"A Renegades History of the United States"

[Os Cangaceiros]

I still haven't finished this book entirely yet, so I can't really give a complete review, but what I have read is pretty good. I imagine that it'd probably outrage a lot of leftists, honestly, because the author (Thadeus Russell) seemed to go out of his way to write an ultra-contrarian book that picks apart a bunch of sacred cows. However, I imagine that the right/far-right would be waaaaaaaaay more outraged by what's in the book, as Russell incessantly praises the lowest strata of American society: drunks, gamblers, pirates, prostitutes, gangsters, hedonists, pornograhers, militant homosexuals, defiant immigrant populations, lazy, unproductive and striking workers, draft dodgers, drug users etc. As he puts it in the introduction, he aimed to create a history "from the gutter up".

The "founding fathers" come across as grumpy conservatives who aimed to suppress the libertine "cultural revolution" that was happening in the colonies at the time; many labor leaders backed an obsessive weird cultish appreciation of work/labor that many American workers couldn't care less about; wealthy prostitutes in some American cities spearheaded efforts to desegregate public transportation/services; the Mafia was one of the only organizations that supported gay bars during the 50's (the famous Stonewall Riot was the result of a large police sting on Mob businesses); etc. Leftists will probably be offended by such claims that slavery right before the civil war "wasn't that bad", but will probably find other aspects of the book interesting, such as the author's heavy referencing of Noel Ignatiev in explaining how ethnic groups such as Italians, Irish and Jews "became 'white'".

[Brosa Luxemburg]

I remember hearing that he claims FDR was a fascist...so that kind of turned me off to the book.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Also didn't he say the japanese sent to camps during wwii in the US deserved it?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Well, no, he does mention that some Japanese were members of Japanese patriot organizations and/or went to go fight for Japan during WW2, but he explicitely says in the book that he does not support/condone "internment". He says that he brings up the fact that many Japanese did not support the USA's war effort because he wanted to show that the USA wasn't as united behind the war effort as some claim.

As well as some other figures like the 14,000 strikes involving some 6,000,000 workers that took place during the war, some of which were in vital industries like munitions.

The FDR as fascist thing is an actual argument he tries to make in the book, though. The argument for it is stronger than I would've initially thought, especially because Hitler, Mussolini, and many other German and Italian fascists actually wrote about the US government pre-WW2 and heavily praised FDR's economic policies as something they wished to emulate. The CP-USA during the 30's labeled FDR a "fascist" as well, before they decided that he wasn't one, and the "real fascists" who invaded the USSR needed fighting etc.

[electrostal]

So this is like some-pro lumpen book? What is the book's main point?

[x359594]

...some Japanese were members of Japanese patriot organizations and/or went to go fight for Japan during WW2, but he explicitely says in the book that he does not support/condone "internment". He says that he brings up the fact that many Japanese did not support the USA's war effort because he wanted to show that the USA wasn't as united behind the war effort as some claim...

Many US Japanese and Japanese-Americans didn't support the war effort because they were behind barbed wire (the "No-No Boys".) During the 5 month period between the declaration of war and the round up of the Issei and Nisei support for the war was high; the FBI found no evidence of subversion even among the patriotic organizations. In fact the majority of US Japanese and Japanese-Americans did support the war effort, and the Nissei fought valiantly:

"They were superb! That word correctly describes it: superb! They took terrific casualties. They showed rare courage and tremendous fighting spirit. Not too much can be said of the performance of those battalions in Europe and everybody wanted them...."
General George C. Marshall

"...I had the honor to command the men of the 442nd Combat Team. [They] fought magnificently in the field of battle and wrote brilliant chapters in the military history of our country...They demonstrated conclusively the loyalty and valor of our American citizens of Japanese ancestry in combat."
General Mark W. Clark

"...I cannot say...that their 'Go For Broke' service has ever been adequately honored, but I do know that any objective appraisal of the record of this unit will place it high up in the annals of our military history...Whether in France, Italy or elsewhere, I know of no units in the American Army that fought and persevered more gallantly than did those Nisei companies and battalions."
John J. McCloy, Assistant Secretary of War

"The Nisei troops are among the best in the United States Army and the respect and the appreciation due honorable, loyal, and courageous soldiers should be their's rather than the scorn and ridicule they have been receiving from some thoughtless and uninformed citizens and veterans."
Major General E.M. Almond

[Os Cangaceiros]

In fact the majority of US Japanese and Japanese-Americans did support the war effort, and the Nissei fought valiantly:

The author of the book agrees, that's why he put the number of people in the Japanese Military Serviceman's League (which paid dues to the Japanese army) and the Imperial Comradeship Society at only 12% of the total Japanese-American population at the time.

[Ismail]

I've heard the FDR = fascism argument before. FDR was known for praising Mussolini and such early on, and his government didn't mind having US companies export supplies to Nazi Germany so that the Nazis could ship them to Francoist rebels in Spain (thus conveniently going around the farcical "non-intervention" basis of American policy towards that war), but at the same time FDR did establish diplomatic relations with the USSR, and later on (not during WWII either) he privately regretted allowing US companies to aid Spanish fascism. He was also on friendlier terms with Stalin than Truman, who in 1941 had called on the US to stand by and watch the USSR and Nazi Germany kill each other.


If people want a brief account of the similarities between FDR's programs and fascism (although the author notes that FDR himself wasn't a fascist) see the relevant section of this link: http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/rise_of_american_fascism.htm

I think the point about FDR is that he came to power at a time when the bourgeoisie's primary task was extinguishing the sharp rise in class consciousness caused by the Great Depression. Shooting workers down and/or establishing an outright fascist dictatorship wouldn't work, so in came FDR's "New Deal" which, although to the right of European social-democracy, was something unparalleled in American politics. Considering that fascism had a reputation of stopping communism, it isn't surprising that the West sought to emulate some of its economic mechanisms (notably the involvement of the state as a partner of corporations, etc.)


IMO Huey Long was a lot more likely to have been closer to a fascist President than FDR, in part because Long was actually a demagogue, had support from American fascists, and was a lot more "authoritarian" in his treatment of people he didn't like. FDR was said to actually have been a bit afraid of Long.