Difference between revisions of "Talk:Franklin D. Roosevelt"
(→focus on FDR: thanks) |
|||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
:Complimenting your writing prowess is sort of like bringing those old coals of yore to Newcastle, Richard, but nevertheless a masterful work! Perhaps some of that extraneous material can be gathered into some sort of critique of the New Deal? Personally, I would like to see RobS's ''[[New Ordeal]]'' expanded, and perhaps some of the removed material can find a new life there? Thoughts? --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 03:10, 22 April 2009 (EDT) | :Complimenting your writing prowess is sort of like bringing those old coals of yore to Newcastle, Richard, but nevertheless a masterful work! Perhaps some of that extraneous material can be gathered into some sort of critique of the New Deal? Personally, I would like to see RobS's ''[[New Ordeal]]'' expanded, and perhaps some of the removed material can find a new life there? Thoughts? --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 03:10, 22 April 2009 (EDT) | ||
::thanks. The extraneous stuff is mostly about Communist spies and can go into another article. Libertarian criticism of the new Deal also should have its own article. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 03:56, 22 April 2009 (EDT) | ::thanks. The extraneous stuff is mostly about Communist spies and can go into another article. Libertarian criticism of the new Deal also should have its own article. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 03:56, 22 April 2009 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :::I'll review it tomorrow, but as I remember it, much of the spy stuff crossover is in the Hiss article, maybe. Occurs to me encyclopedias need a new indexing system, perhaps not invented, that reads as a narrative, to help with logical progression learning......instead of the piecemeal method used for centuries. Oh well, educational methods are over my my pay grade! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 05:21, 22 April 2009 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 09:21, April 22, 2009
FDR was a socialist, and probably the last US president to describe himself thus.
- FDR was perhaps the most openly socialist leader ever to occupy the White House, and his policies reflected a firm belief that government should control business and redistribute wealth. The Liberty Committee (a lobbying group)
- Many attacked Roosevelt as a socialist, but he ardently refuted these accusations and the principles of Marxism. In truth, Roosevelt did not despise big business. In fact, he realized that the trusts in the latter half of the nineteenth century had indirectly increased the standard of living for nearly every American. He did, however, dislike the power of the trusts and the fact that the American public had little control of them. Yet, at the same time, he feared giving too much power to labor. His Square Deal policies attempted to strike a balance between the two. [1]
There is controversy over whether he was socialist. --Ed Poor 05:43, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
Please don't delete the section on his decision to run for a third term before somebody writes an article on the Constitution in exile movement. I see the latter as absolutely central to modern conservatism, which is as much a reaction against Franklin Roosevelt as anything.
By the way, #2 above refers to THEODORE, not Franklin Roosevelt. Ironically, fans of Franklin typically designate Theodore as the last great Republican President. #1 is interesting, but Roosevelt never said, "We desire not just equality in theory and opportunity, but equality as a fact and a result," as Lyndon Johnson did. Of course, Johnson didn't make Henry Wallace his vice-presidential nominee, either.
I believe it was with FDR that the Democratic Party moved from being a party of the uneducated masses to the representative of those segments of the elite which are pragmatic, yet a little jumpy. Whether one is a Democrat or Republican largely depends on which of the latter two adjectives one believes predominates.--User:Amyz 16:10, May 7, 2007 (EDT)
What does that thing mean when it says "specialized knowledge"? -Additioner 14:10, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
Disambiguation
"Roosevelt" should not redirect here. There should be a disambiguation page that can specify which Roosevelt. DanH 22:43, 21 July 2007 (EDT)
- Agreed. Bohdan 22:47, 21 July 2007 (EDT)
Theodore Roosevelt was also a famous President for another thing. -Additioner 14:02, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
- The whole article needs to be moved. Again. Look at any history book or encyclopedia; he is never referred to as Franklin Roosevelt, but always as Franklin D. Roosevelt. Same for any search...you are taken to Franklin D. on Google when you search plain Franklin. What were you guys thinking in re-directing it here? The template is wrong as well. --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 05:42, 21 August 2007 (EDT)
Anatomically impossible act
This language obviously was cleaned up:
- "In August 1939...Assistant Secretary of State Adolph A. Berle, disclosed that a Soviet espionage cell was operating in the State and Treasury departments that included Hiss and Harry Dexter White... The president coldly told Berle to perform an anatomically impossible act [2]
In keeping with our family friendly Commandments, should this be included? Rob Smith 22:22, 2 November 2007 (EDT)
- IMO it could be safely paraphrased as "where the sun doesn't shine". Or the like, and link to the historically correct quote in the citations, eh? How is that for family-friendly and diplomacy? --şyŝoρ-₮K/Ṣρёаќǃ 23:11, 2 November 2007 (EDT)
conservative aspects
FDR has been described as one of the most conservative presidents, because he made just enough liberal changes to the role of the govt to save conservatism as a whole. Some say that without the changes he made, the U.S. risked a revolution, perhaps communist or fascist, like in several European countries at the time. I need to find a source for this, but I think it is worth adding. FernoKlump 17:17, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
Fourth term/ALP
The section on Roosevelt's fourth term states, "It was 825,000 votes from Earl Browder and Sidney Hillman's American Labor Party that gave him his majority." This is complete nonsense. Roosevelt's popular vote margin in 1944 was 3,594,987. In the Electoral College, a minimum of 6 additional (large) states would have had to have been carried by Dewey for the Republican to win the presidency. Dadsnagem2 13:55, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
proof
I'd like a citation for this passage-
"Although Mr. Roosevelt was very popular, it has been argued by scholars and analysts then and now that many New Deal relief efforts actually helped to prolong the Great Depression. Mr. Roosevelt started the second wave of the massive expansion of the Federal Government and greatly increased American foreign aid. Some of these policies were coupled with a persistent high level of unemployment "
Term of Office
I would like to add a footnote to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's term of office section. Is there any way that this can be done? Mal 16:31, 21 June 2008 (EDT)
HaHa
"While the Democrats were damning Hoover as a big spender" Was this meant to be a joke? It struck me funny, Hoover damn, ya'know? --Ṣ₮ёVeN 19:48, 13 November 2008 (EST)
- No--that line appealed to a lot of conservatives who distrusted Hoover. Just like Democrats in 2008 attack Bush deficits. RJJensen 00:00, 14 November 2008 (EST)
focus on FDR
This article is about FDR and so I dropped all sorts of extraneous stuff. RJJensen 00:36, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
- Complimenting your writing prowess is sort of like bringing those old coals of yore to Newcastle, Richard, but nevertheless a masterful work! Perhaps some of that extraneous material can be gathered into some sort of critique of the New Deal? Personally, I would like to see RobS's New Ordeal expanded, and perhaps some of the removed material can find a new life there? Thoughts? --₮K/Admin/Talk 03:10, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
- thanks. The extraneous stuff is mostly about Communist spies and can go into another article. Libertarian criticism of the new Deal also should have its own article. RJJensen 03:56, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
- I'll review it tomorrow, but as I remember it, much of the spy stuff crossover is in the Hiss article, maybe. Occurs to me encyclopedias need a new indexing system, perhaps not invented, that reads as a narrative, to help with logical progression learning......instead of the piecemeal method used for centuries. Oh well, educational methods are over my my pay grade! --₮K/Admin/Talk 05:21, 22 April 2009 (EDT)