“I believe that, on balance, few conservatives today would oppose Teddy Roosevelt’s four signature accomplishments”
The McCain/McConnell wing and the Establishment appear to be on the decline to me. It’ll be a long time before they are gone, but I think we’re going in the correct direction. Not everybody who claims to be a conservative is one.
“(1) antitrust legislation”
I didn’t used to oppose those things myself - until I realized the real reasons TR did all of that, the “progressive” reasons. It was nothing more than anti-capitalism with new clothes.
But we all know better, the emperor has no clothes.
“(2) the establishment of the national park system”
Seeing the abusive nature of the government lands divisions, this isn’t nearly as popular as you might be apt to believe.
At the end of the day, even with conservatives who “find this popular”, if you ask the point blank question “is it constitutionally permitted” then it doesn’t matter the popularity.
It is still flatly unconstitutional. No park is popular enough to put our Constitutional parchment in the paper shredder. We are on an open forum, we could ask open wide if you like in a new discussion. “Do you support the national parks anyways in spite of their clear unconstutionality”
You’ll get more no’s than yes’s.
The parks would be just fine if they were returned to the states just as Roe/abortion has been returned to the states. There is. No. Need. for tyrannical government on the parks.
“(3) the development of the US Navy into a modern force”
Foreign affairs is TR’s only saving grace. Domestically, it was disaster after disaster.
“(4), anti-corruption legislation that helped remedy abuses that had put Congress and state legislatures at the service of the highest bidder.”
Come full circle, no, I don’t think many would say that. What did all of the progressive hoopla amount to? They used taxpayer money to bribe each other.
I won’t forget the Cornhusker Kickback, and I bet you don’t either. All of that was in the age of so called “progressive” reform - we now live with all of this junk. It didn’t work. It’s been a failure. Just like the 17th amendment. That didn’t make a thing better. It made everything worse. That’s what progressivism does.
Progressivism makes everything worse.
The only time progressivism can be said to be a good thing is when it’s undoing earlier progressive failures, perhaps the most notable being prohibition. All that did was give us the mob. No thanks to the progressive “social gospel” sect having their way.
“the fruits of Progressivism lets a now pejorative label control our understanding of history”
It’s not.
When a guy comes around and says “I am a progressive” I take him at his word. He is a progressive. Especially since the record matches.
Graduated tax, price controls, support of global government, executive orders coming out of every which way, and on and on.
There’s no labeling. He was all social justice, all the time, and said so.
TR didn’t want to break up trusts, he wanted the Government to regulate them. He was a Hamiltonian.
As for Teddy Roosevelt's record, let us begin with anti-trust legislation. The worst business combines and trusts of the era engaged in bribery, extortion, sabotage, and highly destructive market manipulations. That is not capitalism but criminality.
As for the national park system, is that really an issue? Considering that the land was federally owned, Teddy Roosevelt dedicating choice parts for use as federal parks is plainly constitutional. Or do you think that the Louisiana Purchase and other national territorial acquisitions ought to be undone as unconstitutional?
Until Republican Progressive era reforms, it was an open and common practice for major corporations to deliver monthly satchels of cash to members of Congress. Even after being outlawed, the practice continued for many decades. The father of a friend had such a job as a bright law school graduate during the Depression.
Conservatism cannot prosper as a political philosophy if it cannot address problems and fashion remedies and reforms. This brings us to a paradox. As di Lampedusa offered in his great conservative novel The Leopard, "If we want everything to stay as it is, everything has to change." Conservatism at its best accepts the necessity of change so that what is essential remains alive and vital.