- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Would FDR turn over in his grave
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:24 am to WhiskeyPapa
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:24 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
But there was in the country a worse hysteria than there was after 9/11.
just so we're clear, this is a sign of a weak leader
this from the guy who said "we have nothing to fear except fear itself"...obviously he meant to include "and Japanese-Americans"
1
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:26 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
That's horse shite. He knew it was wrong at the time. He was told it was wrong at the time. He did it anyway.
What did he "know" was wrong at the time? If you mean the interment camps, absolutely.
If you mean the Interstate Highway Project and other government programs, how would they if they were wrong or not?
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:31 am to skrayper
quote:
I think FDR gets a bit of a bad rap.
Deservedly so. So does Nixon. You're judged on your actions.
quote:
Don't get me wrong, I don't AGREE with some of the things he did, but I have to also accept the fact that I have the benefit of hindsight that he simply did not.
This can be said regarding ANY historical study. It doesn't excuse his actions and attitudes.
quote:
If your issue with him is the more Socialist programs he undertook as President, it should be noted that the US had never undergone anything even REMOTELY like the Great Depression. I cannot say I would not have been trying some radical things to get people working and fed and any number of other things, and I'm Libertarian. There's only so many times you can see pictures of starving children before you feel compelled to try SOMETHING.
This also doesn't excuse bad decisions and behaviors. FDR was not dictator. Problems are resolved through America's established form of elected government and that an economic crash happens does not elevate the primacy of the U.S. president's preferred policies over those of Congress and other leaders. FDR doesn't get to decide on his own how the country moves forward. What a horrendously dangerous precedent that would set.
quote:
If the issue is regarding certain stances he took in WWII, I have to point out that every sitting President since WWII has made "deals with the devil" to oust other "devils". WWII was just a bigger stage.
You can rationalize his actions on this front all you want, I don't contend that their wasn't rationale behind it. But I will absolutely call out the bullshite suggestion that his conduct of WWII was a glowing example of moral leadership when that narrative is put forward, particularly his propaganda efforts which served to grossly deceive the American public about the true nature of Stalin and the Soviet regime. And the moral decision is really not even relevant to his bungling of the postwar layout of Europe. We swapped out Germany for the Soviet Union in Europe by war's end. Our national security situation was arguably worse after Germany's defeat. If WWII is mentioned to demonstrate his great wisdom and leadership then this matter is completely relevant to the discussion
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:40 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
There is such a thing as considering the time in which historical people lived.
And surely you would extend this consideration to the period of slavery as well.
quote:
Certainly FDR's order was the worst thing he did. But there was in the country a worse hysteria than there was after 9/11
And yet Japanese Americans hadn't engaged in any terroristic attacks on the United States whatsoever when FDR discounted their fundamental rights as U.S. citizens and had them rounded up and interned on pure hysterical sentiments.
It's incredible to witness you rationalize racist internment when it's a guy who happened to push some political agenda you like.
Again, par for the course for the left.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:43 am to skrayper
quote:
What did he "know" was wrong at the time? If you mean the interment camps, absolutely.
Stacking the court to get around the constitutional system of checks and balances was pretty egregious as well, I would say.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:46 am to ChewyDante
quote:
You can rationalize his actions on this front all you want, I don't contend that their wasn't rationale behind it. But I will absolutely call out the bull shite suggestion that his conduct of WWII was a glowing example of moral leadership when that narrative is put forward, particularly his propaganda efforts which served to grossly deceive the American public about the true nature of Stalin and the Soviet regime. And the moral decision is really not even relevant to his bungling of the postwar layout of Europe. We swapped out Germany for the Soviet Union in Europe by war's end. Our national security situation was arguably worse after Germany's defeat. If WWII is mentioned to demonstrate his great wisdom and leadership then this matter is completely relevant to the discussion
I'm not claiming the man was moral at all. Sorry if I came across that way. I don't see a point in judging a dead man anyway - judging others is something Jesus tells us not to do regardless, and the deceased have no means of defending their actions.
quote:
This also doesn't excuse bad decisions and behaviors. FDR was not dictator. Problems are resolved through America's established form of elected government and that an economic crash happens does not elevate the primacy of the U.S. president's preferred policies over those of Congress and other leaders. FDR doesn't get to decide on his own how the country moves forward. What a horrendously dangerous precedent that would set.
I agree; however, I wasn't in his shoes.
quote:
This can be said regarding ANY historical study. It doesn't excuse his actions and attitudes.
By that logic, every Founding Father who owned a slave was racist (and not simply a product of their times). Some people and events you simply cannot hold up to the scrutiny of today's world view.
quote:
Deservedly so. So does Nixon. You're judged on your actions.
One must be wary of judging another's actions through the lens of modern thought. Nixon, though, is a bit of a different example as he broke the law and tried to interfere with judicial process.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:56 am to skrayper
quote:
If you mean the Interstate Highway Project
This was Eisenhower.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 9:58 am to skrayper
quote:
I don't see a point in judging a dead man anyway - judging others is something Jesus tells us not to do regardless, and the deceased have no means of defending their actions.
Jesus was opposed to analyzing the political actions, ideas, and effects of leaders so as to draw knowledge and assessment for future policies? So Jesus was opposed to the fields of history and political science? I'm not following that train of thought. Not that I even find the teachings of Jesus relevant to this in the first place.
quote:
I agree; however, I wasn't in his shoes.
You weren't in Hitler's shoes either, so do you refrain from analyzing his actions and drawing conclusions about them? Positive or negative? Nobody was in anybody's shoes so should we have no study of history and political science?
quote:
By that logic, every Founding Father who owned a slave was racist (and not simply a product of their times). Some people and events you simply cannot hold up to the scrutiny of today's world view.
Not at all. It's not hard to understand that history has to be studied with context in mind. This is rudimentary and contested by no one. But to suggest that no opinions or judgments can be derived at simply on account that we live in different times is asinine and worthless. Not to sound like a broken record, but that's not how the study of history and political phenomena works. If that's your attitude, you effectively believe they are worthless endeavors to study in which case you are really on the wrong board.
This post was edited on 7/3/17 at 10:07 am
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:09 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
FDR wasn't on the Supreme Court.
did you just stop reading after that sentence?
I don't have to read further than that to see that you are hateful and stupid in the bargain.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:12 am to ChewyDante
quote:
And yet Japanese Americans hadn't engaged in any terroristic attacks on the United States whatsoever when FDR discounted their fundamental rights as U.S. citizens and had them rounded up and interned on pure hysterical sentiments.
In the hysteria of the moment it was thought the Imperial Japanese might arrive and attack the west coast. Prudence dictated that the Japanese be interned. It was still fricked because most were American citizens who were deprived of due process.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:14 am to ChewyDante
quote:
Jesus was opposed to analyzing the political actions, ideas, and effects of leaders so as to draw knowledge and assessment for future policies? So Jesus was opposed to the fields of history and political science? I'm not following that train of thought. Not that I even find the teachings of Jesus relevant to this in the first place.
Learning from the mistakes of others is not the same as going on a message board and talking about pissing on their graves. I think we're too many steps removed from my original reply to follow what I was initially replying to.
quote:
You weren't in Hitler's shoes either, so do you refrain from analyzing his actions and drawing conclusions about them? Positive or negative? Nobody was in anybody's shoes so should we have no study of history and political science?
The "Hitler equation" gets a bit tired. FDR did plenty of things I disagree with, but he didn't murder millions of people in gas chambers. Systemic murder of innocents is not in line with the same things people have against FDR.
quote:
Not at all. It's not hard to understand that history has to be studied with context in mind. This is rudimentary and contested by no one. But to suggest that no opinions or judgments can be derived at simply on account that we live in different times is asinine and worthless. Not to sound like a broken record, but that's not how the study of history and political phenomena works. If that's your attitude, you effectively believe they are worthless endeavors to study in which case you are really on the wrong board.
Once again, you confuse my statement as a "we should pretend the past never existed" - I'm not saying that. I'm saying we learn from those people's mistakes, not sit in high judgement over them all. Yeah, certain sins transcend time (no one should believe Hitler or Stalin were a "product of their times"), but that doesn't mean I'm going to go find some politician whose policies I disagree with and take a dump on their tombstone.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:18 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
In the hysteria of the moment it was thought the Imperial Japanese might arrive and attack the west coast. Prudence dictated that the Japanese be interned.
I'm aware of the rationale.
But prudence didn't dictate that, FDR's and other leaders' own attitudes did. Let's not pretend that it was an evidently necessary measure. It wasn't.
Hitler used similar lines of argument for rounding up the Jews since they might be "saboteurs" and "partisans" undermining Germany's war effort from within.
FDR stripped American citizens of their fundamental liberty and interned them under no charges and with no due process of law. Plain and simple. He was a man who felt unconstrained by the Constitution, only by what he felt he could get away with.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:19 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
But there was in the country a worse hysteria than there was after 9/11.
just so we're clear, this is a sign of a weak leader
That is nonsense. If anything ever was certain it is that FDR was a strong and effective leader.
It is his policies you don't like.
This post was edited on 7/3/17 at 10:23 am
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:26 am to ChewyDante
quote:
FDR stripped American citizens of their fundamental liberty and interned them under no charges and with no due process of law. Plain and simple. He was a man who felt unconstrained by the Constitution, only by what he felt he could get away with.
Your little rant on this won't affect the perception of FDR.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:27 am to WhiskeyPapa
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:33 am to skrayper
quote:
Learning from the mistakes of others is not the same as going on a message board and talking about pissing on their graves. I think we're too many steps removed from my original reply to follow what I was initially replying to.
You suggested that we can't or shouldn't make judgments about his actions. The majority of this thread was discussing why people either approve or disapprove of his time in office. That's how the study of history and politics works. There are many different views and it's a subjective affair. That's how these subjects are studied and analyzed, through debate and subjective political analysis.
quote:
The "Hitler equation" gets a bit tired. FDR did plenty of things I disagree with, but he didn't murder millions of people in gas chambers. Systemic murder of innocents is not in line with the same things people have against FDR.
Nor did I nor anyone else say they were. The Hitler reference was to highlight that your arguments for why we can't judge FDR are inconsistent with judgments you surely make about others. You can either make judgments about past leaders and their actions or you can't. It doesn't matter whether they were Hitler or Jesus. We're talking about logical consistency here, it's either legitimate to do so or not, so spare me the strawman that anyone is equating Hitler with FDR.
quote:
Once again, you confuse my statement as a "we should pretend the past never existed" - I'm not saying that. I'm saying we learn from those people's mistakes, not sit in high judgement over them all. Yeah, certain sins transcend time (no one should believe Hitler or Stalin were a "product of their times"), but that doesn't mean I'm going to go find some politician whose policies I disagree with and take a dump on their tombstone.
I didn't confuse anything. For some reason you think FDR shouldn't be judged or criticized for his actions because "nobody was in his shoes" and "the times were different." If those are your views, then clearly they must be applied to ALL in history, which of course is absurd.
Again, most of this thread has been detailed discussion of why people did or didn't like him, yet you keep harping on one comment about pissing on his grave and then suggesting no one should judge him. It's quite puzzling really.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:36 am to ChewyDante
quote:
You can rationalize his actions on this front all you want, I don't contend that their wasn't rationale behind it.
"In 1962, while chief justice, Warren publicly defended the Supreme Court’s 1943 and 1944 decisions supporting the internment of the Japanese against constitutional challenges. He argued that “there are some circumstances which the Court will, in effect, conclude that it is simply not in a position to reject descriptions by the Executive of the degree of military necessity.” According to Warren, the decision to relocate Japanese-Americans was one such circumstance, and in such instances, he maintained, “actions may be permitted that restrict individual liberty in a grievous manner.”
LINK
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:37 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
Your little rant on this won't affect the perception of FDR.
Nor will your propaganda pictures of your glorious leader.
I'm of the mindset that rational argumentation trumps posting pictures of someone when it comes to influencing people's opinions. And I'm quite confident that the perception of FDR is about where I would expect it to be. He's revered on the left and responsibly criticized by the right.
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:39 am to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
"In 1962, while chief justice, Warren publicly defended the Supreme Court’s 1943 and 1944 decisions supporting the internment of the Japanese against constitutional challenges. He argued that “there are some circumstances which the Court will, in effect, conclude that it is simply not in a position to reject descriptions by the Executive of the degree of military necessity.” According to Warren, the decision to relocate Japanese-Americans was one such circumstance, and in such instances, he maintained, “actions may be permitted that restrict individual liberty in a grievous manner.”
So as long as a Supreme Court upholds a law, it's considered morally and legally justified then, right?
Posted on 7/3/17 at 10:51 am to ChewyDante
quote:
You suggested that we can't or shouldn't make judgments about his actions.
I appreciate you telling me what I meant. Here I thought I had a grasp on that already, but clearly I was mistaken.
quote:
Nor did I nor anyone else say they were. The Hitler reference was to highlight that your arguments for why we can't judge FDR are inconsistent with judgments you surely make about others. You can either make judgments about past leaders and their actions or you can't. It doesn't matter whether they were Hitler or Jesus. We're talking about logical consistency here, it's either legitimate to do so or not, so spare me the strawman that anyone is equating Hitler with FDR
The strawman was introduced by you, so don't try tossing it back on me. I shared my opinion on FDR; I never said I agreed with all the things he did. I'm just saying that a lot of times we get people who rant and rave against the "New Deal" that he was a major architect of, but no one on this board had to live through that. A lot of opinions on THAT subject from people who weren't suffering because of the Great Depression anyway.
As far as his other things - Japanese Internment, attempting to pad the SCOTUS, etc - all bad ideas, all things I disagree with entirely. Those don't cause me to take on a rage boner for the New Deal, however.
quote:
I didn't confuse anything. For some reason you think FDR shouldn't be judged or criticized for his actions because "nobody was in his shoes" and "the times were different." If those are your views, then clearly they must be applied to ALL in history, which of course is absurd.
You assumed a blanket application from a solitary viewpoint; my world appears to have more shades of gray than yours.
quote:
Again, most of this thread has been detailed discussion of why people did or didn't like him, yet you keep harping on one comment about pissing on his grave and then suggesting no one should judge him. It's quite puzzling really.
Because you replied directly to the message that originated from me replying to THAT. I come back to it because it was the root of the whole discussion you and I are having now.
See, I just don't view things in this on/off switch that apparently others do. I don't look at Hitler (for example) and think, "Well, these other actions he took were deplorable, and therefor his tax plan was deplorable too" - I am capable separating and thinking, "Well, maybe he thought tax plan A was critical to his country" and then thinking "his actions against the Jewish people and neighboring countries were plain evil and have no justification".
So, my apologies for not being clearer. I don't have a single "FDR was X" lens to apply to everything he ever did.
Page 6 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News