Posted on 09/11/2018 11:45:18 AM PDT by iowamark
A-men!
FDR’s “Arsenal of Democracy” speech was for all intents and purposes a Declaration of War on Germany. Anyone who heard it, knew war was coming one way or the other.
And remember, it wasn’t just Germany. It was Japan controlling Asia, Italy controlling Africa and Germany, all of Europe. This is what we were staring at. Eventually the Axis would have moved into South America and threaten the US, if we had not ultimately acted.
It’s certainly true that old biases brought over from the old country were very influential at times in this country. The Italians, Irish, “Bohunk” and of course Jewish immigrants all faced persecution and disdain, as much for their immigrant poverty as for their national “sins” of criminality, alcoholism, stupidity and scheming malevolence respectively, but in most cases those stereotyped beliefs in national sins faded over time. It’s only when the hatreds are married with a political ideology, as in Father Coughlin’s that Pat Buchanan still reflect in the present day that they become truly pernicious.
My Jewish grandfather grew up in the American south, son of an immigrant father who never became perfectly fluent in English. He said there was zero social mixing between Jews and non-Jew when he was young in the 1910s and 20s. But in my life I can truly say I never or never knowingly encountered anti-Semitism. Maybe there would be a joke or something, like a moment of uncomfortable “differentness” being mentioned or something, but never more than that. What a great country we live in!!
Wrong again. It was FBI director J. Edgar Hoover.
I've read the book.
Lindbergh is another example of the curious interlocking between "far left" and "far right." His father was a populist Congressman who actually at one time ran on the old time lefty Democratic-Farmer-Labor ticket, but because he was convinced there was an international banking conspiracy (an idea shared by the original left wing Populists of the 1890s) the old Birch Magazine American Opinion ran an article lionizing both father and son. They even had an illustration of his Democratic-Farmer-Labor campaign poster. The article was written by William P. Hoar, one of the more conspiratorialist writers for the magazine who also condemned the Radical Republicans--despite the fact that notorious Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens was an anti-banking greenbacker whose beliefs about currency were similar to those of later right wing heroes. But he was against the "last holdout of medieval Europe" (the Old South) and slavery, so he's a right wing villain, regardless of his beliefs about currency.
Many members of the "Old Right" actually started out on the Left (Oswald Garrison Villard, J.B. Matthews, John Dos Passos, Burton K. Wheeler) but suddenly were considered "right wing" when they crossed ways with the old conservative Anglophile Eastern Establishment. Interestingly, the old conservative Eastern Establishment is now the Eastern Liberal Establishment. The most radical change in classification was for Wheeler, who during the 20s had been considered one of the most notorious Reds in the country (he was Robert M. LaFollette's running mate on the Progressive ticket in 1924).
I sometimes wonder if it is a coincidence that since at least the 60s the Left's enemy has been, not capitalism, but the allegedly racist and reactionary working class. It was white Arkansan C. Wright Mills who about 1960 said that the working classes were no longer the progressive thesis of history but had been succeeded by ethnic minorities and their new leaders, rich white brats (alias "young academic intellectuals"). Also interestingly, the newly radical minorities had been the "scabs" of earlier years.
Very interesting post. The “right wing” remains quite amorphous as today’s Leftists use of the term belies definition. The technical advance of modern newspeak would astound Orwell, though his political inclinations would probably applaud it. The ability to recast history grants almost godlike powers to the new Left and the right flounders in its attempts to preserve not only truth, but the very concept of factual evidence.
Trump’s ability to exploit the inherent instability of the social narrative confounds the Left because he simply usurps control. Every time they attempt to get him to defend his ground, he advances a more radical controversy. While the Left is chasing his latest “outrage,” his agents are quietly advancing significant reforms. By the time the Left realizes how bad it’s gotten in the EPA or whatever agency, he’s already prepared another horrific tweet storm for them to chase.
He’s mastered not just the art of the deal, but the science of misdirection. The unrelenting attacks and the unending attention to his enemies would crush a normal politician, but Trump truly revels in it. Mistaking his command of the press for narcissism, the Left reinforces their own misconceptions.
As they count their poison darts, he’s counting coup and deconstructing their power bases. Lindbergh was an antisemite and Nazi sympathizer, but we once admired men for their actions rather than their personal failings.
No man is perfect. and Trump’s victories show the difference between a great speaker and a strategic leader. You don’t have to convince everyone of the truth; you just do what needs doing. Large gains require outrageous claims. He’s moved the center by expanding the range. What defines the Left and Right is not history, but those who make history.
Thanks for your timely correction. Good to see the wrong information I gave, corrected. No wonder the FBI director drew so much hatred in certain cases. Communists hate to be outed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.