History FDR: The American Dictator

[TheVeryGermanGuy]

When Most people Hear the Last Name Roosevelt, they either think of Theodore Roosevelt, who Is personally my favorite US President and an absolute legend, or Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the American Dictator. After America went to war with Japan, FDR, not unlike Adolf Hitler or Stalin, round up 125,000 Japanese-American citizens on the basis that they were spies. Executive order 9066 authorized the arrest and detention without charges of American citizens of Japanese ancestry Franklin Delano Roosevelt passed this law on February 19, 1942. 2 reports Roosevelt commissioned In the years prior to their Internment found that Japanese Americans posed little to no risk to the government, but FDR Ignored the reports recommendations. 70,000 of those detained had been American citizens for years and a simple executive order, no due process, allowed them to be arrested them for no reason other than their race and nationality. With executive order 6102 signed on April 5, 1933 everyone living In the United States Of America was given 25 days to turn In their gold, their property, gold coins and bullion was confiscated. It became a federal offense for anyone to own or trade gold anywhere In the world, except for some exceptions like Jewelry and collectors coins, the government paid about 20 dollars per ounce for the gold they forced the American Citizens to give up, and shortly after the raised the price to 35 dollars. They essentially stole half the wealth of people who owned gold In a time where America and the world was experiencing mass unemployment and people were poor. And back then owning gold was a popular way to keep your savings, they could do that because at that point a dollar was still backed by a set amount of gold. Increasing the dollar value of gold allowed them to print more money, and the law wasn't repealed until 1974. Only then was private ownership of gold once again fully legal in the united states. Benito Mussolini was the fascist dictator of Italy, In league with Hitler during World War II. The book three new deals actually shows how similar the 3 leaders of the USA, Italy, and Germany, were. It also recounts how FDR once said "I don't mind telling you in confidence." FDR remarked to a white house correspondent, "That I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman." Mussolini and FDR were two peas In a pod. Diana West describes in her book 'American Betrayal' just how well the soviet union infiltrated the white house. Top officials close to the president were supportive of the soviet regime, and some were almost certainly actual Soviet spies. In one sketchy encounter soldiers were told to stand down when they witnessed American secrets being smuggled out of the USA on a plane bound for Russia guarded by Soviet soldiers. This may be how the Soviet Union was able to find out the secrets of the Manhattan Project and produce their own Nuclear Weapons. Many other policies were directly influenced by socialist sympathizers and possibly outright spies in the government appointed by FDR. For instance soviet troops were given American supplies during world war 2 through a lend lease program, while American soldiers mainly lacked these supplies. Reason Magazine describes FDR's war against free speech, Roosevelt warned In 1938 that "Our newspapers cannot be edited In the interest of the general public from the counting room. And I wish we could have a national symposium on that question, particularly In the relation to freedom of press. How many bogies are conjured up by Invoking that greatly overworked phrase?" he's basically saying that he wishes he could abolish freedom of press simply because of fake news. Roosevelt also started the FCC and limited licenses for broadcast radio to six months, that way the government could revoke a license and shut down critics of FDR, and It did not take long for broadcasters to get the message. The agricultural adjustment act of 1933 reauthorized in 1938 was allegedly to help struggling farmers. The point was to raise the prices of crops to keep farmers from going broke and abandoning their farms, of course if farmers were abandoning their farms because prices were too low to make a living that would have naturally decreased the supply. Instead power hungry leaders like FDR just had to intervene and the consequences were disastrous. Remember this was during the Great Depression which meant already struggling families had to pay more for food. Then when not enough crops were grown in the US the US had to import crops making the country more dependent and less self-sufficient. My hands feel like they're going to break so I'll cut this short. FDR also Ignored warnings of Pearl Harbor and Insisted on placing ships In Pearl Harbor and even demoted the commander who suggested he place the ships somewhere else, this was possibly because he wanted to go to war with Japan. He was also racist and refused to meet with Jessie Owns in the White House after he won an Olympic Gold Medal because he was black. Also remember that Instead of siding with his relative Theodore during the 1912 elections, Roosevelt sided with another American dictator, Woodrow Wilson, and rose to prominence during Wilson's terms as president. All In all FDR prolonged the Great Depression and dragged us Into a war with Japan after he Ignore warnings of Pearl Harbor and placed a harsh embargo on Japan.

 

[ShieldWife]

Absolutely, FDR was a tyrant. He also tried to stack the Supreme Court when they wouldn’t let him get away with some of his activities. We normally think about “Unamerican Activities” as being something people were accused of by Joseph McCarthy but FDR used that charge to persecute dissenters, especially after the war started.

It’s my belief that he intended for the Pearl Harbor attack to happen to allow the USA to be dragged into WWII. I also think that his treasonously close relations with communists laid the foundations since he died before this fully happened) for Stalin to get half of Europe after WWII and for Mao to eventually rise to power in China.

Much of the authoritarian power of big government that threatens us now was created under FDR’s regime. It’s shocking hypocritical that the modern leftists who go on about white privilege adore a man who put thousands of American citizens into concentration camps because of their race.

 

[Cherico]

Absolutely, FDR was a tyrant. He also tried to stack the Supreme Court when they wouldn’t let him get away with some of his activities. We normally think about “Unamerican Activities” as being something people were accused of by Joseph McCarthy but FDR used that charge to persecute dissenters, especially after the war started.

It’s my belief that he intended for the Pearl Harbor attack to happen to allow the USA to be dragged into WWII. I also think that his treasonously close relations with communists laid the foundations since he died before this fully happened) for Stalin to get half of Europe after WWII and for Mao to eventually rise to power in China.

Much of the authoritarian power of big government that threatens us now was created under FDR’s regime. It’s shocking hypocritical that the modern leftists who go on about white privilege adore a man who put thousands of American citizens into concentration camps because of their race.

To be fair given the chance they would put more then thousands of Americans into concentration camps

 

[Sailor.X]

Absolutely, FDR was a tyrant. He also tried to stack the Supreme Court when they wouldn’t let him get away with some of his activities. We normally think about “Unamerican Activities” as being something people were accused of by Joseph McCarthy but FDR used that charge to persecute dissenters, especially after the war started.

It’s my belief that he intended for the Pearl Harbor attack to happen to allow the USA to be dragged into WWII. I also think that his treasonously close relations with communists laid the foundations since he died before this fully happened) for Stalin to get half of Europe after WWII and for Mao to eventually rise to power in China.

Much of the authoritarian power of big government that threatens us now was created under FDR’s regime. It’s shocking hypocritical that the modern leftists who go on about white privilege adore a man who put thousands of American citizens into concentration camps because of their race.

Actually no. All the stuff people complain about today is the result of the actions of one man..........

Woodrow Wilson: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center

 

[ATP]

When Most people Hear the Last Name Roosevelt, they either think of Theodore Roosevelt, who Is personally my favorite US President and an absolute legend, or Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the American Dictator. After America went to war with Japan, FDR, not unlike Adolf Hitler or Stalin, round up 125,000 Japanese-American citizens on the basis that they were spies. Executive order 9066 authorized the arrest and detention without charges of American citizens of Japanese ancestry Franklin Delano Roosevelt passed this law on February 19, 1942. 2 reports Roosevelt commissioned In the years prior to their Internment found that Japanese Americans posed little to no risk to the government, but FDR Ignored the reports recommendations. 70,000 of those detained had been American citizens for years and a simple executive order, no due process, allowed them to be arrested them for no reason other than their race and nationality. With executive order 6102 signed on April 5, 1933 everyone living In the United States Of America was given 25 days to turn In their gold, their property, gold coins and bullion was confiscated. It became a federal offense for anyone to own or trade gold anywhere In the world, except for some exceptions like Jewelry and collectors coins, the government paid about 20 dollars per ounce for the gold they forced the American Citizens to give up, and shortly after the raised the price to 35 dollars. They essentially stole half the wealth of people who owned gold In a time where America and the world was experiencing mass unemployment and people were poor. And back then owning gold was a popular way to keep your savings, they could do that because at that point a dollar was still backed by a set amount of gold. Increasing the dollar value of gold allowed them to print more money, and the law wasn't repealed until 1974. Only then was private ownership of gold once again fully legal in the united states. Benito Mussolini was the fascist dictator of Italy, In league with Hitler during World War II. The book three new deals actually shows how similar the 3 leaders of the USA, Italy, and Germany, were. It also recounts how FDR once said "I don't mind telling you in confidence." FDR remarked to a white house correspondent, "That I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman." Mussolini and FDR were two peas In a pod. Diana West describes in her book 'American Betrayal' just how well the soviet union infiltrated the white house. Top officials close to the president were supportive of the soviet regime, and some were almost certainly actual Soviet spies. In one sketchy encounter soldiers were told to stand down when they witnessed American secrets being smuggled out of the USA on a plane bound for Russia guarded by Soviet soldiers. This may be how the Soviet Union was able to find out the secrets of the Manhattan Project and produce their own Nuclear Weapons. Many other policies were directly influenced by socialist sympathizers and possibly outright spies in the government appointed by FDR. For instance soviet troops were given American supplies during world war 2 through a lend lease program, while American soldiers mainly lacked these supplies. Reason Magazine describes FDR's war against free speech, Roosevelt warned In 1938 that "Our newspapers cannot be edited In the interest of the general public from the counting room. And I wish we could have a national symposium on that question, particularly In the relation to freedom of press. How many bogies are conjured up by Invoking that greatly overworked phrase?" he's basically saying that he wishes he could abolish freedom of press simply because of fake news. Roosevelt also started the FCC and limited licenses for broadcast radio to six months, that way the government could revoke a license and shut down critics of FDR, and It did not take long for broadcasters to get the message. The agricultural adjustment act of 1933 reauthorized in 1938 was allegedly to help struggling farmers. The point was to raise the prices of crops to keep farmers from going broke and abandoning their farms, of course if farmers were abandoning their farms because prices were too low to make a living that would have naturally decreased the supply. Instead power hungry leaders like FDR just had to intervene and the consequences were disastrous. Remember this was during the Great Depression which meant already struggling families had to pay more for food. Then when not enough crops were grown in the US the US had to import crops making the country more dependent and less self-sufficient. My hands feel like they're going to break so I'll cut this short. FDR also Ignored warnings of Pearl Harbor and Insisted on placing ships In Pearl Harbor and even demoted the commander who suggested he place the ships somewhere else, this was possibly because he wanted to go to war with Japan. He was also racist and refused to meet with Jessie Owns in the White House after he won an Olympic Gold Medal because he was black. Also remember that Instead of siding with his relative Theodore during the 1912 elections, Roosevelt sided with another American dictator, Woodrow Wilson, and rose to prominence during Wilson's terms as president. All In all FDR prolonged the Great Depression and dragged us Into a war with Japan after he Ignore warnings of Pearl Harbor and placed a harsh embargo on Japan.

All true.
I would add,then in 1938 american Pacyfic fleet was moved to USA becouse carriers could hit it,and FDR send it to Hawaii again in 1940.
And,that he was well avare of Holocaust and did nothing to prevent it - when polish envoy ,Karski meet him in 1943 and start taking about it,he stopped him and started talking about selling horses to Poland after war.
He also gave Poland to soviet for notching - which was stupid,allieas are supposed to be sold,not given for free in politics.

Absolutely, FDR was a tyrant. He also tried to stack the Supreme Court when they wouldn’t let him get away with some of his activities. We normally think about “Unamerican Activities” as being something people were accused of by Joseph McCarthy but FDR used that charge to persecute dissenters, especially after the war started.

It’s my belief that he intended for the Pearl Harbor attack to happen to allow the USA to be dragged into WWII. I also think that his treasonously close relations with communists laid the foundations since he died before this fully happened) for Stalin to get half of Europe after WWII and for Mao to eventually rise to power in China.

Much of the authoritarian power of big government that threatens us now was created under FDR’s regime. It’s shocking hypocritical that the modern leftists who go on about white privilege adore a man who put thousands of American citizens into concentration camps because of their race.

Yes,it seems as if he wanted to gave half of world to commies.
And,he provoked war with Japan not when they raped Nankin or sinked american gunboat,but when they could help germans attack soviet.
Which mean,that he wanted save soviets,not fight Japan.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

@Sailor.X you're absolutely right about Woodrow Wilson. He is the beginning of the fall of our country towards it's current state.

@TheVeryGermanGuy FDR followed in his footsteps by using WWII to mightily speed up the process.

 

[S'task]

Actually no. All the stuff people complain about today is the result of the actions of one man..........

Woodrow Wilson: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center

Wilson laid the foundation, but FDR spread the cancer through the entire country. The idea that the Federal government should be involved in the day to day economic activities and regulating just about everything wasn't something Wilson could have pursued in his day. There was no foundation for it, nor was it really within his vision of the country. He was much more focused on international affairs in many respects, and his domestic concerns were primarily focused on ensuring he didn't have to deal with domestic interference with those concerns.

FDR on the other hand is who popularized the Federal government "helping" people out in economic difficult times. It was his programs that pushed the Federal government into all aspects of the economy, even to the point where the Federal government could regulate the growth and production of crops grown for use and consumption on a private farm. And all this was BEFORE WW2. WW2 arguably saved FDR's reputation and sadly also redeemed his vision of an interventionist Federal government. You see, despite all the economic intervention by the Federal government, the Great Depression was dragging on and on... in large part because FDR's programs had hindered a proper recovery while also artificially boosting the money supply with make-work. He also had introduced various price controls, which caused shortages while enabling price-gouging. Basically, as expected of progressive economics, he'd actually made the economic situation worse in the long run just to be seen as "doing something". It literally would have been better for the Federal government to do nothing and allow the Great Depression to run its course. It would have been over sooner and led to less bad things.

But WW2 saved all this. Because of so many men being enlisted it ended up constricting the labor supply which drove up wages to the point where FDR instituted PRICE CONTROLS ON WAGES. This led companies to offer OTHER things that were not direct employment, the most common being splitting the cost of health insurance (yes, employer health insurance and the entire mess that came from it was a result of FDR's mucking with the economy). The wartime economy also required large amounts of central coordination and sacrifice of civilian standard of living for military concerns. The combination of the draft meant that unemployment basically ceased to exist and since a war was on the reduction in amenities was understood to be a temporary thing necessary for the war (IE, of course sewing machines costs have gone up and they're harder to find, the sewing machine factory has been repurposed to make aviation targeting and other equipment, once the war is won we'll have sewing machines aplenty but until then they're going to cost more). All this, combined with the success of winning the war and the economic boom times brought on by the demilitarization of the economy afterwards made many people think FDR's policies had worked... when it fact they'd done no such thing...

 

[Zyobot]

To be fair given the chance they would put more then thousands of Americans into concentration camps

*Eyes Rex 84 warily.*

They say they’ve learned from Japanese internment, but seeing as they literally drafted this a generation after World War II ended, I’m not sure I believe them.

Generally in agreement that FDR came closest to establishing a “People’s States of America” and was a “President for Life” figure of sorts, though given time, something tells me we’ll have a president who accomplishes what FDR couldn’t and finally takes us all the way there. The infrastructure’s already in place, so now it’s only a matter of when.

 

[ShieldWife]

Snip

FDR also turned away the ship St. Louis that carried over 900 Jewish refugees from Germany, who mostly ended up being brought back to Germany. If FDR cared about people being persecuted by the Nazis, he certainly had the ability to bring over refugees and situate them either in the USA or elsewhere.

Actually no. All the stuff people complain about today is the result of the actions of one man..........

Woodrow Wilson: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center

Wilson was terrible and I agree that he laid the foundations for many of our worse problems. FDR ran with that and made it worse. They were a one-two punch to American freedoms.

To be fair given the chance they would put more then thousands of Americans into concentration camps

Given the chance, the current ideological heirs of FDR would probably keep all Americans in camps aside from their own elite circle.

 

[Cherico]

*Eyes Rex 84 warily.*

They say they’ve learned from Japanese internment, but seeing as they literally drafted this a generation after World War II ended, I’m not sure I believe them.

Generally in agreement that FDR came closest to establishing a “People’s States of America” and was a “President for Life” figure of sorts, though given time, something tells me we’ll have a president who accomplishes what FDR couldn’t and finally takes us all the way there. The infrastructure’s already in place, so now it’s only a matter of when.

While I think your right I don't think it will last forever just a human life time, and as for everyones comments. I think this all started with the French revolution and that the western world has been dealing robperries heirs ever since.

 

[Zyobot]

While I think your right I don't think it will last forever just a human life time, and as for everyones comments. I think this all started with the French revolution and that the western world has been dealing robperries heirs ever since.

Agreed that it's unsustainable and that we're due for a reckoning at some point.

Thing is, just because the follies of our age won't last forever doesn't mean they won't wreck irreparable damage before ending. If anything, that's how I expect the current century to end — with the guy who presides over "The Desolation" in the second half quite possibly being the worst tyrant in history, as we've discussed before. Still a ways away, of course, but even a few decades of foolishness can leave scars that take centuries to heal, at best.

 

[Cherico]

Agreed that it's unsustainable and that we're due for a reckoning at some point.

Thing is, just because the follies of our age won't last forever doesn't mean they won't wreck irreparable damage before ending. If anything, that's how I expect the current century to end — with the guy who presides over "The Desolation" in the second half quite possibly being the worst tyrant in history, as we've discussed before. Still a ways away, of course, but even a few decades of foolishness can leave scars that take centuries to heal, at best.
[/QUOTE

Pain isn't an entirely bad thing, it teaches you what not to do or that something is wrong. And while scars arn't nice there a sign the body is healing.

 

[Zyobot]

Pain isn't an entirely bad thing, it teaches you what not to do or that something is wrong. And while scars arn't nice there a sign the body is healing.

When the lives of millions (or even billions) are at risk... then yes, they are very much a bad thing. May have long-term consequences that aren't entirely terrible, but sometimes, the best scenario is when they don't happen at all.

 

[S'task]

Generally in agreement that FDR came closest to establishing a “People’s States of America” and was a “President for Life” figure of sorts, though given time, something tells me we’ll have a president who accomplishes what FDR couldn’t and finally takes us all the way there. The infrastructure’s already in place, so now it’s only a matter of when

Actually, FDR also ended up putting in place things that end up STOPPING such men. The first big one is Presidential term limits. It's really hard to have a "President for life" at this point due to the formalization of term limits in the Constitution. While I'd agree many see the Constitution as just a piece of paper in many respects, no one has been willing to actually try and challenge the core mechanics of the government and elections. A President running for a third term, in spite of the Constitutional term limit, would require such a perfect storm of circumstances at this point I'm not sure it could happen. The absolute closest we ever came since FDR to having a three term President was in the 1980s with Reagan and then HW Bush, otherwise the American people have generally soured on the Presidental party in power after two terms. Reagan to HW Bush has been the only time SINCE FDR where a single party has controlled the White House for more than 8 years.

 

[Zyobot]

Actually, FDR also ended up putting in place things that end up STOPPING such men. The first big one is Presidential term limits. It's really hard to have a "President for life" at this point due to the formalization of term limits in the Constitution. While I'd agree many see the Constitution as just a piece of paper in many respects, no one has been willing to actually try and challenge the core mechanics of the government and elections. A President running for a third term, in spite of the Constitutional term limit, would require such a perfect storm of circumstances at this point I'm not sure it could happen. The absolute closest we ever came since FDR to having a three term President was in the 1980s with Reagan and then HW Bush, otherwise the American people have generally soured on the Presidental party in power after two terms. Reagan to HW Bush has been the only time SINCE FDR where a single party has controlled the White House for more than 8 years.

If we're concerned about the decades immediately after FDR passed, then sure.

What I'm talking about is what's coming throughout the rest of this century, especially once the various taboos of the last crisis period (read: World War II) fade and a host of new ones arise in its place. In which case, cue a people used to thinking in four-year time horizons instead of what's best in the long run clamoring for a strongman to provide security and stability, no matter the cost to their freedoms or limits on the Constitution.

Besides, just because the mechanisms constraining the president hold weight doesn't mean the other infrastructure for establishing a dictatorship (such as mass surveillance and Rex 84, as I've mentioned previously) isn't already there. On the contrary, it's only gotten worse, and based on how much of it there is and how the US government is up to its rafters in people bent on keeping it that way, I think it's safe to say that it can't all be dismantled overnight by just one guy — no matter how anti-establishment they are or how much success they've had on the state or local level.

 

[ShieldWife]

The way the establishment is now, they don’t need a president for life. In fact, a president for life would undermine their power because it would make it too obvious and because the actual president might claim too much personal power.

They are far better off changing every 4 to 8 years to give the illusion that people actually have a choice.

 

[Zyobot]

The way the establishment is now, they don’t need a president for life. In fact, a president for life would undermine their power because it would make it too obvious and because the actual president might claim too much personal power.

They are far better off changing every 4 to 8 years to give the illusion that people actually have a choice.

Perhaps, but the way it is now isn't necessarily the same as how it'll be around, say, 2063.

At that point, I actually wonder if the oligarchy and lack of real choice will be so apparent, that there's no other way for them to worsen the dismal PR they already have. In which case, whatever "President for Life" they appoint will probably be a very egocentric, power-hungry, "Always wanted to be President!" fall guy to preoccupy the irate masses while the people who put him there pack their bags and flee for their lives, if they have any sense left. Kind of like Biden is now — but way, way worse.

 

[ShieldWife]

Perhaps, but the way it is now isn't necessarily the same as how it'll be around, say, 2063.

At that point, I actually wonder if the oligarchy and lack of real choice will be so apparent, that there's no other way for them to worsen the dismal PR they already have. In which case, whatever "President for Life" they appoint will probably be a very egocentric, power-hungry, "Always wanted to be President!" fall guy to preoccupy the irate masses while the people who put him there pack their bags and flee for their lives, if they have any sense left.

By 2063 it’s very hard to say. If things continue as they have been, there may well be no Republican Party. All information might be controlled by a few corporations working with the government and other news is illegal. We may be no longer recognizable as the USA at all, in which case it probably won’t matter if we have a president for life or a fake election every 4 years.

 

[Zyobot]

By 2063 it’s very hard to say. If things continue as they have been, there may well be no Republican Party. All information might be controlled by a few corporations working with the government and other news is illegal. We may be no longer recognizable as the USA at all, in which case it probably won’t matter if we have a president for life or a fake election every 4 years.

*Eyes the French, Russian, and Iranian Revolutions suspiciously.*

Somehow, I don't think the masses will stand for that forever. In fact, it's what comes next that scares me most, especially if either the Establishment goes Muammar Gaddafi mode as the common people rise up or the victorious revolutionaries set up a regime even more nightmarish than what they overthrew, if the likes of Robespierre, Stalin, and Khomeini are any indication.

Not saying that's the exact play-by-play, but in any case, I highly doubt Neocon/Neolib rule will last forever. And in some ways, I wonder if that's even worse, since having power-mongering, but otherwise "vanilla" oligarchs in perpetuity would still be better than whatever conga-line of horrors we're actually getting by the end of this century.

 

[ShieldWife]

*Eyes the French, Russian, and Iranian Revolutions suspiciously.*

Somehow, I don't think the masses will stand for that forever. In fact, it's what comes next that scares me most, especially if either the Establishment goes Muammar Gaddafi mode as the common people rise up or the victorious revolutionaries set up a regime even more nightmarish than what they overthrew, if the likes of Robespierre, Stalin, and Khomeini are any indication.

Not saying that's the exact play-by-play, but in any case, I highly doubt Neocon/Neolib rule will last forever. And in some ways, I wonder if that's even worse, since having power-mongering, but otherwise "vanilla" oligarchs in perpetuity would still be better than whatever conga-line of horrors we're actually getting by the end of this century.

Well, nothing lasts forever, but tyranny and oppression has been far more of the standard through out human’s history than freedom or liberalism as it has existed in the modern West. Sometimes an empire or civilization collapses forever. The Roman Empire, while we still live in its shadow, is gone forever and the day may fast be approaching that not only the USA, but Western Civilian itself, collapses as completely if not more so.

Our oligarchs are more than merely power hungry. They have an agenda for global dominance that involves more than merely rule but destroying and salting the earth of the West. Controlled immigration is one way this is being accomplished. Another is the destruction of the family and community.