Friday, August 13, 2010

Dez Prez Rankings: 20th Century Giant

#3 of 39:
Franklin D. Roosevelt (32nd president)
1933-45
Democrat




This is actually a rather controversial choice this high up. Depending on your political persuasion, FDR was either a saint or (an unwitting) devil for the future of this country. I’m generally a moderate politically, so naturally I don’t fall in either camp. But there are several things that you cannot deny. FDR had an unparalleled rapport with the American people when they really needed someone to look to. Winning an unprecedented four terms in a row (a Constitutional impossibility now with the 22nd Amendment), he obviously connected with the people unlike almost anyone before. Also, FDR guided us through two of the most defining events of the 20th Century, The Great Depression and World War II. So his impact is absolutely undeniable. At least on that we can all agree.

The Depression was already in full swing when FDR first took office in 1933. The cautious approach of Herbert Hoover did not seem to be working (although he was not as bad as history has painted him), and the country was desperate for more decisive and daring leadership. FDR’s New Deal was not a carefully planned roadmap, instead it was rather like throwing a lot of things at the wall and seeing what sticks. Roosevelt himself said “I have no expectation of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.”

Once he took office, he immediately took charge. One of the most effective things he did was not really policy at all. He hit the radio airwaves with his weekly “fireside chats,” talking through his ideas with the American people and giving pep talks. Sounds a bit hokey nowadays, but you cannot underestimate how effective these chats were. When unemployment peaked at 25%, FDR was a lifeline to a government that gave the appearance of actively trying to make things better. This is the blueprint of Clinton’s “feeling your pain” or Reagan’s equally effective use of television in the 1980’s. Probably more important than anything else, Roosevelt inspired a confidence when it was most needed (“the only thing to fear is fear itself”), exemplified by his own heroic struggle against polio which had paralyzed his legs (the media environment was such that the average American had no clue that their president was actually a cripple. He masterfully disguised his condition, and was either discreetly propped up at podiums or conveniently seated when photographed).



ABOVE: FDR giving one of his fireside chats. Doesn't look all that cozy, does it?

As far as the substance of the New Deal itself, it was a mixed bag of an alphabet soup of programs. My students groan as I make them memorize at least 20 or so acronyms, from the AAA to the TVA. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) brought electricity to the dark ages of Appalachia, built needed dams throughout the region, and employed many workers on these projects. It is the best example of internal improvements both being beneficial in themselves and also helping to employ out of work folks. He had many other less spectacular public works programs, but they did give many workers employment, albeit temporary (kind of like census workers?) Much needed banking reform was enacted, most notably the FDIC protecting our savings from bank bankruptcies. Of course, we also have Social Security thanks to the New Deal. His one real misstep during this period was his attempt in 1937 to pack the Supreme Court with New Deal-loving judges. The conservative Court had struck down several New Deal programs as unconstitutional (such as the AAA), and so Roosevelt proposed, with a straight face claiming he wanted to lighten the workload for elderly Justices, to expand the Court from 9 to 15 justices. As president, he of course would get to appoint all of the additional justices. Congress struck it down as a blatant attempt to pack the Court with friendly Justices, and it was a rare political disaster for the president.


ABOVE: Appalachia received much needed help from the TVA. Look at them now.

Alas, the New Deal did not end the Great Depression. I know some argue that it actually prolonged it, but I don’t buy that argument. The Depression was the result of rampant speculation, a concurrent agricultural crisis, an unregulated stock market plagued by margin buying, a crumbling international economic system, unregulated speculative banks, lack of deposit protection for the consumers, consumer credit run wild, and other factors. It was due in order to correct these problems. The New Deal, at best, enacted some policies that helped fix some problems, eased some of the symptoms of the Depression, and inspired some hope when it was needed. But what got us out of the Depression was World War II.

Nothing like a world war to end unemployment and spur industry. The country still had a strong isolationist streak in the late 30’s as the rest of the world burst into chaos, but FDR wanted to get involved from the beginning. He was savvy enough to know that the American people were not there yet. But his Lend-Lease program saved Great Britain, and in turn saved the Allied cause against Hitler and fascism. Britain was the lone bastion against Hitler in the West after the rest of Western Europe fell like dominoes to Hitler’s Blitzkrieg, and our money, supplies and weapons kept them alive in those crucial months before we got directly involved.

Once the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, we were ready to dive in. (The theories that FDR knew ahead of time of the Pearl Harbor attack and let it happen to get us into the War are intriguing). FDR’s leadership during the incredibly complex WWII was as vigorous as his New Deal had been at home. He didn’t always make the right decisions, but he guided us through a War like no other and was intimately involved in strategy every step of the way.


ABOVE: The Manzanar internment camp in the Southwest U.S.

His WWII decisions are not without controversy. He and Churchill delayed for a long time opening their second front in Europe (D-Day), probably too long, allowing the Russians to bear the brunt of Nazi might. This is something that forever embittered Stalin and the Soviets, and is one of the key roots of the Cold War. FDR and other Allied leaders knew of the horrors of the Holocaust much earlier than the general public, yet instead of bombing key rail lines leading to Auschwitz and other camps, they focused on destroying Hitler’s industrial capacity to make war. The thinking was that industry had to be priority to most quickly end Hitler's reign. Also, the internment of Japanese-Americans on the west coast is definitely a stain on his legacy. There were fears, but little to no proof, that Japanese-Americans on the west coast would aid the Japanese Empire through sabotage and espionage, and so hundreds of thousands were rounded up and placed in prison camps in the interior of the country. They lost their homes, jobs, everything. This is not comparable to Hitler’s death camps (which some people stupidly compare them to), but it was still a horrible thing to do. And this was done by direct Executive Order from FDR himself. Nearing the end of his life and in frail health, it is generally acknowledged that FDR was taken advantage of by Stalin at Yalta. Stalin steamrolled and got way too many concessions from a sick FDR and politically desperate (at home) Churchill in planning out the postwar world (but to be fair, we were thinking that we would need Soviet help to defeat Japan).

These sound like serious criticisms, and they are, but what he did right in World War II far outweighs these missteps. The War could have been even more devastating than it was if we had had weaker leadership.

Alright. Disagree on FDR? Fire away.


ABOVE: FDR's landmark "day of infamy" speech the day after Pearl Harbor

Pros:
• Provided confident leadership during the darkest days of the Depression (fireside chats)
• Vigorous attempts to fix the symptoms, if not the causes, of the Depression
• Some New Deal programs have a lasting legacy like TVA, FDIC, Social Security
• Lend-Lease
• WWII leadership

Cons:
• Court Packing
• Japanese-American Internment
• Yalta

NOTE: I know that it is shocking that this has come down to Lincoln and Washington for the top spot, but that is where we are. Who will I choose? Stay tuned.

9 comments:

kentucky cat said...

Well, I'll take the first shot. I can attest to the effectiveness of his fireside chats. I was a kid at the time and everything stopped at our house as we listened to him.He was amazingly effective at calming the people and rallying them. I don't recall him ever blaming our problems on Hoover.

That being said, I don't think he dealt with the recession effectively and, actually prolonged it. He should have followed the Coolidge example in the early 20's
which in many ways was just as bad a recession.

I wouldn't rank him that high but I know it's hard to argue against a guy who was elected to four terms

It's interesting, I didn't know as a kid that he was paralyzed from polio. He wouldn't allow pictures of him in his wheelchair and, of course, there was no TV.

Dezmond said...

Actually, he wasn't paralyzed until the age of about 39.

kentucky cat said...

I don't know how old he was when he became president but he was paralyzed at that time. He was very self conscious about it and at that time you did not see pictures of him in his wheel chair.

pockyjack said...

An analysis of FDR is always tricky. I always thin it is best analyze him as two presidents. Pre-war and war

Pre-war, I actually think he did some good things by bringing in some much needed infrastructure to the country, but in doing so created and artificial rampant spending, tariffs (which you did not mention) and not more forcibly engaging in world politics to solve the WORLDWIDE depression. Instead, I believe he was more cowardly and played more to the people's heartstrings ala bill Clinton and Reagan and promoted a culture of economic isolation. This is where a woodrow wilson could have succeeded, at least on an economic front (not the balkanization that he fostered)

On the war front, I do believe he was what the country needed at that time. There were mistakes made, arguably moral and ethical, but he was a great motivator for the war effort.

So if I am counting correctly, that leaves us Lincoln and Washington? Do I have that right. If that is correct, I will already make fun of you for the Washington choice.

HA HA!

There. I did it

JMW said...

Dez, I believe that Kentucky Cat meant that when Kentucky Cat was a kid, he didn't realize FDR had polio; not when FDR was a kid.

Dezmond said...

Ah, you are correct. That is what he meant.

He definitely was embarassed by his paralysis, but there was more to it than that (as to why he hid it from the public). At that time, the view towards cripples was less charitable and understanding than it is today. Through the Great Depression and WWII, the American president had to project strength.

Obviously nowadays someone paralyzed who accomplished what he did would be seen as very strong. Hell, it would almost be seen as a political asset these days. But back then it would not.

Dezmond said...

Pocky, FDR wanted to get more involved internationally during the 1930's, but the mood of the country (and Congress) was decidedly isolationist.

Johannes said...

"...the view towards cripples was less charitable and understanding than it is today."

Heh, what's wrong with this statement?

pockyjack said...

"Pocky, FDR wanted to get more involved internationally during the 1930's, but the mood of the country (and Congress) was decidedly isolationist."

I think you just proved my point