It's time we elected Franklin Delano Roosevelt to a fifth term as president. Specifically, we need to re-re-elect the Roosevelt of 1936.
Accepting his party's nomination that June for a second term, Franklin Roosevelt delivered the most radical speech ever given by an American president. Comparing the corporate elite of the 1930s to the royalists of 1776, he told the 100,000 people gathered at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia and the millions of Americans listening on the radio, "These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power." Which, he confessed, was exactly what he and the party he led intended to do.
Indeed, FDR declared: "Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power."
No one gives up power readily, neither now nor then. Roosevelt knew the political and economic right of his era would accuse him of promoting socialism and communism. He also knew they would never stop doing so. Then, as now, power redistributed would be a contest, not a conversation. In 1936 Roosevelt confronted both corporate-rich Liberty Leaguers and pandering demagogues like Father Coughlin and Gerald L. K. Smith, all of whom cloaked themselves in real and verbal patriotic bunting. Roosevelt damned them for it: "In their blindness they forget what the Flag and Constitution stand for. Now, as always, they stand for democracy, not tyranny; for freedom, not subjection; and against a dictatorship by mob rule and the over-privileged alike."
Damned them puts it mildly. When the rich and reactionary -- the 1 percent and Tea Partiers of his day -- came after Roosevelt, as he predicted they would, he flatly declared, "They are unanimous in their hate for me -- and I welcome their hatred."
It has been said that those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. We are not so lucky. As the 2012 presidential contest enters its promissory stage, that drawn-out march to choreographed conventions, go back and read or listen to FDR in 1936.
Attend to what he said -- because post-1936, Roosevelt and his fellow citizens made good on a tremendous percent of his promises and a more equitable, democratic, stronger, freer and more resilient America was the result.
Expressing his faith in God and the American people, Roosevelt prophetically proclaimed, "There is a mysterious cycle in human events. To some generations much is given. Of other generations much is expected. This generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny."
Then, and in the decades that followed, Americans rejected reaction and demagoguery and carried out a political revolution.
We must do no less in 2012.
Americans had not imagined they would make a revolution when they voted for Roosevelt in 1932. They were simply seeking a way out of the Great Depression. They wanted action and they were ready to act.
Recognizing that, FDR engaged their democratic energies in the diverse labors and struggles of the New Deal -- vast and progressive labors of relief, recovery, reconstruction and reform. In fact, Roosevelt challenged Americans to transform America. And they not only did so. They also challenged him to go beyond what he himself had originally envisioned.
Re-electing Franklin Roosevelt to a second term with an unprecedented majority of votes, Americans were not just endorsing his New Deal. They were declaring their determination to continue to redeem America's promise and to transform the nation in progressively democratic ways.
Looking backward to the 1930s, we can rightly carp and complain. Standing in 1936 looking forward, we can rightly marvel and envy. Despite fierce conservative and corporate opposition, Roosevelt and his fellow Americans were well on the way to remaking America. They were subjecting big business and the banks to public account, empowering the federal government to address the needs of working people, establishing a social security system, organizing labor unions, improving the nation's public infrastructure and environment, refashioning popular culture, and imbuing themselves with fresh democratic convictions, hopes, and aspirations for the struggles to come.
But now, in 2012, we can only look forward -- either with hope and determination or with fear. Let's go with hope and determination, and start by metaphorically re-re-electing FDR of 1936.
Cast a vote to Re-re-elect FDR in 2012 by sending his words of 1936 to the candidates today. E-mail the link to the speech to Mitt Romney and/or President Barack Obama.
Even better, record yourself reading the lines of the speech you like the most and send the recording to the candidates. Best of all, record yourself reciting those words at a New Deal site -- in front of a bridge, a park, a post office, a school, a hospital, or a mural created by the CCC, WPA or PWA!
We no more know the history of the coming decade than FDR did back in 1936. What he and his generation of progressive Americans made sure of, however, was that America concretely deepened and strengthened its democratic institutions, broadened individual liberties, and rendered America freer, more equitable, and ever so much more aligned with its historic promise.
Make 2012 the new 1936!
Follow Harvey J. Kaye on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarveyJKaye
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
FDR had a 70+ Dem maority in the Senate. It was a breeze to pass all of his programs.
PBO didn't have a 60-vote majority in session until late Sept. 2009. Even then, there were still Blue Dogs to fight with. ACA was finally passed and Jan. 2010 Scott Brown took over Ted Kennedy's seat: no 60-vote majority again.
In this, as in every, election, candidates can say what they will. The limelight may be on them, but the ultimate responsibility is on us. Will we the people demand these rights that FDR so eloquently proclaimed? Or will we shirk our responsibility as citizens and "settle" for less?
Despite their misguided ways, at least the Tea Partiers have shaped the course of the leadership of the Right. The rest of us can do likewise, in a more reasoned, yet no less passionate way.
"True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish."
"The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit."
"Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits. These dark days will be worth all they cost us if they teach us that our true destiny is not to be ministered unto but to minister to ourselves and to our fellow men."
See a good discussion of Roosevelt at http://messenger.cjcmp.org/roosevelt.html
If a nation requires at least occasional greatness on the part of its leaders, that nation must be able to produce great individuals, encourage them to seek office, allow the public to recognize their merit and be able to reward them with electoral victory.
I have no doubt our country produces outstanding individuals. I have no doubt that many potentially great leaders are willing to serve. But our electoral system no longer *sees* their merit. Rather, our electoral system recognizes and rewards subservience to wealth as its primary -- and increasingly, sole -- criterion. Individuals are no longer being selected who demonstrate greatness, excellence, leadership, vision, independence. Our current choice -- between Obama and Romney -- is a choice between unremarkable men. Neither one is close to being the best the country can offer and neither one is who we need.
But, we've not bothered to keep our electoral system democratic; so these two may be all that we deserve. Our electoral system has been corrupted -- perhaps fatally -- by the power of money. If it is not fixed, nothing else can be. Can it be fixed? I don't know.
Politics in the first three-quarters of the 20th century were quite different from now. First- rich party bosses in smoke-filled rooms decided who was on the ticket and what the platform was. Money changed hands so fast only the clever fast-talkers knew what was what. Favors were exchanged and arms were twisted. And the public was none the wiser.
Now we demand transparency, despise backroom deals, secretly tape people at fundraisers, post videos online, make crap up that becomes truth to the ignorant and the Freedom of Information Act enables us to know what was once sacrosanct.
FDR was a smooth-talking rich boy who could convince the American people of anything because they were at their lowest. There was no Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid then. People were hurting and everything else had been tried by Hoover for over 3 years. FDR was an angel to them.
Then the Senate had over 70 Dems. They passed everything they could without ANY opposition. FDR even tried to change the number of Supreme Court judges- but that was a bridge too far and it was voted down.
President Obama had a completely different upbringing and therefore a different way of doing things. He wanted to work in tandem with the Republicans- and said so during the campaign. He didn't twist arms, threaten repercussions or bribe anyone to convince them to his way of thinking.
What needs to be played over and over is President Obama's hour-and-a-half confrontation of Republicans at their Baltimore conference on January 29, 2010. Now THAT was something even the vaunted FDR would NEVER have done.