![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Which US President presided over one of the most infamous racially motivated incarcerations of US citizens in the country's history, for which he is ironically lauded by the opposition that hated him then? Which US President willingly sent Soviet dissidents to certain death at the hands of Stalin's death squads? Which US President successfully hid the effects of a major disease with the collaboration of the US Media? Which US President assumed the most wide-ranging power of any POTUS in the country's history, shamelessly breaking one of the oldest precedents, forcing US soldiers to go fight foreign wars against an enemy who really was none of our business in imperialism against a people that appointed an unpleasant megalomaniac, but he was the problem of that part of the world? Which President used a new and insidious means of communication to spread his shameless propaganda into our HOMES?
Which President was it that shamelessly violated the letter and the spirit of Neutrality Acts passed by the Congress representing the Silent Majority of the American People who weren't in the least bothered by what the aforementioned megalomaniac was doing? Which President yielded to dangerous radicals who exploited without shame a war against that self-same megalomaniacal radical for purely selfish ends? Which US President was it under whom the US government assumed a power that it had never before considered remotely valid, only to extend these immoral and unjust expansions, including (horror of horrors) lifting a dirt-poor mountainous region out of the Stone Age (I kid, but barely) to that most evil and immoral of things, the draft? Under which US President was the HUAC led by a Soviet spy?
The answer is beneath the cut:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
Now, this is the problem with pointing out that Reagan of propaganda-bordering-on-myth is not really the Reagan of real life. This is very much a valid point, but the patron saint of the progressive-liberal state did a lot of things that most modern liberals consider among the most immoral aspects of US society, such as acceptable use of strategic bombing, beginning the Manhattan Project, interning Japanese only on the mainland foreknowing that there was nothing but racism in it (as opposed to the Germans and Italians who actually were pro-Nazi), edit he also was POTUS when HUAC took its full form as a standing Congressional Committee, while expanding the US government's political power in ways that while necessary were entirely unprecedented. Similarly he was an undeclared member of the Allied Powers from 1940 which was very much violations of international law then and now.
So, I'm going to ask a simple question: As it's pretty much a given that Reagan, as an actual human being as opposed to a monomanical ideologue did not match his ideology, what does the real record of Franklin Delano Roosevelt mean? Would it be fair to say that he's actually not that much of a Progressive any more than Reagan was a zealous Conservative?
One more thing:
Remember when Reagan was responsible for losing the Cold War?
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE5DD163FF934A25752C0A96E948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
Which President was it that shamelessly violated the letter and the spirit of Neutrality Acts passed by the Congress representing the Silent Majority of the American People who weren't in the least bothered by what the aforementioned megalomaniac was doing? Which President yielded to dangerous radicals who exploited without shame a war against that self-same megalomaniacal radical for purely selfish ends? Which US President was it under whom the US government assumed a power that it had never before considered remotely valid, only to extend these immoral and unjust expansions, including (horror of horrors) lifting a dirt-poor mountainous region out of the Stone Age (I kid, but barely) to that most evil and immoral of things, the draft? Under which US President was the HUAC led by a Soviet spy?
The answer is beneath the cut:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
Now, this is the problem with pointing out that Reagan of propaganda-bordering-on-myth is not really the Reagan of real life. This is very much a valid point, but the patron saint of the progressive-liberal state did a lot of things that most modern liberals consider among the most immoral aspects of US society, such as acceptable use of strategic bombing, beginning the Manhattan Project, interning Japanese only on the mainland foreknowing that there was nothing but racism in it (as opposed to the Germans and Italians who actually were pro-Nazi), edit he also was POTUS when HUAC took its full form as a standing Congressional Committee, while expanding the US government's political power in ways that while necessary were entirely unprecedented. Similarly he was an undeclared member of the Allied Powers from 1940 which was very much violations of international law then and now.
So, I'm going to ask a simple question: As it's pretty much a given that Reagan, as an actual human being as opposed to a monomanical ideologue did not match his ideology, what does the real record of Franklin Delano Roosevelt mean? Would it be fair to say that he's actually not that much of a Progressive any more than Reagan was a zealous Conservative?
One more thing:
Remember when Reagan was responsible for losing the Cold War?
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE5DD163FF934A25752C0A96E948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 03:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 03:19 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 03:25 (UTC).....
Despite that IRL FDR made all of them banal US policies. Which is analogous entirely to the Right objecting to cutting and running with Islamists while hailing St. Ray Gunn.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 12:33 (UTC)(no subject)
From:FDR 1936 Speech at Madison Square Garden: I welcome their hatred
Date: 10/2/11 03:22 (UTC)Re: FDR 1936 Speech at Madison Square Garden: I welcome their hatred
Date: 10/2/11 03:24 (UTC)Re: FDR 1936 Speech at Madison Square Garden: I welcome their hatred
From:Re: FDR 1936 Speech at Madison Square Garden: I welcome their hatred
From:Re: FDR 1936 Speech at Madison Square Garden: I welcome their hatred
From:Re: FDR 1936 Speech at Madison Square Garden: I welcome their hatred
From:Re: FDR 1936 Speech at Madison Square Garden: I welcome their hatred
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 03:31 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 03:49 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 03:54 (UTC)I can't imagine the equivalent, though it would be pretty funny to participate in a Custer's Last Stand re-enactment.
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 04:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 04:51 (UTC)Terrorists gotta learn how to make big bangs some place don't they?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 04:53 (UTC)As for a re-enactment of Custer's Last Stand, your wish is my command. Mecca lecca hi, mecca hiney ho. (http://www.custerslaststand.org/)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 06:01 (UTC)Sorry...couldn't resist....
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 16:57 (UTC)I mean there's definitely some of that to it, but I wouldn't say it dominates. And somebody's got to play the Union. . .
Reagan vs FDR
Date: 10/2/11 04:49 (UTC)Re: Reagan vs FDR
Date: 10/2/11 09:10 (UTC)Hair splitting in this case does not reveal anything of much use. "Yeah, but they do it worse just sounds all to much like "but he did it first".
oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: oh, was that what I was doing.
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
Date: 10/2/11 09:11 (UTC)Re: Reagan vs FDR
Date: 10/2/11 13:14 (UTC)complete BS and even smells of it
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:Re: Reagan vs FDR
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 06:48 (UTC)"In a world... that they did not create... two people..." etc.
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 09:22 (UTC)UNDERLANKERS: Verbosity
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 09:09 (UTC)There are some Germans in Texas that would like to speak to you about your historical revisionism.
http://www.gaic.info/internment_camp.html
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 12:05 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 14:00 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 15:09 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 16:42 (UTC)I'm going to cherry pick a couple items from your list that confuse me a bit. First.. Beginning the Manhattan Project is considered "among the most immoral aspects of US society" by modern liberals? Certainly the use of the atom bomb could be considered immoral, depending on the circumstances/reasons, but I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone say that it was immoral to start the project that developed the atom bomb.
Second.. Strategic bombing is considered immoral? I can certainly see how some aspects of it are (fire bombing of Dresden, for example), but bombing an enemy's factories, railways, roads, bridges, etc is an entirely legitimate wartime strategy. The technology available in WWII made significant collateral damage inevitable, but with certain obvious exceptions ("terror bombing," etc), I don't think I've heard anyone say that strategic bombing is any more immoral than shooting enemy soldiers. And by "anyone" I mean anyone who doesn't find all aspects of war immoral. Is that who you're referring to when you say "most modern liberals?"
I'm sure you can find people who morally object to both of these things, but "most modern liberals" consider them "among the most immoral aspects of US society?" That seems to be quite a stretch.
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 18:14 (UTC)What is the most common criticism of all US wars from Vietnam onward? What strategic bombing is supposed to do. Hence the hypocrisy with considering FDR a hero when he made it an integral part of strategy.
These have been key rallying points in all the wars, including the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. There is something more than a little disingenuous in objecting to Vietnam and Afghanistan seeing terror bombing and hailing FDR's Administration as a champion of the "clean war."
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 10/2/11 22:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/2/11 04:38 (UTC)(no subject)
From: