'Raw Deal': Historian makes waves with scathing look at Franklin D.
Roosevelt
Burton Folsom Jr.'s book livens up the 'tea party'-driven debate over how to
interpret America's past.
By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times 
February 12, 2011, 5:04 p.m.

Reporting from Dunwoody, Ga. -- For more than half a century, biographers
have treated Franklin Delano Roosevelt
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/franklin-delano-roosevelt-PEPLT005656
.topic>  with Rushmore-like reverence, celebrating the nation's 32nd
president as a colossus who eased the agony of the Great Depression and
saved democracy from Nazi Germany
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/parties-movements/nazi-party-ORCIG000
00044.topic> .

Which never sat right with historian Burton Folsom Jr.

Growing up in Nebraska, Folsom remembers, his dad, a savings and loan
executive, griped about high taxes and Roosevelt's voracious ambition. FDR
was dead, but his legacy -- deficit spending, an activist federal
government, an expansive social safety net -- lived on.

About 15 years ago, Folsom read another of those historical surveys, this
one placing Roosevelt on par with Abraham Lincoln
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/government/presidents-of-the-united-s
tates/abraham-lincoln-PEHST002241.topic>  and George Washington
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/george-washington-PEHST002264.topic>
. "As a matter of my professional integrity," Folsom said, "I had to
respond."

The result was "New Deal or Raw Deal?," a scathing 300-page
counter-narrative that has made Folsom a conservative hero and placed him
squarely in the midst of a roiling debate over America's past, the nature of
history and, some say, its manipulation for political ends.

It is an ancient debate spurred anew by the rise of the
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/tea-party-movement-ORCIG000068.topic>
"tea party" movement, which treats the Constitution as both cudgel and
sacred text; by TV commentators such as Glenn Beck
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/arts-culture/mass-media/news-media/glenn-beck-
PECLB00177647.topic> , who wrap their ideology in selective scholarship; and
by a current vogue among conservatives eager not just to revisit the past
but to rewrite it.

Many tea partyers, for instance, speak as though the Founders favored a
small, circumscribed federal government, when in fact some wanted a more
powerful Washington than we have today. (James Madison proposed a national
veto over state laws.) In a recent speech, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.)
extolled the Founding Fathers' efforts to end slavery, when they actually
made inequality the law, passing legislation counting blacks as three-fifths
of a person.

Misleading or not, the revisionism represents a scramble for the high
ground; in a country that reveres its history - even as we endlessly fight
over its meaning - there are few more powerful arguments than precedent.

"We're not discussing how many economic-stimulus plans we can balance on the
head of a pin," said the University of New Mexico
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/education/colleges-universities/university-of-
new-mexico-OREDU0000457.topic> 's Jason Scott Smith. "There can be
real-world consequences to the lessons we attempt to take from history."

Some scholars, however, worry the debate has been poisoned by the same
attitude afflicting political discourse: the notion that truth and virtue
reside on one side, and those who disagree are not just wrong but
un-American. In a new book, Harvard's Jill Lepore condemns what she calls
"historical fundamentalism," a belief that "a particular and quite narrowly
defined past" should be worshiped, unquestioned, above all others.

"There's an opportunity for an interesting national conversation about what
the past means to us," Lepore said. "But it needs to be a respectful
conversation."

That would seem to exclude the likes of Beck, who routinely heaps opprobrium
on FDR - "one evil son-of-a-bitch"; Woodrow Wilson
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/woodrow-wilson-PEPLT007150.topic>  -
the No. 1 "president you need to hate"; and other demons on the left.
"Trained historians try to take seriously the complexities of the past . and
not just reduce people to archvillains," said Randall Stephens, an Eastern
Nazarene College professor who edits Historically Speaking, a trade journal.

Folsom, whose book is a tea party must-read, is no armchair analyst. He
holds a doctorate in history, and he spent 10 years on research and compiled
40 pages of footnotes that, even critics say, attest to the depth of his
research.

Most historians agree the New Deal did not solve the economic crisis that
began in 1929 and lasted until the U.S. entry into World War II
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/unrest-conflicts-war/wars-interventions/world-
war-ii-%281939-1945%29-EVHST00000110.topic> . Many believe, however, that
Roosevelt's actions mitigated the suffering of many millions of Americans.

Further, they say, the New Deal's foundation helped make the U.S. the
world's richest, most powerful nation. "The record of the edifice built by
Roosevelt is mind-boggling," said Andrew W. Cohen, a New Deal scholar at
Syracuse University.

Folsom, an avid free-marketeer, couldn't disagree more. He says Roosevelt's
policies not only failed - undermining business, worsening unemployment,
contributing to higher crime and increased suicide rates - but, handed down,
choke our economy to this day.

At 63, in square, rimless glasses and an argyle sweater, Folsom is
professorial in both demeanor and dress: pleasant, unassuming and
unfailingly polite. He is not one to press his point by raising his voice or
lacing his arguments with invective.

The problem with most histories, Folsom said, is their focus on relief
efforts, without serious discussion of their financing. High tax rates,
approaching 80% of income on the wealthy, stifled entrepreneurs, he said,
and were - to use a modern phrase - "a job killer."

"That argument might resonate in today's environment," countered Smith, but
not so much in the 1930s, when only 3% of households paid income tax.

What, he asks, of feats like Hoover Dam, the Triborough Bridge
<http://www.latimes.com/topic/travel/commuting/triborough-bridge-NY050920080
36.topic>  and the span between Oakland and San Francisco? Those sorts of
public works not only created jobs, Smith said, but built a scaffolding that
still buttresses our economy.

Those projects had merit, Folsom agreed, but all the government did was
elbow out private industry, adding layers of inefficiency, corruption and
cost. "The good things that are there would have happened and, I think, in
greater abundance without the New Deal," he said.

Folsom has not won fame or riches with his FDR indictment. But it raised
Folsom's profile on TV and the lecture circuit, affording the luxury of
teaching half a year at Michigan's Hillsdale College, a conservative
citadel, and spending winters outside Atlanta, near his adult son. He is
writing a second Roosevelt book with his wife, Anita, criticizing his role
during World War II.

Folsom knows that many dismiss his work as little more than conservative
polemic. "I think the story I tell is the right story," he said, as soft
winter light filtered into his living room. "I want to present something
that's going to endure, and to endure you have to be accurate. You have to
have something that's going to be compelling 40, 50 years from now."

In other words, he suggested, history will judge.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-history-fdr-20110213,0,
461166.story 

-- 



 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to