Jump to content
270soft Forum
vcczar

#26 Theodore Roosevelt's Legacy

Teddy Roosevelt's Legacy  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. Which of the following Roosevelt decisions/events are positives for his legacy?

    • Signed a series of anti-trust regulations to weaken the grip of corporate monopolies
    • He was the first president to regularly visit the people to appeal them to pressure Congress to support his legislation--setting the precedence for executive as activist
    • His Square Deal programs worked to balance the interests of labor/business, developer/conservationist, etc.
    • First president to strongly believe in using government resources to help with economic and social justice
    • Signed numerous conservation bills to protect the environment
    • Signed the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food & Drug Act
    • Although, he vocalized support for African-American rights, he opted not to get involved in race relations in the South
    • Established the Panama Canal
    • Created the Roosevelt Corrollary to the Monroe Doctrine, stating that the US would intervene in Latin American countries with economic problems
    • Played the role as mediator & peacemaker between countries; despite building up the navy, he never opted for war as an instrument to increase US influence
    • Tried to remove references of God on currency, as he believed it to be sacrilegious and unconstitutional.
    • Swiftly reacted to the Panic of 1907 by allowing JP Morgan to intervene, and by signing the Aldrich-Vreeland Act, which established a commission which recommended a Federal Reserve Bank.
    • Created the FBI
    • Threatened to send troops to break up a Coal Strike
    • Signed the expediting act to move trustbusting cases (anti-monopoly) to the top priority cases automatically.
    • Mediated the end of the Russo-Japanese War, setting a precedence for leading international mediation
    • Navy increased from 5th largest to 2nd largest, behind the UK
    • Saw the passage of the first campaign finance bill
    • Sent the Great White Fleet around the world, and to major international ports, to show the world our 1st class navy
    • None of the above
  2. 2. Part 2 of the above

    • Occupies the Philippines after winning a brief war there; appoint William Taft to govern and modernize the islands.
    • Invaded the Dominican Republic
    • Held Peace Talks at the White House to prevent a possible war between UK and Germany
    • Intimidated the Ottoman Empire with the US Navy to give American missionaries equal treatment with European missionaries
    • Supported a rebellion in Panama
    • Set a precedence by sending a legal agreement for international settlement to the Hague, Netherlands.
    • Reformed the military to promote by merit rather than by seniority
    • Easily won reelection, and easily could have had a 3rd term, but allowed his hand-picked successor, William Taft, to take over.
    • Kept McKinley's best cabinet members, Elihu Root and John Hay, both considered among the best.
    • Appointed Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr to the Supreme Court, generally considered one of the most influential justices in US History
    • Went from a surplus to a deficit
      0
    • Greatly restricted Japanese immigration in 1907, after which Green Cards in general drastically fell
    • Signed legislation to greatly improve the infrastructure of less developed regions of the US
    • Nationalistic, favoring large nationwide modernization projects and other national efforts.
    • Strongly advocated the arts and sciences
    • Often considered the first modern president, by maintaining executive power and activity, even in peace time.
    • None of the above
  3. 3. In general, your opinion of Roosevelt's legacy is...



Recommended Posts

From now on, I'll put up a new presidential poll after 12 votes:

@Patine @jvikings1 @Reagan04 @Dallas @Sanser2016 @CalebsParadox @lok1999 @jnewt @ThePotatoWalrus  @SiorafasNaCillini @servo75 @Presidentinsertname @Falcon @Take Me to La Riva @TheMiddlePolitical @Zach @Sunnymentoaddict @streiner @Conservative Elector 2 @Jayavarman @SeanFKennedy @QuickHead555 @goTBrays @warren2016 @victor1313 @TheLiberalKitten @Biden Should've Run @wolves @Socialist Bernie @Mordechai @michaelsdiamonds @chunkbuster11 @admin_270 @VanMav @pilight

Here's the new poll, which will be used towards a forum ranking. 

All previous presidents have polls in this forum with the number of their presidency before their name.

Please take these polls if you have not done so already. 

If anyone needs clarification/definition of an event/decision, then I'll be glad to provide one. 

****NOTE: IF YOU COULD NOT TAKE THE JAMES BUCHANAN POLL, PLEASE LOOK AT THE QUESTIONS AND LET ME KNOW WHICH EVENTS/DECISIONS (IF ANY) YOU AGREE WITH AS WELL AS YOUR ANSWERS TO QUESTION 2 and 3. You can PM me. THANKS! (I need one more vote)**** 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine how different the country would have been if TR had:

- Not opted out of a 3rd term, and ran for reelection in 1908. 

- Had defeated Taft and Wilson in his even more progressive incarnation in 1912. 

- Had not suddenly died in 1919 at the age of 60, and won the nomination in 1920 (he was the presumed frontrunner before he died). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always wondered: had Teddy ran and won the '08 election would the GoP become the leftwing party of the US, and the Democratic Party becomes the rightwing party.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

I've always wondered: had Teddy ran and won the '08 election would the GoP become the leftwing party of the US, and the Democratic Party becomes the rightwing party.  

Instead when he decided to run in 1912 and failed to get the nomination, he stubbornly ran as a third party candidate, splitting the Republican ticket and put Woodrow Wilson into office, dragging the Democrats to the left forever.  Technically that can't affect my ranking of him since he wasn't in office, but I greatly dislike him for that selfish move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pilight said:

Teddy Roosevelt was the first president to leave the country while in office

No, it was McKinley. He had family-owned vacation property in rural Quebec he sometimes retreated to while in office. It just may not have been included because he wasn't doing "presidential duties" while there, even though he was in office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Instead when he decided to run in 1912 and failed to get the nomination, he stubbornly ran as a third party candidate, splitting the Republican ticket and put Woodrow Wilson into office, dragging the Democrats to the left forever.  Technically that can't affect my ranking of him since he wasn't in office, but I greatly dislike him for that selfish move.

I have the same feeling towards his 3rd party run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Instead when he decided to run in 1912 and failed to get the nomination, he stubbornly ran as a third party candidate, splitting the Republican ticket and put Woodrow Wilson into office, dragging the Democrats to the left forever.  Technically that can't affect my ranking of him since he wasn't in office, but I greatly dislike him for that selfish move.

For his lack of party loyalty and not accepting the party nomination, whomever that maybe. You probably know by now, from some of my other posts, my feeling on the value of "party loyalty" when put above other concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patine said:

For his lack of party loyalty and not accepting the party nomination, whomever that maybe. You probably know by now, from some of my other posts, my feeling on the value of "party loyalty" when put above other concerns.

It is more than that.  He was acting like a sore looser.  He didn't get his way, so he was going to show them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None, none, negative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

It is more than that.  He was acting like a sore looser.  He didn't get his way, so he was going to show them.

Even outside of "sore loser" and "bullheaded stubbornness," considering Roosevelt literally got 11 times as many Electoral Votes as Taft, from a strictly strategic, pragmatic, politically expedient point of view, the party convention may have selected the inferior candidate. Also, Constitutionally, no one is required to win a primary election, be nominated by a party convention, or otherwise jump through any partisan hoops to be allowed to run for US President. I remind you again, the US Constitution doesn't mention political parties in any way, shape, or form ONCE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Patine said:

Also, Constitutionally, no one is required to win a primary election, be nominated by a party convention, or otherwise jump through any partisan hoops to be allowed to run for US President. I remind you again, the US Constitution doesn't mention political parties in any way, shape, or form ONCE.

This is all true, and yes I'd like to see an end to political parties, but the point is that his ego led to the loss of a moderate like Taft to the Socialist Woodrow Wilson.  Roosevelt was angry that his hand-picked successor didn't continue his own policies, how dare Taft betray him like that, well I'll show him, I'll go against him in the Primaries.  Again, he was all ego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, servo75 said:

Instead when he decided to run in 1912 and failed to get the nomination, he stubbornly ran as a third party candidate, splitting the Republican ticket and put Woodrow Wilson into office, dragging the Democrats to the left forever.  Technically that can't affect my ranking of him since he wasn't in office, but I greatly dislike him for that selfish move.

"Failed to get the nomination", which is to say Taft rigged the convention to ensure his renomination.  This was before primaries were prevalent, and Roosevelt dominated the few primaries that were held.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, servo75 said:

This is all true, and yes I'd like to see an end to political parties, but the point is that his ego led to the loss of a moderate like Taft to the Socialist Woodrow Wilson.  Roosevelt was angry that his hand-picked successor didn't continue his own policies, how dare Taft betray him like that, well I'll show him, I'll go against him in the Primaries.  Again, he was all ego.

Wilson was a Socialist? Again, I think your lack of objective and comprehensive knowledge or education (or perhaps biased manipulation of such by those teaching you) of the political spectrum and how it really works and what it's different stances and positions really mean has been betrayed again. But, unfortunately, this is a growing problem among many Americans today, and it's becoming a liability for the nation as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teddy Roosevelt is in my bottom 10 for being probably the biggest antithesis of Libertarianism ever to sit in the White House.  An egomaniac who was a foreign policy interventionist and took it upon himself to ignore the Constitution and rule by Presidential fiat.



First president to strongly believe in using government resources to help with economic and social justice
Is this a good thing? I have yet to see anyone define those terms, but it’s not the Federal government’s business to define them or interfere with the economy.

Signed numerous conservation bills to protect the environment
Nearly half of Western land is owned by the Federal government, this is not conservation it’s an unconstitutional land grab.

Signed the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food & Drug Act
This was based purely on hysteria created by “The Jungle,” Socialist propaganda written by a man who had never set foot inside a meat packing plant, based legislation on fiction – we already had meat inspection but the large meat companies loved it because the smaller packers couldn’t afford the inspection, which had the consequence of putting the “little guy” out of business.

Established the Panama Canal, Created the Roosevelt Corrollary to the Monroe Doctrine, stating that the US would intervene in Latin American countries with economic problems

A radical interventionist and a neocon, interfering with the revolt in Columbia to get his precious Panama Canal to satisfy his egomaniacal lust for power.  He had the notion that it’s somehow our job to not only be the world’s police, but to meddle in the affairs of other countries in the name of “civilizing” them.  Just look at the list from this survey:

Invaded the Dominican Republic

Intimidated the Ottoman Empire with the US Navy to give American missionaries equal treatment with European missionaries

Mediated the end of the Russo-Japanese War, setting a precedence for leading international mediation

Occupies the Philippines after winning a brief war there; appoint William Taft to govern and modernize the islands.

Supported a rebellion in Panama

So Roosevelt was an egomaniacal neoconservative who tried to be a one-man foreign policy, and then went rogue when Congress didn't give him what he wanted.  “Supported a Panama rebellion” is an understatement – he directly intervened to get access to build the canal, in a sense entering a treaty and building the canal with no Congressional approval.    He set the stage for modern leftism.  Basically the United States are the World’s police force, Roosevelt can intervene at will without consulting Congress.  And who the hell is he to dictate that it’s up to us (and by us I mean him) to “modernize” countries that aren’t up to our “standards”?  He acted like an interventionist dictator. Here’s a quote he gave about the Panama Canal:

“Because, gentlemen, if I had followed the general or conservative method, I should have submitted an admirable state paper, occupying a couple of hundred pages detailing the facts to Congress and asked Congress consideration of it, in which there would have been a number of excellent speeches made on the subject in congress and the debate would be proceeding at this moment with great spirit, and the beginning of the canal would be fifty years in the future.”  Fortunately the crisis came when I could begin the work unhampered. I took the Isthmus, started the canal, and then left Congress not to debate the canal, but to debate me."

 

Note the use of the word “I”:  It’s all about him, he was hell-bent on nation-building and he wasn’t going to let that pesky Constitution get in his way.  Translation: “Well I could have done things the right way through the Constitution, but then it might get bogged down in dumb things like legality, Democratic debate, budgeting and separation of powers, but we can’t have that, so instead of letting a good crisis go to waste, I capitalized on the revolt in Panama, interfering in a sovereign nation and made a unilateral treaty without consulting Congress, acted like an international dictator and built it myself, so now the damage is done and all that’s left to do is debate me and you can’t do anything about it, so naaaah!”

Often considered the first modern president, by maintaining executive power and activity, even in peace time


Yes and therein lies the problem – he set the stage for the “modern” view of the President as a legislator who completely ignored separation of powers in the name of “Progress”

Easily won reelection, and easily could have had a 3rd term, but allowed his hand-picked successor, William Taft, to take over.


And then when Taft dared to bring the Office of the President to heel and roll back TR’s unconstitutional “reform”, he threw a hissy fit and tried to get the nomination back.  Technically not part of my evaluation, but his actions in 1912 are symptomatic of his Presidency – he was a loudmouthed bully who just intervened on his own when he didn’t get his way.

Other overreaches:

The food police
The spelling police - actually tried to change the spelling of "complicated" words by Presidential decree
Although technically not part of my rating, the splitting of the GOP ticket in 1912 which led to the election of a racist progressive socialist, sowing the seeds for FDR, LBJ, and Obama.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Patine said:

Wilson was a Socialist? Again, I think your lack of objective and comprehensive knowledge or education (or perhaps biased manipulation of such by those teaching you) of the political spectrum and how it really works and what it's different stances and positions really mean has been betrayed again. But, unfortunately, this is a growing problem among many Americans today, and it's becoming a liability for the nation as a whole.

Yeah, when people claim someone is a socialist that isn't a socialist, that's when you tune that person out. There's no reason to waste one's energy listening to ravings. '

Wilson was actually a Bourbon Democrat (Grover Cleveland Democrat) for much of his career. His transformation into progressivism was more of a means to get to the presidency. I do think he ultimately believed it to be the right way to go, once he was on that path. 

and @pilight is right. The 1912 Republican primary was totally rigged against Roosevelt. Taft won 2 primary states, TR won 9, and La Follette won 2. Despite a 3-way race, Roosevelt won over 50% of the popular vote in the primary. Taft ran the table in the closed convention ballots, where the party bosses believed they could control Taft. I don't blame TR for running 3rd party. 1) There was a chance Taft would drop out and support TR before election day. 2) In many ways, Wilson was more progressive than Taft, which would be a sort of win for Roosevelt. 

As far as it being selfish, I do believe that was part of it as well. I don't think any other figure at the time would have done what TR had done, but no one else was like TR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Teddy Roosevelt is in my bottom 10 for being probably the biggest antithesis of Libertarianism ever to sit in the White House.  An egomaniac who was a foreign policy interventionist and took it upon himself to ignore the Constitution and rule by Presidential fiat.

 

 

 

 


First president to strongly believe in using government resources to help with economic and social justice
Is this a good thing? I have yet to see anyone define those terms, but it’s not the Federal government’s business to define them or interfere with the economy.

 

 

Signed numerous conservation bills to protect the environment
Nearly half of Western land is owned by the Federal government, this is not conservation it’s an unconstitutional land grab.

 

Signed the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food & Drug Act
This was based purely on hysteria created by “The Jungle,” Socialist propaganda written by a man who had never set foot inside a meat packing plant, based legislation on fiction – we already had meat inspection but the large meat companies loved it because the smaller packers couldn’t afford the inspection, which had the consequence of putting the “little guy” out of business.

 

 

 

Established the Panama Canal, Created the Roosevelt Corrollary to the Monroe Doctrine, stating that the US would intervene in Latin American countries with economic problems

 

A radical interventionist and a neocon, interfering with the revolt in Columbia to get his precious Panama Canal to satisfy his egomaniacal lust for power.  He had the notion that it’s somehow our job to not only be the world’s police, but to meddle in the affairs of other countries in the name of “civilizing” them.  Just look at the list from this survey:

Invaded the Dominican Republic

Intimidated the Ottoman Empire with the US Navy to give American missionaries equal treatment with European missionaries

Mediated the end of the Russo-Japanese War, setting a precedence for leading international mediation

Occupies the Philippines after winning a brief war there; appoint William Taft to govern and modernize the islands.

Supported a rebellion in Panama

So Roosevelt was an egomaniacal neoconservative who tried to be a one-man foreign policy, and then went rogue when Congress didn't give him what he wanted.  “Supported a Panama rebellion” is an understatement – he directly intervened to get access to build the canal, in a sense entering a treaty and building the canal with no Congressional approval.    He set the stage for modern leftism.  Basically the United States are the World’s police force, Roosevelt can intervene at will without consulting Congress.  And who the hell is he to dictate that it’s up to us (and by us I mean him) to “modernize” countries that aren’t up to our “standards”?  He acted like an interventionist dictator. Here’s a quote he gave about the Panama Canal:

 

“Because, gentlemen, if I had followed the general or conservative method, I should have submitted an admirable state paper, occupying a couple of hundred pages detailing the facts to Congress and asked Congress consideration of it, in which there would have been a number of excellent speeches made on the subject in congress and the debate would be proceeding at this moment with great spirit, and the beginning of the canal would be fifty years in the future.”  Fortunately the crisis came when I could begin the work unhampered. I took the Isthmus, started the canal, and then left Congress not to debate the canal, but to debate me."

 

 

Note the use of the word “I”:  It’s all about him, he was hell-bent on nation-building and he wasn’t going to let that pesky Constitution get in his way.  Translation: “Well I could have done things the right way through the Constitution, but then it might get bogged down in dumb things like legality, Democratic debate, budgeting and separation of powers, but we can’t have that, so instead of letting a good crisis go to waste, I capitalized on the revolt in Panama, interfering in a sovereign nation and made a unilateral treaty without consulting Congress, acted like an international dictator and built it myself, so now the damage is done and all that’s left to do is debate me and you can’t do anything about it, so naaaah!”

 

 

 

Often considered the first modern president, by maintaining executive power and activity, even in peace time

 


Yes and therein lies the problem – he set the stage for the “modern” view of the President as a legislator who completely ignored separation of powers in the name of “Progress”

 

Easily won reelection, and easily could have had a 3rd term, but allowed his hand-picked successor, William Taft, to take over.

 


And then when Taft dared to bring the Office of the President to heel and roll back TR’s unconstitutional “reform”, he threw a hissy fit and tried to get the nomination back.  Technically not part of my evaluation, but his actions in 1912 are symptomatic of his Presidency – he was a loudmouthed bully who just intervened on his own when he didn’t get his way.

Other overreaches:

The food police
The spelling police - actually tried to change the spelling of "complicated" words by Presidential decree
Although technically not part of my rating, the splitting of the GOP ticket in 1912 which led to the election of a racist progressive socialist, sowing the seeds for FDR, LBJ, and Obama.

 

I can't help but sometimes think, and it sometimes you come across to me, as though you care much more about the CONSTITUTION of the US in it's "pure" form (or how you see it's pure form) than the actual PEOPLE of the US (and their desires, needs, and zeitgeist at any given time) or even the US as a NATION, in and of itself. This viewpoint that I glean from your posts disturbs me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patine said:

I can't help but sometimes think, and it sometimes you come across to me, as though you care much more about the CONSTITUTION of the US in it's "pure" form (or how you see it's pure form) than the actual PEOPLE of the US (and their desires, needs, and zeitgeist at any given time) or even the US as a NATION, in and of itself. This viewpoint that I glean from your posts disturbs me...

Well you have the right to that opinion.  I think you've inaccurately characterized my viewpoint but I've made my point on the Constitution painfully clear several times.  The Constitution in its pure form DOES protect citizens, and if you don't believe me then repeal it but then don't complain when you lose your right to free speech.  My point is that this isn't a buffet.  The fact is we have a written Constitution which isn't perfect but I think most Americans would rather have it than not, because the alternative is letting people cherry-pick which laws they like and which ones they don't, and once you go down that path we're no longer a nation of laws.  If you think something needs to be added or removed, then by all means, we've been having that discussion for weeks.  But if we don't strictly interpret it as it exists at any given time, then we're making the law up as we go along - that is more dangerous than any bad amendment  someone can point out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Patine

I'm wondering why you gave him a mixed score. 

@everyone else 

We just need one more vote. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vcczar said:

@pilightYeah, when people claim someone is a socialist that isn't a socialist, that's when you tune that person out.

 

So why do you keep responding to me?  For someone who finds my opinion so reprehensible (I think un-American was how you put it) that you need to enter a safe space and block me, you seem awfully interested in what I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patine said:

Wilson was a Socialist? Again, I think your lack of objective and comprehensive knowledge or education (or perhaps biased manipulation of such by those teaching you) of the political spectrum and how it really works and what it's different stances and positions really mean has been betrayed again. But, unfortunately, this is a growing problem among many Americans today, and it's becoming a liability for the nation as a whole.

I probably meant to say Progressive - they're both equally bad in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, vcczar said:

@Patine

I'm wondering why you gave him a mixed score. 

@everyone else 

We just need one more vote. 

I moreso gave him a mixed score because he gleefully continued McKinley's attitude of Imperialism (albeit, mostly restricted to a paternalistic attitude to Latin America, but his policy on the Philippines and the circumstances around the 1899 Treaty of Paris  that aren't often brought up in the US), as well as his egotistical personality and flamboyance, which strikes me must have been reminiscent of Trump, if not the same policies and platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, servo75 said:

I probably meant to say Progressive - they're both equally bad in my view.

If being politically 'progressive,' is inherently and always bad, and to be condemned at every juncture, consider that by pure definition of the word, there are only two alternative points of view - 'static' and 'regressive,' and I suppose, you could add 'degenerative' as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Patine said:

I moreso gave him a mixed score because he gleefully continued McKinley's attitude of Imperialism (albeit, mostly restricted to a paternalistic attitude to Latin America, but his policy on the Philippines and the circumstances around the 1899 Treaty of Paris  that aren't often brought up in the US), as well as his egotistical personality and flamboyance, which strikes me must have been reminiscent of Trump, if not the same policies and platform.

Both McKInley and TR were under the influence of three major theorists at the time:

  • Alfred Thayer Mahan, who wrote a groundbreaking book on the history of sea power. The nation with the largest navy controls the world. Mahan pointed out the naval chokepoints and likely naval bases needed to dominate the Western Hemisphere. 
  • Brooks Adams, grandson of JQ Adams and great-grandson of John Adams, who added an economic and political component. He also accurately predicted the rise of Russia as a great power, World Wars. He was one of those historians that believed America had a destiny larger than itself, and that it must go global. He was also a critic of capitalism, which helped lead to many of TR's anti-trust and other laws and regulations. 
  • Henry Cabot Lodge, Senator of Massachusetts, and grandfather of Nixon's VP-nominee of the same name. He basically took in these theories first and was the primary advocate of the American Empire in the Senate. He got into McKinley and Roosevelt's head early and often. 

There's a difference in how McKinley and Roosevelt took in this information. TR read all of these people and knew them personally. He was equally an intellectual as he was "that damn cowboy." McKinley, no intellectual, may not have read these guys, but he certainly allowed himself to be influenced. McKinley was considered to be extremely impressionable, easily influence, and, as TR said, "had the backbone of an eclair." While his presidency is generally consider by historians as better than average, he really wasn't a natural executive. He was probably a better legislator. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Patine said:

If being politically 'progressive,' is inherently and always bad, and to be condemned at every juncture, consider that by pure definition of the word, there are only two alternative points of view - 'static' and 'regressive,' and I suppose, you could add 'degenerative' as well.

That depends of course on how you define "progressive."  There are shades of gray to everything.  I'm a social progressive on most things but a conservative on things like the economy and the Constitution.  I disagree with "change simply for change's sake."  Personally, I have differing beliefs on different issues.  For example, I'm a social progressive in that I believe in the legalization of same-sex marriage and the end of drug prohibition.  I'm static in that I think our current form of government should be preserved, and I suppose you could say that I'm "regressive" in my belief that we've lost our moral compass and respect for founding principles as a nation.  Early 20th Century progressives like Wilson and the Roosevelts believed that the Constitution was somehow outmoded and ancient, and needed to be "reinterpreted" to fit with modern times but no one can define what they meant by those things or give a single concrete example of any aspect of modern life that the Constitution is unable to handle, even with amendments. So to me, it comes off as intellectual laziness.  The reason that I think that Wilson, FDR, TR and LBJ are such horrible POTUS is because their actions have opened the door to the belief that our whole system of government needs to be re-defined for a reason that I haven't heard anyone articulate beyond abstract feelings and emotion.  For example modern Progressives are under the notion that workers "deserve" a $15 minimum wage simply because the business owners have a lot of money and therefore we've determined that they "don't really need" it and that the government needs to redistribute wealth because they have taken it upon themselves to arbitrarily define the words "rich" and "fair." The difference between myself and progressives then, is that I separate the bad old stuff like slavery and lack of modern conveniences from the good old stuff like the principles of our founding.  Modern Progressives, in my opinion, do not distinguish between the two.  They go from social change to "we don't need the Constitution anymore" without explaining what the middle step is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×