative was to shackle it....

Then he said: “In the hands of a people’s government this power is wholesome and proper. But in the hands of political puppets, of an economic autocracy, such power would provide shackles for the liberties of the people.”

There, unconsciously perhaps, is a complete statement of the revolutionary thesis. It is not a question of law. It is a question of power. There must be a transfer of power. The President speaks not of laws; he speaks of new instruments of power, such as would provide shackles for the liberties of the people if they should ever fall in other hands. What then has the government done? Instead of limiting by law the power of what it calls economic autocracy the government itself has seized the power. [end of excerpt].

[Cacique]

btt

[nutmeg]

I'm just skimming this now, as I'm too tired to read the whole thing (I will, ASAP though). Looks like a great read. Is this a book, or an excerpt from a book... or a newspaper article?

Thanks...