Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Over 18 ONLY! For grown-ups. . .

Moderators: Sluggo, Amskeptic

steve74baywin
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by steve74baywin » Tue May 17, 2011 6:58 am

This is a long one.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=1440
Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud
By James Bovard
View all 26 articles by James Bovard
Published 05/13/11

Bookmark and Share Printer-friendly version

President Obama has succeeded in seizing new power over health care and other swaths of American lives in part because previous presidents muddied Americans' understanding of freedom.

Most of the past century's debates over the meaning of liberty have featured one politician after another who promised people true freedom, if only they would submit to increased government power. In the process, politicians have been generously shrinking people's individual liberty.

The clearest political turning point in the American understanding of freedom came during the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt. He often invoked freedom, but almost always as a pretext for increasing government power. He proclaimed in 1933, "We have all suffered in the past from individualism run wild." Naturally, the corrective was to allow government to run wild.

Roosevelt declared in a 1934 fireside chat, "I am not for a return of that definition of liberty under which for many years a free people were being gradually regimented into the service of the privileged few." Politicians such as Roosevelt began by telling people that control of their own lives was a mirage; thus, they lost nothing when government took over.

In his renomination acceptance speech at the 1936 Democratic Party convention, Roosevelt declared that "the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties ... created a new despotism.... The hours men and women worked, the wages they received, the conditions of their labor -- these had passed beyond the control of the people, and were imposed by this new industrial dictatorship." But if wages were completely dictated by the "industrial dictatorship" -- why were pay rates higher in the United States than anywhere else in the world, and why had pay rates increased rapidly in the decades before 1929? Roosevelt never considered limiting government intervention to safeguarding individual choice; instead, he favored multiplying power to impose "government-knows-best" dictates on work hours, wages, and contracts.


New improved freedom

On January 6, 1941, he gave his famous "Four Freedoms" speech, promising citizens freedom of speech, freedom of worship -- and then he got creative: "The third [freedom] is freedom from want ... everywhere in the world. The fourth is freedom from fear ... anywhere in the world." Proclaiming a goal of freedom from fear meant that the government henceforth must fill the role in daily life previously filled by God and religion. His list was clearly intended as a "replacement set" of freedoms, since otherwise there would have been no reason to mention freedom of speech and worship, already protected by the First Amendment.

Roosevelt's list of new freedoms liberated government while making a pretense of liberating the citizen. It offered citizens no security from the state, since it completely ignored the rights protected by the Second Amendment (the right to keep and bear firearms), the Fourth Amendment (freedom from unreasonable search and seizure), the Fifth Amendment (due process, property rights, the right against self-incrimination), the Sixth Amendment (the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury), and the Eighth Amendment (protection against excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishments). Roosevelt's revised freedoms also ignored the Ninth Amendment, which specifies that the listing of "certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people," as well as the Tenth Amendment, which specified that "powers not delegated" to the federal government are reserved to the states or to the people.

And, even though Roosevelt included freedom of speech in his new, improved list of progressive freedoms, he added,

A free nation has the right to expect full cooperation from all groups.... ... We must especially beware of that small group of selfish men who would clip the wings of the American eagle in order to feather their own nests....

The best way of dealing with the few slackers or troublemakers in our midst is, first, to shame them by patriotic example, and, if that fails, to use the sovereignty of government to save government.

Thus, the "new freedom" required that government have power to suppress any group not actively supporting the government's goals. (The United States was still at peace at the time of Roosevelt's speech.) The expansions of freedoms in the list were promised to the whole world -- primarily people who did not vote in U.S. elections -- while the implicit contractions of previously sanctified freedoms would affect only Americans.

Roosevelt elaborated on his concept of freedom in his 1944 State of the Union address. He declared that the original Bill of Rights had "proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness." He called for a "Second Bill of Rights," and asserted, "True individual freedom can't exist without economic security." And security, according to Roosevelt, included "the right to a useful and remunerative job," "decent home," "good health," and "good education." Thus, if a government school did not teach all fifth-graders to read, the nonreaders would be considered oppressed. Or, if someone was in bad health, then that person would be considered as having been deprived of his freedom, and somehow it would be seen as the government's fault. Roosevelt also declared that liberty requires "the right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living" -- a nonsensical concept that would require setting food prices high enough to keep the nation's least efficient farmer behind his mule and plow.

Roosevelt clarified the necessary underpinnings of his new freedom when, in the same speech, he called for Congress to enact a "national service law -- which for the duration of the war ... will make available for war production or for any other essential services every able-bodied adult in this Nation." He promised that this proposal, described in his official papers as a Universal Conscription Act, would be a "unifying moral force" and "a means by which every man and woman can find that inner satisfaction which comes from making the fullest possible contribution to victory." Presumably, the less freedom people had, the more satisfaction they would enjoy.

Commenting on foreign policy, Roosevelt praised Soviet Russia as one of the "freedom-loving Nations" and stressed that Marshal Stalin was "thoroughly conversant with the provisions of our Constitution." Roosevelt's concept of freedom required people to blindly trust their leaders -- a trust he greatly abused. He also denounced those Americans with "suspicious souls" who feared that he had "made ‘commitments' for the future which might pledge this Nation to secret treaties" at the summit of Allied leaders in Tehran the previous month. But at that summit, he had secretly agreed to allow Stalin to move the Soviet border far to the West -- thus consigning millions of Poles to life under direct Soviet rule. (Roosevelt and Stalin used roughly the same dividing line that Hitler and Stalin had used in 1939 to divide Poland into Nazi and Soviet spheres.)


Praise for increased power

Though Roosevelt continually seized power long after he gave the Four Freedoms speech, that oration is the one that is most frequently invoked by subsequent presidents to sanctify their own power grabs. President George H.W. Bush, speaking on the 50th anniversary of the Four Freedoms speech, called Roosevelt "our greatest American political pragmatist" and praised him for having "brilliantly enunciated the 20th-century vision of our Founding Fathers' commitment to individual liberty." The elder Bush loved to invoke the Four Freedoms speech in his appeals to vastly expand the federal war on drug users.

President Clinton declared in October 1996,

In Franklin Roosevelt's view, government should be the perfect public system for fostering and protecting the "Four Freedoms".... Roosevelt ... enumerated these freedoms not as abstract ideals but as goals toward which Americans -- and caring people everywhere -- could direct their most strenuous public efforts.

In other speeches, Clinton made it clear that the government needed vastly more power to give Americans "freedom from fear" (except for fear of the government).

Roosevelt's Four Freedoms speech provides a push-button invocation for any U.S. president who wants to sound as though he cares about liberty. President George W. Bush invoked Roosevelt in perhaps his most fraudulent speech -- his "Mission Accomplished" strut aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln in May 2003:

Our commitment to liberty is America's tradition -- declared at our founding; affirmed in Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms; asserted in the Truman Doctrine and in Ronald Reagan's challenge to an evil empire.... When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life. American values and American interests lead in the same direction: We stand for human liberty.

And any Iraqi or Afghan who refused to submit to the Bush-definition of freedom automatically forfeited his right to live.

Bush also invoked Roosevelt in his November 2003 speech to the National Endowment for Democracy celebrating its 20 years of interfering with foreign elections: "The advance of freedom is the calling of our time; it is the calling of our country. From the Fourteen Points to the Four Freedoms ... America has put our power at the service of principle. We believe that liberty is the design of nature; we believe that liberty is the direction of history."

Bush had a great belief in freedom in the abstract, as long as no one tried to meddle with his boundless power. For Bush to be invoking freedom -- after he suspended habeas corpus, authorized torture, and destroyed much of Americans' privacy -- was typical of the shenanigans that politicians have long gotten away with in this country.

Bush again invoked Roosevelt in a March 2005 speech to the National Defense University, trying to vindicate his war on terror as part of "a consistent theme of American strategy -- from [President Wilson's] Fourteen Points, to the Four Freedoms, to the Marshall plan, to the Reagan Doctrine.... We are confident that the desire for freedom, even when repressed for generations, is present in every human heart."

Bush may have given this particular speech to a military audience because the officers knew that they could not laugh outloud at his absurdities without wrecking their careers. Unfortunately, Americans are still paying a price because Franklin Roosevelt's freedom demagoguery was not laughed off the national stage decades ago.

H.L. Mencken wisely observed, "One horse-laugh is worth ten thousand syllogisms." Any politician who seeks more power now to give people more freedom at some distant future point deserves all the derision Americans can heap upon him. Citizens should not tolerate any president who invokes freedom as he tramples the Bill of Rights.

User avatar
turk
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by turk » Tue May 17, 2011 8:39 am

Good read. I did not know of this tripe before ("Four Freedoms"). Makes me want to quote George Orwell. Is it any wonder Orwell's genius was inspired in those times? I'll just define Doublethink: The acceptance of or mental capacity to accept contrary opinions or beliefs at the same time, esp. as a result of political indoctrination.
Also nice quote by Mencken at the end.
A man said to the universe, "Sir I exist! "However," replied the universe, "the fact has not created in me a sense of obligation."

"Let me be perfectly clear" "[...] And so that was just a example of a new senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country." Barry Sotero

steve74baywin
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by steve74baywin » Tue May 17, 2011 11:24 am

turk wrote:Good read. I did not know of this tripe before ("Four Freedoms"). Makes me want to quote George Orwell. Is it any wonder Orwell's genius was inspired in those times? I'll just define Doublethink: The acceptance of or mental capacity to accept contrary opinions or beliefs at the same time, esp. as a result of political indoctrination.
Also nice quote by Mencken at the end.
Good catch on the doublethink. I didn't really think of that, or I took it for granted.

User avatar
Amskeptic
IAC "Help Desk"
IAC "Help Desk"
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by Amskeptic » Tue May 17, 2011 2:44 pm

steve74baywin wrote:This is a long one.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=1440
Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud
By James Bovard
Roosevelt declared that "the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties ... created a new despotism.... The hours men and women worked, the wages they received, the conditions of their labor -- these had passed beyond the control of the people, and were imposed by this new industrial dictatorship." But if wages were completely dictated by the "industrial dictatorship" -- why were pay rates higher in the United States than anywhere else in the world,
This rebuttal to Roosevelt deserves a greater savaging than I am able to offer right now, but the logic leaps are sophistry to the extreme.
If you fall for this horseshit, then you have no fucking heart for the lives of millions of real human beings who had to live through the Depression while the rich partied on.
I have no patience for the heartless.
Colin
BobD - 78 Bus . . . 112,730 miles
Chloe - 70 bus . . . 217,593 miles
Naranja - 77 Westy . . . 142,970 miles
Pluck - 1973 Squareback . . . . . . 55,600 miles
Alexus - 91 Lexus LS400 . . . 96,675 miles

steve74baywin
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by steve74baywin » Tue May 17, 2011 3:05 pm

Amskeptic wrote: This rebuttal to Roosevelt deserves a greater savaging than I am able to offer right now, but the logic leaps are sophistry to the extreme.
If you fall for this horseshit, then you have no fucking heart for the lives of millions of real human beings who had to live through the Depression while the rich partied on.
I have no patience for the heartless.
Colin
I am not sure of this logic. "If you fall for this horseshit, then you have no fucking heart for the lives of millions of real human beings who had to live through the Depression"
If I think a certain theory back in time is true, I don't have a heart?
Nothing else to add.
Except this, I am one step closer perhaps to figuring out how come so many get all mean and nasty so quick on this forum lately.

User avatar
ruckman101
Lord God King Bwana
Location: Up next to a volcano.
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by ruckman101 » Tue May 17, 2011 3:28 pm

James Bovard has been or is an Associate Policy Analyst at Cato Institute, an Adjunct Analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and on the Advisory Board of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow.

Another shill for corporate interests.


neal
The slipper has no teeth.

steve74baywin
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by steve74baywin » Tue May 17, 2011 3:50 pm

ruckman101 wrote:James Bovard has been or is an Associate Policy Analyst at Cato Institute, an Adjunct Analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and on the Advisory Board of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow.

Another shill for corporate interests.


neal
I can't say I know enough about those groups to say I agree or disagree with given them a BIG X.
What I do know is, if we had the limited gov like him and I want, neither business owner or worker would be able to use the government to make a law in their favor and use guns and the threat of jail to force that law.
The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.
Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
turk
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by turk » Tue May 17, 2011 4:57 pm

Amskeptic wrote:
steve74baywin wrote:This is a long one.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=1440
Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud
By James Bovard
Roosevelt declared that "the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties ... created a new despotism.... The hours men and women worked, the wages they received, the conditions of their labor -- these had passed beyond the control of the people, and were imposed by this new industrial dictatorship." But if wages were completely dictated by the "industrial dictatorship" -- why were pay rates higher in the United States than anywhere else in the world,
This rebuttal to Roosevelt deserves a greater savaging than I am able to offer right now, but the logic leaps are sophistry to the extreme.
If you fall for this horseshit, then you have no fucking heart for the lives of millions of real human beings who had to live through the Depression while the rich partied on.
I have no patience for the heartless.
Colin

Aren't you the guy who prohibits YOU statements? I think YOU are implying Steve is "fucking heartless", a sophist, and falling for horse-shit. If not, excuse me, I don't follow your logic. You havn't backed it up with anything but sweeping class-warfare generality. So, what's your point? What we can do to continue discussing this is look up the "Four Freedoms". I don't know about that. Seems liked warped demagoguery, and Orwellian on its face. Shall we investigate?
A man said to the universe, "Sir I exist! "However," replied the universe, "the fact has not created in me a sense of obligation."

"Let me be perfectly clear" "[...] And so that was just a example of a new senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country." Barry Sotero

User avatar
Hippie
IAC Addict!
Location: 41º 35' 27" N, 93º 37' 15" W
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by Hippie » Tue May 17, 2011 7:13 pm

Is Roosevelt running again? Why the revisionist history if he's dead and gone?
Image

User avatar
Amskeptic
IAC "Help Desk"
IAC "Help Desk"
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by Amskeptic » Tue May 17, 2011 7:44 pm

steve74baywin wrote:
Amskeptic wrote: This rebuttal to Roosevelt deserves a greater savaging than I am able to offer right now, but the logic leaps are sophistry to the extreme.
If you fall for this horseshit, then you have no fucking heart for the lives of millions of real human beings who had to live through the Depression while the rich partied on.
I have no patience for the heartless.
Colin
I am not sure of this logic. "If you fall for this horseshit, then you have no fucking heart for the lives of millions of real human beings who had to live through the Depression"
If I think a certain theory back in time is true, I don't have a heart?
Nothing else to add.
Except this, I am one step closer perhaps to figuring out how come so many get all mean and nasty so quick on this forum lately.
Steve, maybe I came down too hard. If somebody wants to play games with "comparative pay rates in the world" when most cultures were successfully subsistent and therefore didn't even need money to survive, and refuse to acknowledge that we in the U.S. had an urban population in this country damn close to starving while the wealthy skewed the statistics, then it cannot just be a discussion about pay rates and a thinly disguised attack against the humanitarian aspects of Roosevelt's efforts. Let me ask you respectfully and pointedly to answer my question directly without personally owning my "rudeness" as directed at you, do you personally fall for statistical sleight-of-hand that says Americans are richer now than ever before? without adjusting for the explosion of wealth at the top while in fact poverty now has over 1 in 4 of our nation's children?
BobD - 78 Bus . . . 112,730 miles
Chloe - 70 bus . . . 217,593 miles
Naranja - 77 Westy . . . 142,970 miles
Pluck - 1973 Squareback . . . . . . 55,600 miles
Alexus - 91 Lexus LS400 . . . 96,675 miles

User avatar
turk
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by turk » Tue May 17, 2011 8:43 pm

Hippie wrote:Is Roosevelt running again? Why the revisionist history if he's dead and gone?
History is always being reinterpreted. In this case it's fascinating because the New Deal is the lynchpin of liberalism. What did it mean. What did it succeed in. What does it succeed in. What does it mean. It has to be "revised" after 70 years. "It" has to be evaluated. It's not a simple task, but it is worth doing. I know FDR is a giant in many minds. Some in a good light. Some in a skeptical light. It's worth discussing.
A man said to the universe, "Sir I exist! "However," replied the universe, "the fact has not created in me a sense of obligation."

"Let me be perfectly clear" "[...] And so that was just a example of a new senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country." Barry Sotero

User avatar
Hippie
IAC Addict!
Location: 41º 35' 27" N, 93º 37' 15" W
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by Hippie » Wed May 18, 2011 4:01 am

Why now? Because of the laissez faire economics movement? Laissez faire leads to communist or fascist dictatorships. No one has an excuse to not know that. Or is this part of the new world government plan?
Image

steve74baywin
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by steve74baywin » Wed May 18, 2011 6:02 am

Amskeptic wrote: Steve, maybe I came down too hard. If somebody wants to play games with "comparative pay rates in the world" when most cultures were successfully subsistent and therefore didn't even need money to survive, and refuse to acknowledge that we in the U.S. had an urban population in this country damn close to starving while the wealthy skewed the statistics, then it cannot just be a discussion about pay rates and a thinly disguised attack against the humanitarian aspects of Roosevelt's efforts. Let me ask you respectfully and pointedly to answer my question directly without personally owning my "rudeness" as directed at you, do you personally fall for statistical sleight-of-hand that says Americans are richer now than ever before? without adjusting for the explosion of wealth at the top while in fact poverty now has over 1 in 4 of our nation's children?
First Colin the article mentions how we were doing better than most countries. One needs to look at what happen to get us into the predicament that caused the reaction by Roosevelt. (Problem, reaction, solution). We have been here before. Why were so many people living in cities working for less wage than what it cost to live in the city, living in a city cost lots of money because most of what one needs to live now needs to be bought. Foolish predicament. But the depression you speak of was caused by A GOVERNMENT ACT called the FEDERAL RESERVE ACT of 1913. The people were scared and wanted the government to rescue them, so little did they know bankers met and wrote the act to protect people from the banks. The people were used to get the gov to make a law that in the end hurt them. This is the same thing Roosevelt did. All of his doings to save labor that you think he did just put the people dependent on the governments intervention. This is simple stuff. I starve you for a while to then get you to be so hungry you by into a plan I offer that feeds you well, but now you are dependent on me. How does that sound to you, do you want to be dependent on me Steve74baywin? I will treat you fairly, I did feed you after I starved you. (problem, reaction, solution)

Now to answer your questions, sometimes I find your question hard to get, you seem to attempt to be fancy when writing.
I do not think we are richer. I think we are all very close to being bankrupt. I think we are in a very bad state of affairs. I think we have as a nation been hoodwinked to
1), get away from being self sufficient, I know we need to buy somethings, but we have been led to buy all things just to live
2) We have been led to be in debt as opposed to owning things outright
3) Our country is useless as far as making those things we need to live
Basically we have been set up and we are nothing but a bunch of poor, needy, sap suckers who are NOW at the mercy of the government and those who are in power, the big money and the government.
This whole system in this country could be choked, stop the money flow and the vast majority of people in this country would be hungry in a few weeks. I think on the larger scale falling for FDR as savior of the people was just one of many steps to cause this situation. People remaining more self sufficient and not being suckered into the system of living in the city, in debt, totally needing a paycheck written on paper would have solved the problem. People back then needed to realize they have the power and should not have been needy begging sap suckers whole fell for the trap of becoming enslaved by the mommy government.
I think your policies and belief's Colin are one of the worst things that could have happened to this country and the American people.

steve74baywin
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by steve74baywin » Wed May 18, 2011 7:50 am

Okay, I want to add to my last post. I was in a hurry to head out and get some errands done. I dislike trips to the store to buy things.

Colin, you have pointed to FDR saving those poor people during the depression by forcing companies to pay more. Were there not probably many other options to this problem? It is like you are saying, the ONLY solution was to get the government to force the companies to pay more. I am sorry, but I think one needs to look deeper into the cause of the problem and look at what the other options and fixes were and are. You speak as if the ONLY option was to have the GOV FORCE companies to pay more. For starters I dislike that option because it was using guns and the threat of jail to force companies to pay more to people. Any type of politics that works on using force, violence, threats of guns and jail does not sound like a good system to me. There were other solutions and options, to think there was only one is incorrect. Now one should ask what is the benefits of that one option seeing how people want the masses to believe it was the only option. It gave gov control over businesses. Is there a form of politics that works on the premise of gov controlling business? I am not sure if that is what Communism or Fascism is? It seems to me gov control of business is a Socialist thing? It is interesting, the philosophy of Cecil Rhodes, who the Cliintons' and Obama's follow, besides saying do what ever it takes to get into power cause you can't do anything unless you are in power, they also have view of the world that is very closely related to communism and socialism. Could that maybe be why we are led to believe the ONLY solution to people living in an area not able to make enough dollars to live their was the GOV forcing business' to do things?

steve74baywin
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: Roosevelt's "Four Freedoms" Fraud

Post by steve74baywin » Wed May 18, 2011 7:58 am

Hippie wrote:Why now? Because of the laissez faire economics movement? Laissez faire leads to communist or fascist dictatorships. No one has an excuse to not know that. Or is this part of the new world government plan?
I do not understand what you are saying.
How can business not being interfered with by gov lead to a system where gov runs most things?
Especially if you have a limited form of government, and that is followed, business can only get as big as the people allow it to by how much they support it, and way I say big, that doesn't mean big and in control of gov, that just means big and successful. To ever end up with communist and fascist dictatorships could only happen if at some point the limited government idea is abandoned. Hence why I say using the excuse that people were poor in the city to allow gov to intervene is the first step towards a communist or fascist gov.
What am I missing? Is it the meaning of words that is getting us?

Post Reply