FDR, opinions

[tehAdmrl]

I'm interested, what do you all think of Franklin D. Roosevelt?

[The Intransigent Faction]

An awful, awful, awful man. Among the wonders of his tenure were Japanese internment, opposition to public sector unions, and refusal to support an anti-lynching bill because it would lose him votes in the south. The book "Global Capitalism in Crisis" actually goes into pretty good depth on FDR in response to Michael Moore's worshipping of him and his "New Deal"/"Worker's Bill of Rights" reforms.

[sixdollarchampagne]

Very much like the late President Chávez, FDR escorted capitalist rule through a very challenging period of plebeian dissatisfaction, with massive struggles by working people against those exploiting them, like the sit-down strikes that led to successful organization of industrial unions. Without FDR's co-opting very nearly the entire US left, there might have been a possibility of fundamental change in this country, of the working population becoming a "class for itself," through self-organized, uncompromising class struggle. We have FDR to thank for the survival of bourgeois rule over us and for the survival of the capitalist system.

[Red Commissar]

I think it's pathetic when right-wingers complain about FDR's supposed socialism and destruction of the US. Honestly it's FDR that saved the US for the bourgeoisie, the ruling class. He kept the pressures of the Great Depression from reaching levels to radicalize workers like it did in Europe, and managed to co-opt segments of the progressive movement in the US and isolated the revolutionary left.

If anything conservatives should thank FDR for saving their livelihoods.

[Starship Stormtrooper]

He "saved capitalism from capitalists" unfortunately, as most bourgeoisie will admit, despite being demonized as "Rooseveltski" etc. while still alive.

An interesting anecdote from my history textbook, apparently a reporter asked a socialist candidate if FDR had carried out the party's agenda. He replied that FDR certainly had, on a stretcher :laugh:.

[Akshay!]

The reforms he did in the capitalist system were all because of necessity - I mean with all the workers movements going on, and USSR being largely unaffected by the "Great Depression", and the system being on a brink of collapse, he didn't really have a choice.

And, let's not delude ourselves into thinking that he was some sort of a socialist. He was one of the biggest benefactors of capitalism in the 20th century. If Hoover had been re-elected and introduced the kind of austerity policies he advocated, there could've been a revolution. FDR saved capitalism. So, overall, I'd say that he was a negative thing for revolutionaries, but a positive thing for reformists, social democrats, liberals, etc.

[RHIZOMES]

Very much like the late President Chávez, FDR escorted capitalist rule through a very challenging period of plebeian dissatisfaction, with massive struggles by working people against those exploiting them, like the sit-down strikes that led to successful organization of industrial unions.. Without FDR's co-opting very nearly the entire US left, there might have been a possibility of fundamental change in this country, of the working population becoming a "class for itself," through self-organized, uncompromising class struggle. We have FDR to thank for the survival of bourgeois rule over us and for the survival of the capitalist system.

Yeah, what this person said. Keep in mind that people like FDR + Keynes explicitly stated that thwarting communist sympathies by raising working class living standards was one of the central goals of their social democratic economic policy.

[Forli]

Capitalist and Warmonger - anything else I think is pretty much secondary.

[one10]

FDR is the savior of capitalism. I can't help but laugh when republicans label democrats as socialists. If it wasn't for the democrats, the United States would've radicalized decades ago.

[Sentinel]

Moved to History

[Raúl Duke]

On one hand, he raised or set the trend for the rising of living standards among most of the US working class. I won't deny some people benefited from this.

On the other, he was just one side of the bourgeois reaction to the Great Depression. Initially, many nations pushed for following the normal austere course and balance budgets. This did not help.

The Great Depression heighten working class militancy. Some nations responded with reformism while others with fascism. The only thing those nations shared in common is their war-mongering: with each other (which was also part of the Keynesian idea, since war also increases public spending and provides people jobs as soldiers or in war industries).

My question is, why aren't some nations trying to redo the whole "reformism" paradigm? (I bet its been answered already on revleft, I heard something about declining rates of profits, etc) Or conversely, will the current economic troubles lead to a big war (big enough to re-activate conscription and war industries, to elicit a social mobilization)?

[Red Nightmare]

FDR was a wartime capitalist profiteer who was not in anyway socialist unless you are like the Tea Party idiots who think that any government becomes involvement in the economy constitutes socialism. The reason why he created his New Deal was to help capitalism recover from the Great Depression and to placate the working class so they would not become radical enough to have a revolution. He might be the most successful capitalist this country has ever seen and the conservative morons are too dumb to even realize he was a blessing in disguise. Not to mention that he imprisoned many U.S. citizens for no other reason than they were Japanese and excluded blacks from many of his programs because he was afraid he would not get reelected if he did. He was the most effective anti-communist ever, he didn't have to oppress or fight the radical left, he did something even more devastating-make us irrelevant.

It is not the ultraconservatives that will impede revolution, it is pseudo-leftist snakes in the grass that placate the working class without liberating it that will ultimately hold back revolution. We must fight just as hard against reformists as we do against orthodox capitalists.

[homegrown terror]

FDR's policies are the definition of the "frog in a slowly boiling pot" analogy: heat the water too fast and the frog jumps out. he did only the barest minimum necessary to keep the working class under the thumb of the bourgeoisie, all while planting the seeds that would one day bloom into the flowers of mccarthyism and neoliberalism.

[Comrade Nasser]

I think the far left doesn't hate him for the most part. He's no Maggie thatcher haha. The only group that likes FDR are his own group. The Libs.

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

I think the far left doesn't hate him for the most part. He's no Maggie thatcher haha. The only group that likes FDR are his own group. The Libs.
Speak for yourself. I for one, loathe him. He was a fairly capable executive of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. A dangerous enemy of the international proletariat. If you think he was good, well that might mean you are a Communist, but definitely not a communist.

[Comrade Nasser]

Speak for yourself. I for one, loathe him. He was a fairly capable executive of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. A dangerous enemy of the international proletariat. If you think he was good, well that might mean you are a Communist, but definitely not a communist.

I never said "I like him" per se. I just don't see a real reason to hate him. Everyone's entitled to an opinion and you probably know more than me hahaa.

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

I never said "I like him" per se. I just don't see a real reason to hate him. Everyone's entitled to an opinion and you probably know more than me hahaa.
Okay, comrade. I get a little hot under the collar when people don't draw obvious class lines. Roosevelt, every bit as much as old Maggie, was the enemy of the proletariat and revolution. There is nothing great for us in a highly competent, liberal leader of the bourgeoisie. The revolution will be made against their every effort to drown it in blood.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I think it's pathetic when right-wingers complain about FDR's supposed socialism and destruction of the US. Honestly it's FDR that saved the US for the bourgeoisie, the ruling class. He kept the pressures of the Great Depression from reaching levels to radicalize workers like it did in Europe, and managed to co-opt segments of the progressive movement in the US and isolated the revolutionary left.

If anything conservatives should thank FDR for saving their livelihoods.

I'm not sure that had FDR not been there, that America's socialist/communist current would become a frontline opposition to the status quo...more likely I think would be some kind of populist movement (in the tradition of WJ Bryan or someone like that) or even some kind of indigenous American fascism, although I doubt that it would be anywhere near as nutty as, say, the Nazis. Americans have always been pretty suspicious of mass movements.

[Geiseric]

I'm not sure that had FDR not been there, that America's socialist/communist current would become a frontline opposition to the status quo...more likely I think would be some kind of populist movement (in the tradition of WJ Bryan or someone like that) or even some kind of indigenous American fascism, although I doubt that it would be anywhere near as nutty as, say, the Nazis. Americans have always been pretty suspicious of mass movements.

yeah because General Strikes don't qualify as mass movements?

Roosevelt was the worst militarist of the 20th century. He created the military industrial complex during WW2, which was for the end of expanding American imperialism in colonies of other imperialist countries.

He was a scheister of the highest magnitude.

[Os Cangaceiros]

yeah because General Strikes don't qualify as mass movements?

No, a general strike and a mass movement are not synonymous.

[canto-faire]

The New Deal was, to an extent, created with the advice of prominent businessmen; I believe it was the Chair or President of GE who was a driving force behind the National Industrial Recovery Act. The NLRB, established under Roosevelt, pretty much killed any independence the Labor movement had, and has kept it as an extended arm of the Liberal Democratic political machine, rather than a front in the class struggle.

Perhaps worst of all, he exemplifies the mindless pandering ignorance of politicians. Keynes met with him once, and commented that Roosevelt had absolutely no theoretical understanding of what he was doing, he was just finding a program that was both popular and that his economists said would work. There's nothing quite so dangerous as a politician ignorant of what he's doing.