Last night I started reading Hillsdale history professor Burt Folsom’s new book New Deal or Raw Deal? (It won’t be released until November 4, but I received an advance copy for review.)
Of interest to students and professors of history, in the first few chapters, Folsom’s account of the 1932 election raises numerous distressing parallels with 2008. Consider:
In 1932, the Democratic nominee (Franklin D. Roosevelt) was a silver-tongued orator who was completely unschooled in the principles of economics.
During the campaign, Roosevelt sometimes spoke of the importance of cutting taxes and government spending, while planning to increase both.
Roosevelt surrounded himself with a team of advisers ranging from standard liberal interventionists to hard-core socialists.
Roosevelt blamed the country’s problems on capitalism, business greed, and the mal-distribution of wealth.
Even though the Democrats had taken control of Congress two years before, they had nothing to do with the lengthening and deepening depression.
Intellectuals overwhelming and enthusiastically supported FDR’s vague but clearly socialistic agenda.
Roosevelt’s campaign capitalized on the fact that most of the people had no idea why the country was in crisis.
We know the results of the 1932 election. FDR and the Democrats swept everything, producing one-party government that produced a lot of legislative blunders that hobble us to this day (e.g., Social Security and the National Labor Relations Act) and a judiciary dominated by people enthralled with the coercive power of government.
