The Anger of Compassion

Roosevelts and Capitalism

David Beito is asking the question: "Did Roosevelt save capitalism?"

I don't buy it. I have yet to see any evidence that the U.S. was ever on the verge of revolution either before or after the rise of FDR. In 1932, for example, the Communists and the Socialists (primary indicators of radical or revolutionary sentiment on the left) scored between them a measly 2.5 percent of the vote. They did not elect a single member to Congress.

In 1932, FDR campaigned on a platform that differed little from that Al Smith in 1928 or, for that matter, his opponent Herbert Hoover. While he vaguely promised an undefined New Deal, he just as often attacked Hoover as a spendthrift. Politicians who promised retrenchment and low taxes, such as Governor Harry G. Leslie of Indiana, were often just as popular at the polls as those who promised more government.

Good points, and they deserve to be made because the "he saved capitalism" claim gets tossed around all the time. Chris Mathews once used the phrase on G. Gordon Liddy's radio show, and Liddy, an alleged defender of freedom and capitalism, didn't contradict him. We need to get this one filed with the Choking Doberman, Alligators in the Sewers, and other urban legends.

Might be more appropriate, though, to ask how much capitalism was left for Roosevelt to save or to destroy. His immediate predecessor, Herbert Hoover, was quite the active meddler and interventionist (Beito points out that FDR attacked Hoover as a spendthrift). There's also that matter of a previous President Roosevelt, who enjoyed his own reputation as a trust-buster.

Posted by Craig Ceely at January 16, 2006 10:27 AM