Obraćanje Franklina D. Roosevelta od 4. srpnja

Obraćanje Franklina D. Roosevelta od 4. srpnja

U prijenosu iz svoje kuće u Hyde Parku u New Yorku 4. srpnja 1941. predsjednik Franklin D. Roosevelt upozorava Amerikance koji se ne žele miješati u rat da "Sjedinjene Države nikada neće preživjeti kao sretna i plodna oaza sloboda okružena okrutnom pustinjom diktature. "


Adresa nacije u Pearl Harboru

Jučer, 7. prosinca 1941. — datum koji će živjeti u zloglasnoj — Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama iznenada i namjerno napadnut je od strane pomorskih i zračnih snaga Japanskog carstva.

Sjedinjene Države bile su u miru s tom nacijom i, na zahtjev Japana, još uvijek su razgovarale sa svojom vladom i svojim carem gledajući na održavanje mira na Pacifiku.

Doista, jedan sat nakon što su japanske zračne eskadrile započele bombardiranje na američkom otoku Oahu, japanski veleposlanik u Sjedinjenim Državama i njegov kolega dostavili su našem državnom tajniku službeni odgovor na nedavnu američku poruku. I dok je u ovom odgovoru navedeno da se čini beskorisnim nastaviti postojeće diplomatske pregovore, on ne sadrži prijetnju ili nagovještaj rata ili oružanog napada.

Bit će zabilježeno da udaljenost Havaja od Japana daje do znanja da je napad namjerno planiran prije mnogo dana ili čak tjedana. U međuvremenu je japanska vlada namjerno pokušala prevariti Sjedinjene Države lažnim izjavama i izrazima nade za nastavak mira.

Jučer je napad na havajske otoke nanio tešku štetu američkim pomorskim i vojnim snagama. Žao mi je što vam moram reći da je izgubljeno jako mnogo američkih života. Osim toga, prijavljeno je da su američki brodovi torpedirani na otvorenom moru između San Francisca i Honolulua.

Jučer je japanska vlada također pokrenula napad na Malaju.

Sinoć su japanske snage napale Hong Kong.

Sinoć su japanske snage napale Guam.

Sinoć su japanske snage napale Filipinsko otočje.

Sinoć su Japanci napali otok Wake.

A jutros su Japanci napali otok Midway.

Japan je, dakle, poduzeo iznenadnu ofenzivu koja se proširila na cijelo pacifičko područje. Činjenice od jučer i danas govore same za sebe. Ljudi u Sjedinjenim Državama već su formirali svoja mišljenja i dobro razumiju implikacije na sam život i sigurnost naše nacije.

Kao vrhovni zapovjednik kopnene vojske i mornarice naredio sam da se poduzmu sve mjere za našu obranu. Ali uvijek će se cijeli naš narod sjećati karaktera napada na nas.

Bez obzira koliko će nam trebati vremena da prevladamo ovu unaprijed smišljenu invaziju, američki će narod svojom pravednom moći pobijediti do apsolutne pobjede.

Vjerujem da tumačim volju Kongresa i naroda kada tvrdim da se ne samo da ćemo se braniti do krajnjih granica, već ćemo biti vrlo sigurni da nas ovaj oblik izdaje više nikada neće ugroziti.

Neprijateljstva postoje. Nema treptanja nad činjenicom da su naši ljudi, naš teritorij i naši interesi u velikoj opasnosti.

S povjerenjem u naše oružane snage, s neograničenom odlučnošću našeg naroda, dobit ćemo neizbježni trijumf, pa pomozi nam Bože.

Tražim da Kongres proglasi da od ničim izazvanog i podlog napada Japana u nedjelju, 7. prosinca 1941., postoji ratno stanje između Sjedinjenih Država i Japanskog carstva.

Pearl Harbor Warbirds nudi najbolje dostupne avanturističke ture na Havajima. Uronite u detalje zloglasnog napada na Pearl Harbor i uzletite iznad važnih mjesta koja su odigrala ulogu u "Danu zloglasnosti". Oživite povijest dok slijedite korake vojnih i mornaričkih zrakoplovaca u danima nakon bombardiranja. Letite nekim od istih ruta koje su japanski napadači koristili do uzletišta u Wheeleru, Kāne’oheu i Bellowsu. Na Havajima postoji mnogo zračnih putovanja, ali samo jedan let avionom warbird. Smješten u Honoluluu, Hawai‘i Pearl Harbour Warbirds pruža osobno povijesno iskustvo što ga čini jednom od najboljih atrakcija O’ahu.

Doživite zadivljujuću dvosatnu avanturu koja vam omogućuje da ponovno proživite povijest pomorskog avijatičara i letite Pearl Harbourom kao što je to bilo 10. prosinca 1941. Saznajte više o Admiral ’s Warbird Adventure.


Adresa države unije (1942)

Ispunjavajući svoju dužnost izvještavanja o stanju Unije, s ponosom vam mogu reći da duh američkog naroda nikada nije bio viši nego što je danas - Unija nikada nije bila bliže povezana - ova zemlja nikada nije bila dublje odlučan suočiti se sa svečanim zadaćama koje su pred njim.

Odgovor američkog naroda bio je trenutačan i trajat će sve dok naša sigurnost ne bude osigurana.

Na današnji dan prije točno godinu dana rekao sam ovom Kongresu: “Kada su diktatori. . . spremni su za rat protiv nas, neće čekati ratni čin s naše strane. . . . Oni - ne mi - odabrat će vrijeme, mjesto i način napada. ”

Sada znamo njihov izbor vremena: mirno nedjeljno jutro - 7. prosinca 1941.

Znamo njihov izbor mjesta: američko uporište na Pacifiku.

Znamo njihov izbor metode: metodu samog Hitlera.

Japanska shema osvajanja seže pola stoljeća unatrag. To nije bila samo politika traženja dnevne sobe: to je bio plan koji je uključivao potčinjavanje svih naroda na Dalekom istoku i na pacifičkim otocima, te dominaciju tog oceana japanskom vojnom i pomorskom kontrolom na zapadu obale Sjeverne, Srednje i Južne Amerike.

Razvoj ove ambiciozne zavjere obilježen je ratom protiv Kine 1894. godine, naknadnom okupacijom Koreje, ratom protiv Rusije 1904. godine, ilegalnim utvrđivanjem ovlaštenih pacifičkih otoka nakon 1920., zauzimanjem Mandžurije 1931. i invazijom na Kinu 1937. godine.

Sličnu politiku osvajanja zločinaca usvojila je Italija. Fašisti su prvi put otkrili svoje carske planove u Libiji i Tripoliju. 1935. zauzeli su Abesiniju. Cilj im je bio dominacija cijelom sjevernom Afrikom, Egiptom, dijelovima Francuske i čitavim mediteranskim svijetom.

Ali snovi o carstvu japanskih i fašističkih vođa bili su skromni u usporedbi s ogromnim težnjama Hitlera i njegovih nacista. Čak i prije nego što su došli na vlast 1933., njihovi planovi za to osvajanje bili su nacrtani. Ti su planovi predviđali konačnu dominaciju, ne nad jednim dijelom svijeta, već nad cijelom Zemljom i svim oceanima na njoj.

Kad je Hitler organizirao savez Berlin-Rim-Tokio, svi ti osvajački planovi postali su jedinstveni plan. Prema tome, osim vlastitih osvajačkih shema, uloga Japana očito je bila prekinuti našu opskrbu ratnim oružjem Britaniji, Rusiji i Kini - oružjem koje je sve više ubrzavalo dan Hitlerove propasti. Čin Japana u Pearl Harboru namjeravao nas je omamiti - zastrašiti do te mjere da bismo našu industrijsku i vojnu snagu preusmjerili na pacifičko područje ili čak u vlastitu kontinentalnu obranu.

Plan nije uspio u svojoj svrsi. Nismo bili zapanjeni. Nismo bili prestravljeni ili zbunjeni. Ovo ponovno okupljanje Sedamdeset sedmog kongresa danas dokaz je toga za raspoloženje tihe, mračne razlučivosti koja ovdje prevladava zlo za one koji su se urotili i surađivali radi ubijanja svjetskog mira.

To je raspoloženje jače od svake puke želje za osvetom. Izražava volju američkog naroda da bude vrlo siguran da svijet više nikada neće tako patiti.

Doduše, bili smo suočeni s teškim izborima. Bilo je, na primjer, gorko što nisam mogao rasteretiti herojske i povijesne branitelje otoka Wake. Bilo nam je gorko što nismo mogli iskrcati milijun ljudi na tisuću brodova na Filipinskim otocima.

No, ovo samo dodaje našu odlučnost da se pobrinemo da Zvijezde i pruge ponovno prelete Wake i Guam. Da, pobrinite se da se hrabri ljudi Filipina riješe japanskog imperijalizma i da će živjeti u slobodi, sigurnosti i neovisnosti.

Moćne i uvredljive radnje moraju se i bit će poduzete u pravo vrijeme. Postiže se konsolidacija ukupnih ratnih napora Ujedinjenih naroda protiv naših zajedničkih neprijatelja.

To je bila i jest svrha konferencija koje su se u posljednja dva tjedna održavale u Washingtonu, Moskvi i Chungkingu. To je primarni cilj deklaracije o solidarnosti koju je 1. siječnja 1942. u Washingtonu potpisalo 26 nacija ujedinjenih protiv sila Osovine.

U idućim mjesecima možda će biti potrebno donijeti teške izbore. Ne odustajemo od takvih odluka. Mi i oni koji smo s nama ujedinjeni donijet ćemo te odluke hrabro i odlučno.

Ovdje i u drugim prijestolnicama postavljeni su planovi za koordinirano i suradničko djelovanje svih Ujedinjenih naroda - vojno djelovanje i gospodarsko djelovanje. Kao što znate, već smo uspostavili jedinstveno zapovjedništvo nad kopnenim, morskim i zračnim snagama na jugozapadnom pacifičkom ratnom kazalištu. Bit će nastavak konferencija i konzultacija među vojnim stožerima, tako da će se planovi i operacije svakog od njih uklopiti u opću strategiju osmišljenu za slomiti neprijatelja. Nećemo se boriti u izoliranim ratovima - svaka nacija ide svojim putem. Tih 26 nacija su ujedinjeni - ne samo duhom i odlučnošću, već širokim vođenjem rata u svim njegovim fazama.

Prvi put otkako su Japanci, fašisti i nacisti krenuli svojim osvajačkim putem osvojenim krvlju, sada se suočavaju s činjenicom da se nad njima okupljaju nadmoćnije snage. Zauvijek su prošli dani kada su agresori mogli napadati i uništavati svoje žrtve jednu po jednu bez jedinstva otpora. Mi iz Ujedinjenih naroda raspoložit ćemo svoje snage tako da možemo udariti na zajedničkog neprijatelja gdje god mu se može nanijeti najveća šteta.

Militaristi iz Berlina i Tokija započeli su ovaj rat. Ali okupljene, naljućene snage zajedničkog čovječanstva to će dovršiti.

Uništavanje materijalnih i duhovnih središta civilizacije - ovo je bila i još uvijek je svrha Hitlera i njegovih talijanskih i japanskih šahista. Uništili bi moć Britanskog komonvelta i Rusije te Kine i Nizozemske - a zatim bi združili sve svoje snage kako bi postigli svoj krajnji cilj, osvajanje Sjedinjenih Država.

Oni znaju da pobjeda za nas znači pobjedu za slobodu.

Oni znaju da pobjeda za nas znači pobjedu institucije demokracije - ideal obitelji, jednostavna načela zajedničke pristojnosti i humanosti.

Oni znaju da pobjeda za nas znači pobjedu religije. A oni to nisu mogli tolerirati. Svijet je premalen da bi Hitleru i Bogu pružio odgovarajuću životnu sobu ”. Kao dokaz tome, nacisti su sada objavili svoj plan za provođenje svoje nove njemačke, poganske religije u cijelom svijetu - plan prema kojemu će Biblija i križ milosrđa zamijeniti Mein Kampf i svastika i goli mač .

Naši vlastiti ciljevi jasni su cilj razbijanja militarizma koji su nametnuli ratni gospodari svojim porobljenim narodima, cilj oslobađanja potčinjenih naroda - cilj uspostave i osiguranja slobode govora, slobode vjeroispovijesti, slobode od oskudice i straha posvuda u svijetu.

Nećemo prestati s tim ciljevima - niti ćemo biti zadovoljni samo postizanjem tih ciljeva, a zatim i prekinuti. Znam da govorim u ime američkog naroda - i imam dobar razlog vjerovati da govorim i u ime svih drugih naroda koji se bore s nama - kad kažem da smo ovoga puta odlučni ne samo pobijediti u ratu, već i održati sigurnost mira koji će uslijediti.

Ali znamo da suvremene metode ratovanja čine zadatak, ne samo gađanja i borbe, već još hitnijeg rada i proizvodnje.

Za pobjedu je potrebno stvarno ratno oružje i sredstva za njegovo transportiranje na desetak borbenih točaka.

Nećemo biti dovoljni za nas i druge Ujedinjene narode da proizvedemo nešto superiorniju opskrbu streljivom u onoj u Njemačkoj, Japanu, Italiji i ukradenoj industriji u zemljama koje su pregazili.

Nadmoć Ujedinjenih naroda u streljivu i brodovima mora biti golema - toliko snažna da se Nacije Osovine nikada ne mogu nadati da će je sustići. I tako, kako bi postigli ovu ogromnu superiornost, Sjedinjene Države moraju izgraditi avione, tenkove, oružje i brodove do krajnjih granica naših nacionalnih kapaciteta. Imamo sposobnost i kapacitet za proizvodnju oružja ne samo za vlastite snage, već i za vojske, mornarice i zračne snage koje se bore na našoj strani.

I naša ogromna nadmoć u naoružanju mora biti primjerena da se ratno oružje u pravo vrijeme stavi u ruke onih ljudi u osvojenim narodima koji su spremni iskoristiti prvu priliku da se pobune protiv svojih njemačkih i japanskih ugnjetača i protiv izdajnika u njihove vlastite redove, poznate pod već zloglasnim imenom “Quislings. ” I mislim da je pošteno proročanstvo reći da će, pošto dobavimo oružje domoljubima u tim zemljama, i oni ispaliti hitac svijet.

Ova naša proizvodnja u Sjedinjenim Državama mora biti podignuta daleko iznad sadašnjih razina, iako će značiti dislociranje života i zanimanja milijuna naših ljudi. Moramo podići pogled na cijelu proizvodnu liniju. Neka nitko ne kaže da se to ne može učiniti. To se mora učiniti - i mi smo to poduzeli.

Upravo sam poslao pismo direktive odgovarajućim odjelima i agencijama naše Vlade, kojim naređujem da se odmah poduzmu koraci:

Prvo, povećati brzinu proizvodnje zrakoplova tako brzo da ćemo ove godine, 1942., proizvesti 60.000 aviona, 10.000 više od cilja koji smo postavili prije godinu i pol. To uključuje 45.000 borbenih aviona - bombardere, ronilačke bombardere, jurnjave. Stopa povećanja održat će se i nastaviti tako da ćemo iduće 1943. godine proizvesti 125 000 zrakoplova, uključujući 100 000 borbenih aviona.

Drugo, povećati našu proizvodnju tenkova tako brzo da ćemo ove godine, 1942., proizvesti 45.000 tenkova i nastaviti to povećanje, tako da ćemo sljedeće, 1943. godine, proizvesti 75.000 tenkova.

Treće, povećati našu stopu proizvodnje protuzračnih topova tako brzo da ćemo ove godine, 1942., proizvesti 20.000 njih i nastaviti s tim povećanjem tako da ćemo sljedeće godine, 1943., proizvesti 35.000 protuzračnih topova.

I četvrto, povećati našu stopu proizvodnje trgovačkih brodova tako brzo da ćemo ove godine, 1942., izgraditi 6.000.000 tona nosivosti u usporedbi s proizvodnjom od 1.100.000 iz 1941. godine. I na kraju, nastavit ćemo s tim povećanjem, tako da ćemo sljedeće godine, 1943., izgraditi 10.000.000 tona plovidbe.

Ove brojke i slične brojke za mnoštvo drugih oruđa rata dat će Japancima i nacistima malu ideju o tome što su postigli u napadu na Pearl Harbor.

Nadam se da će sve ove brojke koje sam naveo postati općepoznate u Njemačkoj i Japanu.

Naš je zadatak težak - naš zadatak je bez presedana - a vremena je malo. Moramo maksimalno napregnuti svaki postojeći objekt za proizvodnju naoružanja. Moramo pretvoriti svako raspoloživo postrojenje i alat u ratnu proizvodnju. To ide sve od najvećih tvornica do najmanjih - od velike automobilske industrije do seoske prodavaonice strojeva.

Proizvodnja za rat temelji se na muškarcima i ženama - ljudskim rukama i mozgu koje zajedno nazivamo Laburisti. Naši su radnici spremni raditi dugo sate kako bi u dnevnom poslu imali više posla kako bi se kotači okretali, a vatre gorele dvadeset četiri sata dnevno i sedam dana u tjednu. Oni dobro shvaćaju da o brzini i učinkovitosti njihovog rada ovise životi njihovih sinova i njihove braće na borbenim frontovima.

Ratna proizvodnja temelji se na metalima i sirovinama - čeliku, bakru, gumi, aluminiju, cinku, kositru. Sve veće i veće količine njih morat će se preusmjeriti u ratne svrhe. Njihova civilna uporaba morat će se smanjivati ​​sve dalje i dalje - i, u mnogim slučajevima, potpuno eliminirati.

Rat košta novac. Do sada smo to jedva počeli ni plaćati. Mi smo samo 15 posto svog nacionalnog dohotka posvetili nacionalnoj obrani. Kao što će se sutra pojaviti u mojoj Proračunskoj poruci, naš ratni program za nadolazeću fiskalnu godinu koštat će 56 milijardi dolara ili, drugim riječima, više od polovice procijenjenog godišnjeg nacionalnog dohotka. To znači poreze i obveznice i obveznice i poreze. To znači rezanje luksuza i drugih bitnih stvari. Jednom riječju, to znači “svaki izlaz ” rat individualnim trudom i trudom obitelji u ujedinjenoj zemlji.

Samo ova sveobuhvatna ljestvica proizvodnje ubrzat će konačnu pobjedu. Brzina će se računati. Izgubljeno tlo uvijek se može vratiti - izgubljeno vrijeme nikad. Brzina će spasiti živote Brzina će spasiti ovu Naciju koja je u opasnosti spasit će našu slobodu i našu civilizaciju - a sporost nikada nije bila američka karakteristika.

Kako Sjedinjene Države idu punim koracima, moramo uvijek biti na oprezu protiv zabluda koje će se pojaviti, neke od njih prirodno, ili koje će među nas zasaditi naši neprijatelji.

Moramo se čuvati samozadovoljstva. Ne smijemo potcjenjivati ​​neprijatelja. Moćan je i lukav - i okrutan i nemilosrdan. Neće se zaustaviti ni pred čim što mu daje priliku da ubije i uništi. Obučio je svoje ljude da vjeruju da se njihovo najveće savršenstvo postiže ratovanjem. Dugo godina pripremao se upravo za ovaj sukob - planiranje, kovanje zavjera, obuku, naoružavanje i borbu. Već smo okusili poraz. Možda ćemo pretrpjeti daljnje zastoje. Moramo se suočiti s činjenicom teškog rata, dugog rata, krvavog rata, skupog rata.

S druge strane, moramo se čuvati defetizma. To je bilo jedno od glavnih oružja Hitlerove propagandne mašine - koristilo se uvijek iznova sa smrtonosnim rezultatima. Neće se uspješno koristiti na američkom narodu.

Moramo se čuvati podjela među sobom i među svim ostalim Ujedinjenim narodima. Moramo biti posebno oprezni protiv rasne diskriminacije u bilo kojem od njenih ružnih oblika. Hitler će ponovno pokušati stvoriti nepovjerenje i sumnju između jednog pojedinca i drugog, jedne i druge grupe, jedne i druge rase, jedne vlade i druge. Pokušat će se poslužiti istom tehnikom laži i glasina kojom je razdvojio Francusku od Britanije. On to i sada pokušava učiniti s nama. Ali on će pronaći jedinstvo volje i svrhe protiv njega, koje će trajati do uništenja svih njegovih crnih nacrta na slobodi i sigurnosti ljudi svijeta.

Ovaj rat ne možemo voditi u obrambenom duhu. Kako su naša snaga i naši resursi u potpunosti mobilizirani, mi ćemo izvesti napad na neprijatelja - udarit ćemo ga i udariti ga opet gdje god i kad god ga možemo doseći.

Moramo ga držati podalje od naših obala, jer mu namjeravamo dovesti ovu bitku na vlastitom terenu.

Američke oružane snage moraju se koristiti na bilo kojem mjestu u svijetu gdje se čini poželjnim angažirati neprijateljske snage. U nekim slučajevima ove će operacije biti obrambene kako bi se zaštitile ključne pozicije. U drugim će slučajevima te operacije biti uvredljive kako bi se udario na zajedničkog neprijatelja s ciljem njegovog potpunog opkoljavanja i konačnog potpunog poraza.

Američke oružane snage djelovat će na mnogim točkama na Dalekom istoku.

Američke oružane snage bit će na svim oceanima - pomažući u čuvanju bitnih komunikacija koje su od vitalnog značaja za Ujedinjene narode.

Američke kopnene i zračne i pomorske snage zauzeće stanice na Britanskim otocima - što čini bitnu utvrdu u ovoj velikoj svjetskoj borbi.

Američke oružane snage pomoći će u zaštiti ove hemisfere - a također će pomoći u zaštiti baza izvan ove hemisfere, koje bi se mogle koristiti za napad na Ameriku.

Ako netko od naših neprijatelja, iz Europe ili Azije, pokuša dalekometne upade od strane eskadrila bombardiranja aviona, učinit će to samo u nadi da će terorizirati naš narod i poremetiti naš moral. Naši se toga ne boje. Znamo da ćemo za slobodu možda morati platiti veliku cijenu. Ovu ćemo cijenu platiti testamentom. Koja god bila cijena, tisuću se puta isplati. Bez obzira na to što nam neprijatelji, u svom očaju, mogu pokušati učiniti - reći ćemo, kako su rekli stanovnici Londona, “Možemo to podnijeti. ” I što više možemo vratiti i mi ćemo vratiti ga - uz složene kamate.

Kad su naši neprijatelji izazvali našu zemlju da ustane i bori se, izazvali su svakog od nas. I svatko od nas prihvatio je izazov - za sebe i za svoju naciju.

Bilo je samo 400 američkih marinaca koji su u herojskoj i povijesnoj obrani otoka Wake nanijeli neprijatelju tako velike gubitke. Neki od tih ljudi poginuli su u akciji, a drugi su sada ratni zarobljenici. Kad preživjeli iz te velike borbe budu oslobođeni i vraćeni u svoje domove, saznat će da je stotinu i trideset milijuna njihovih sugrađana bilo nadahnuto da pruže vlastiti puni dio usluge i žrtve.

Možemo dobro reći da su naši ljudi na borbenim frontovima već dokazali da su Amerikanci danas jednako hrabri i jednako žilavi kao i bilo koji od heroja čije podvige slavimo 4. srpnja.

Mnogi ljudi pitaju: “Kada će ovaj rat završiti? ” Na to postoji samo jedan odgovor. Završit će čim okončamo, našim zajedničkim naporima, zajedničkom snagom, zajedničkom odlučnošću da se borimo i do kraja probijemo - kraj militarizma u Njemačkoj, Italiji i Japanu. Sigurno se nećemo zadovoljiti manjim.

To je duh u kojem su vođeni razgovori tijekom posjeta britanskog premijera Washingtonu. Gospodin Churchill i ja razumijemo se, naše motive i naše svrhe. Zajedno smo se u posljednja dva tjedna suočili s velikim vojnim i ekonomskim problemima ovog najvećeg svjetskog rata.

Posjet gospodina Churchilla razveselio je sve naše nacije. Duboko smo potreseni njegovom velikom porukom koju nam je poslao. On je dobrodošao među nama, a mi se ujedinjujemo i želimo mu siguran povratak u svoj dom.

Jer borimo se na istoj strani s Britancima, koji su se sami borili dugih, strašnih mjeseci i oduprijeli se neprijatelju hrabrošću, upornošću i vještinom.

Borimo se na istoj strani s ruskim narodom koji je vidio kako se nacističke horde roje do samih vrata Moskve i koji su gotovo nadljudskom voljom i hrabrošću natjerali osvajače natrag u povlačenje.

Borimo se na istoj strani kao i hrabri ljudi u Kini - oni milijuni koji su četiri i pol duge godine izdržali bombe i izgladnjeli i uvijek bičevali osvajače unatoč vrhunskoj japanskoj opremi i oružju. Da, borimo se na istoj strani kao i nesalomljivi Nizozemci. Borimo se na istoj strani kao i sve ostale vlade u egzilu, koje Hitler i sve njegove vojske i sav njegov Gestapo nisu uspjeli osvojiti.

Ali mi iz Ujedinjenih naroda ne podnosimo svu ovu žrtvu ljudskih napora i ljudskih života da se vratimo u svijet kakav smo imali nakon posljednjeg svjetskog rata.

Danas se borimo za sigurnost, za napredak i za mir, ne samo za sebe već za sve ljude, ne samo za jednu generaciju nego za sve generacije. Borimo se da svijet očistimo od drevnih zala, drevnih bolesti.

Naši neprijatelji vođeni su brutalnim cinizmom, neslavnim prezirom prema ljudskom rodu. Nadahnuti smo vjerom koja se proteže kroz sve godine do prvog poglavlja Knjige Postanka: “Bog je stvorio čovjeka na svoju sliku. ”

Mi sa svoje strane nastojimo biti vjerni tom božanskom naslijeđu. Borimo se, kao što su se borili i naši očevi, da podržimo doktrinu da su svi ljudi jednaki u Božjim očima. Oni s druge strane nastoje uništiti to duboko uvjerenje i stvoriti svijet na svoju sliku - svijet tiranije, okrutnosti i kmetstva.

To je sukob koji dan i noć sada prožima naše živote.

Nikakav kompromis ne može okončati taj sukob. Nikada nije bilo - niti može biti - uspješnog kompromisa između dobra i zla. Samo potpuna pobjeda može nagraditi prvake tolerancije, pristojnosti, slobode i vjere.


FDR i holokaust

24. rujna 2013

Pretplatite se na Nacija

Dobiti NacijaTjedni bilten

Prijavom potvrđujete da ste stariji od 16 godina i pristajete primati povremene promotivne ponude za programe koji podržavaju NacijaNovinarstva. Možete pročitati naše Politika privatnosti ovdje.

Pridružite se biltenu Knjige i umjetnost

Prijavom potvrđujete da ste stariji od 16 godina i pristajete primati povremene promotivne ponude za programe koji podržavaju NacijaNovinarstva. Možete pročitati naše Politika privatnosti ovdje.

Pretplatite se na Nacija

Podržite progresivno novinarstvo

Prijavite se u naš Vinski klub već danas.

Washington DC.
& ensp
Početkom 1943., na vrhuncu holokausta, istaknuti je novinar oštro osudio odgovor predsjednika Franklina Roosevelta & rsquos na nacistički genocid: & ldquoTi i ja, predsjednik i Kongres i State Department su pomagači zločinu i dijelimo Hitlerovu krivnju, & rdquo napisala je. & ldquoDa smo se ponašali kao humani i velikodušni ljudi umjesto samozadovoljni, kukavički, dva milijuna Židova koji danas leže na zemlji Poljske i Hitler & rsquos druga prepuna groblja bili bi živi i sigurni & hellip. Imali smo svoju moć da spasimo ovaj osuđeni narod i nismo podigli ruku da to učinimo & mdashor bi možda bilo poštenije reći da smo podigli samo jednu opreznu ruku, zatvorenu u usku rukavicu kvota i viza i izjava, i debeli sloj predrasuda. & rdquo
& ensp
Ovu zapanjujuću kritiku židovske izbjegličke politike FDR -a rsquos napisala je nitko drugi nego Freda Kirchwey, uvjerena New Dealer, Rooseveltova pristaša i glavna urednica Nacija. Očigledno, novinar Laurence Zuckerman nije bio svjestan zapisa o holokaustu časopisa za koji je pisao dok je pisao & ldquoFDR & rsquos Židovski problem & rdquo [kolovoz 5/12]. Potpuno opovrgava Zuckerman & rsquos tezu da je kritika zapisa FDR & rsquos o holokaustu sve djelo ručnih konzervativaca i desničarskih cionista kako bi iskoristili podršku Izraelu.

Nacija rano i glasno govorio o američkim akcijama za spašavanje Židova u Europi. Nakon 1938 Kristallnacht pogroma, tražio je prijem u Sjedinjene Države najmanje 15 000 njemačke židovske izbjegličke djece. (Uprava je odbila podržati prijedlog.) Rooseveltova administracija & rsquos izbjeglička politika & ldquois ona koja mora razboljeti svaku osobu obično humanog instinkta, & rdquo Kirchwey je napisao 1940. & ldquoTo je kao da bismo morali pomno ispitati životopis žrtava poplava koje se drže komad plutajuće olupine i konačno odlučiti da bez obzira na njihove vrline, svima osim nekolicini bolje je dopustiti da se utope. & rdquo

1941. uprava FDR -a & rsquos izradila je oštru novu imigracijsku uredbu koja je zabranjivala prijem svakome s bliskom rodbinom u Europi, pod obrazloženjem da bi ih nacisti mogli natjerati da špijuniraju Hitlera prijeteći rodbini. Nacija osudio to kao & ldbezlučno i smiješno. & rdquo

Uslijedili su brojni istaknuti naprednjaci Nacija& rsquos i koraci Kirchwey & rsquos iskreno priznajući nedostatke FDR & rsquos u tom pogledu. Walter Mondale nazvao je predsjednicu Roosevelt & rsquos izbjegličku konferenciju 1938. u Evian -u u Francuskoj, & ldquolegatom srama & rdquo i rekao da su sudionici & ldquofalali civilizacijski test. & Rdquo Prilikom otvaranja američkog Muzeja holokausta 1993., predsjednik Clinton je istaknuo da su pod Rooseveltovom administracijom & ldquodors na slobodu su zatvoreni, a & helliprail linije do logora u krugu od milja od vojno značajnih ciljeva ostavljene neometane. & rdquo

Nancy Pelosi, u svojoj autobiografiji, s ponosom se prisjetila kako je njezin otac, kongresmen Thomas D & rsquoAlesandro, prekinuo s FDR -om zbog holokausta i podržao Bergson grupu, koja je osporila izbjegličku politiku FDR & rsquos. George McGovern u intervjuu iz 2004. o misijama koje je letio u blizini Auschwitza kao mladi pilot bombarder rekao je: & ldquoFranklin Roosevelt bio je veliki čovjek i bio je moj politički heroj. Ali mislim da je napravio dvije velike pogreške & rdquo: internaciju Japanaca-Amerikanaca i odluku & ldquo da ne krene za Auschwitzom & hellip. Bože oprosti nam & hellip. Postojala je prilično dobra šansa da smo mogli razbiti te željezničke pruge s lica zemlje [i] prekinuti protok ljudi u te odaje smrti, a mi smo imali prilično dobre šanse izbaciti te plinske peći. & Rdquo

Naprednjaci imaju dug i vrijedan uspjeh koji je iskreno priznavao nedostatke FDR & rsquos uz njegova postignuća. Roosevelt & rsquos odgovor na holokaust nije ništa više branljiv od njegovog interniranja Japanaca-Amerikanaca ili njegovih zabrinjavajućih podataka o pravima Afroamerikanaca. Prepoznavanje te činjenice ne ugrožava nasljeđe New Deala niti umanjuje postignuća FDR -a u izvođenju Amerike iz depresije ili njegovog vodstva u Drugom svjetskom ratu. Samo priznaje i njegove mane.

RAFAEL MEDOFF, direktor osnivač,
Institut David S. Wyman za proučavanje holokausta

Laurence Zuckerman sugerira da ga kritičari Roosevelta osuđuju oštro s prednošću unatrag. On piše da & ldquow, kad je saznao za ubojstvo milijuna Židova, nije imao razumijevanja za & hoquote Holocaust, & rssquo koje je došlo kasnije i sada je toliko ugrađeno u našu svijest da je teško zamisliti kako je živjeti bez takvog znanja . & rdquo

No, to ne odražava točno tadašnju svijest javnosti. Treba samo pročitati Fredu Kirchwey: & ldquoJevreji u Europi ubijaju se jer su Židovi. Hitler je obećao njihovu potpunu likvidaciju. Prijavljeni su načini i hellipthe klanja. Brojevi su provjereni & hellip. Vi i ja i predsjednik i Kongres i State Department su pomagači u zločinu i dijelite Hitlerovu krivicu. & Rdquo

Zuckerman također omalovažava doprinose Bergson grupe u formiranju Odbora za ratne izbjeglice, rekavši da je grupa & rsquos & ldquobiggest podvig nešto što je Roosevelt stvorio. & Rdquo Bergson grupa sponzorirala je zakonodavstvo u Kongresu za osnivanje agencije za spašavanje. Vjerojatno bi na ročištima o prijedlogu zakona State Department & rsquos opstruirao napore američkih židovskih skupina da spasu svoju europsku braću. Suočen sa skandalom, Roosevelt je nadmašio situaciju stvarajući WRB & mdashthis nije bilo moralno buđenje, već politička računica.

Vezano za bombardiranje Auschwitza: WRB je istražila bombardiranje željezničkih pruga, plinskih komora i krematorija, ali su dužnosnici tvrdili da bi bombardiranje Auschwitza koristilo zračnu snagu potrebnu drugdje. However, US planes were bombing the I.G. Farben complex at nearby Monowitz. Between July and November 1944, more than 2,800 US planes bombed the oil factories, sometimes flying right over the Birkenau death camp.

Military experts and historians continue to debate the issue. Could precision bombing have been done without loss of prisoners&rsquo lives? And would bombing the gas chambers actually have impeded the extermination? Historian Richard Breitman points out: &ldquothe historians&rsquo debate&hellipmisses the main problem&hellip: [the War Department] was opposed to the whole idea of a military mission for humanitarian purposes&hellipand stopped the [WRB] from pursuing it.&rdquo Of course, one cannot ever know if bombing Auschwitz would have had the desired results. But as Breitman concludes: &ldquobombing the gas chambers would have been a potent symbol of American concern for European Jews.&rdquo

MARK GERSTEIN, former instructor in Holocaust Studies, University of Massachusetts

In response to Laurence Zuckerman&rsquos fine article, we might explain the thinking behind our book FDR and the Jews. We wrote the book because, first, scholarship is typically polarized between lauding FDR as the savior of the Jews and condemning him as a bystander or worse to the Holocaust. Second, we sought to analyze FDR&rsquos approach to Jewish issues from the perspective of his entire life and career. Third, we tried to avoid writing history backward and making unverifiable counterfactual assumptions.

The real story of FDR and the Jews is how a humane but pragmatic president navigated competing priorities during the Great Depression, foreign policy crises and World War II. We do not whitewash FDR. &ldquoFor most of his presidency Roosevelt did little to aid the imperiled Jews of Germany and Europe,&rdquo we wrote. Still, FDR was not monolithic in his policies and &ldquoat times acted decisively to rescue Jews, often withstanding contrary pressures from the American public, Congress, and his own State Department.&rdquo Overall, FDR was far better for the Jews than his political opposition at home or any other world leader of his time. Our loudest critic has been Rafael Medoff, a longstanding FDR critic who assails all those who do not follow his party line.

Political decisions during the Holocaust had a moral dimension that still elicits an emotional response. But some judgments&mdashthat FDR blithely sent passengers on the Louis to their death in the gas chambers, or that he refused to order the bombing of Auschwitz out of indifference or anti-Semitism&mdashare historical distortions. We hope our readers will be able to judge with more and better information than they had.

RICHARD BREITMAN, ALLAN J. LICHTMAN, Distinguished Professors, American University

Zuckerman Replies

I am familiar with Freda Kirchwey and the articles from which Rafael Medoff quotes. But is he aware of this quote: &ldquoPresident Roosevelt has been a man whose greatness shines brightly in times of crisis. He is the only possible leader for the next four years.&rdquo It is from Kirchwey&rsquos endorsement of Roosevelt&rsquos historic bid for a fourth term, in Nacija of July 22, 1944, long after the condemnations of FDR&rsquos refugee policies that Medoff cites&mdashshowing that the picture of FDR is more complex than Medoff would have us believe. It is disturbing that in his latest book, FDR and the Holocaust: A Breach of Faith, Medoff quotes Kirchwey&rsquos criticisms of FDR at length while failing to mention that she still supported him. Emphasizing the former while ignoring the latter illustrates his flawed approach to writing history.

Neither my article nor the book FDR and the Jews, as its authors Richard Breitman and Allan Lichtman point out, portrayed FDR as beyond criticism for his handling of the Holocaust. But neither was he a total villain. Medoff&rsquos articles and latest book contain a litany of criticisms of Roosevelt but virtually nothing about his achievements. One can read Medoff and forget that during FDR&rsquos presidency the country was suffering through the worst economic catastrophe in its history, that the fates of Great Britain and the Soviet Union were hanging by a thread, and that America had suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of the Japanese in Asia. In his letter, Medoff writes approvingly that &ldquoprogressives have a long and admirable record of honestly acknowledging FDR&rsquos failings alongside his achievements.&rdquo If only Medoff were equally fair-minded. As I wrote in my article, over the last thirty years a group of ideologically driven activists, of whom Medoff is the most energetic, have made it their business to cast Roosevelt&rsquos handling of the Holocaust in the harshest possible light. These activists have largely had the field to themselves, and so a distorted image of FDR has become widely accepted. It is easy for politicians of all stripes to go along. Their homilies curry favor with Jewish supporters at little or no political cost.

One of my goals for the article was to re-balance the scales and expose the agenda of FDR&rsquos most vociferous critics. Medoff does not address the central question of my piece: What contemporary purpose does it serve to portray Roosevelt as complicit in the Holocaust? Why do so many of Medoff&rsquos articles link Roosevelt to current events in Israel, a country that didn&rsquot exist during FDR&rsquos lifetime? At a time when our country&rsquos leaders and many of its citizens are agonizing over how to respond to the use of chemical weapons in Syria, we might all agree that figuring out the best way to stop mass murder overseas has never been an easy task.

Our Readers Letters to the editor submitted by our readers.

Laurence Zuckerman Laurence Zuckerman, a former New York Times reporter, is an adjunct professor at Columbia&rsquos Graduate School of Journalism.


The Realignment Project

Introduction:

In the spirit of the best 4th of July speeches, which like Frederick Douglass’ peerless effort seek not to satiate with platitudes but rather to challenge and provoke, today I offer a reflection on America’s past and its future.

At the end of “Resurrecting Henry George,” I argued that a national housing assistance program would “help to make one more of FDR’s Second Bill of Rights, “the right of every family to a decent home,” a legal reality. I would argue, and I will argue in future posts, that the longer-term mission of the progressive movement in America is (and has unconsciously been) the realization of the Second Bill of Rights.” So today I intend to explain what I meant.

January 11, 1944:

When Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave his State of the Union Address on January 11, 1944, the United States was engaged in the largest two-front war of its, or any nation’s history. In the European theater, Allied forces were bogged down in Italy south of Monte Cassino and Operation Overlord was still in the planning stage. In the Pacific, Allied forces were advancing through New Guinea following the bloody Battle of Tarawa.

And yet, in the middle of a crucial address at a time when the successful outcome of the war was still very much in doubt, FDR spoke instead to what would come after, in what might have been the last New Deal speech he ever gave. The theme began with him pledging that:

We are united in determination that this war shall not be followed by another interim which leads to new disaster- that we shall not repeat the tragic errors of ostrich isolationism—that we shall not repeat the excesses of the wild twenties when this Nation went for a joy ride on a roller coaster which ended in a tragic crash.

Roosevelt continued by re-framing the objectives of the war as “ not only physical security which provides safety from attacks by aggressors. It means also economic security, social security, moral security.” The invocation of Social Security, the seemingly jarring transition from foreign to domestic policy was the opening movement of a speech whose moral center was the home front. In the bridge of his speech, FDR decried the “ uproar of demands for special favors for special groups,” and recognized that “ we have not always forgotten individual and selfish and partisan interests in time of war,” a rather unusual tone for a period we prefer to remember in glowing, sepia tones.

Even more unusually, he went on to challenge an even more sacred cow than national unity – individualism. Far from being an expression of American rugged independence, Roosevelt argued that “ In this war, we have been compelled to learn how interdependent upon each other are all groups and sections of the population of America,” following the thread of prices and wages from farmers and workers and factory owners to “ teachers, clergy, policemen, firemen, widows and minors on fixed incomes, wives and dependents of our soldiers and sailors, and old-age pensioners.”

Shifting to explicitly addressing the issue of the post-war world, FDR explicitly returned to the theme of his 1936 Inaugural Address, the theme that more than any other idea than “security” defined the New Deal – “one third of a nation.” The first condition for a new America, the first war aim would be not merely the achievement of economic prosperity but rather the leveling upwards of the poorest of Americans towards a universal minimum standard of living. (Sadly, the first, more anodyne goal of GDP growth would become the standard for post-war liberalism, while the second and higher aim would be marginalized)

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth- is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill housed, and insecure.

America could not be content with a return to prosperity because of the re-discovery of economic interdependence, he argued. This economic reality, once hidden behind the veil of the free market, was being made plain to Americans, and just as the recognition of political community had reshaped an America in 1776, he believed that the recognition of economic community in 1944 would engender similar results in the post-war America:

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our Nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

Linking the Depression to the rise of the Nazi ideology and movement that it empowered, FDR here linked the cause of economic security to the cause of the war, bringing the theme of the home front into unity with the reality of a world war against fascism.

And then he introduced the Second Bill of Rights:

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad

The right of every family to a decent home

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment

The right to a good education.

It has been argued in the past that America has been exceptional in defining rights solely as legal and political in nature, and avoiding the economic and social rights spelled out in later 20th century constitutions. FDR’s speech stands as a powerful rebuttal to this argument, a momentary glimpse of another America. Because Roosevelt did not intend this Second Bill of Rights to be a mere legal letter there was instead a legislative movement to enact them into law, through the combination of the Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill (universal health care plus a national cradle-to-grave welfare state), the Full Employment Bill (establishing full employment and the right to a job through Keynesian planning and the government as employer of last resort), and what would later be the Housing Act of 1949. This political drive was blocked in Congress, but for a moment in 1944, the United States seemed to be moving to a new recognition of human rights.

And for Roosevelt, the Second Bill of Rights really were about the United States and the world at the same time. We often forget that American politics and public policy doesn’t happen in a vacuum, that there is a conversation that goes on across oceans and national borders. And 1944 was a time when there was a Trans-Atlantic conversation about what the post-war world should look like. In the United Kingdom, John Meynard Keynes had established his economic theories into government practice and William Beveridge was in the process of writing his two famous reports, the 1942 Beveridge Plan for a National Health Service and a cradle-to-grave welfare state, and Full Employment in a Free Society (1944.). In Sweden, Gunnar Myrdal and the Stockholm School were solidifying the intellectual foundations for the Swedish social-democratic model. Throughout every occupied country in Europe waiting for Operation Overlord, people imagined a new, better world to come. And here was FDR, speaking with the world.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

July 4, 2009:

In the sixty-five years since FDR’s Second Bill of Rights, the larger historical mission of the progressive movement in America has really been the adoption of the Second Bill of Rights for all Americans, regardless of race, class, and gender. Truman’s failed Fair Deal was built from the intellectual foundations of the Second Bill of Rights. The Great Society and the War on Poverty were incomplete attempts to establish health care, education, and protection from poverty the Civil Rights Movement’s call for “Jobs and Freedom” and the 1963 “Freedom Budget” echoed even more deeply the spirit of Roosevelt. And even in the darkest years of the left’s nadir, when America seemed to be permanently the land of Reagan, the “dream that will never die” that kept people going ultimately is that same dream.


One thought on &ldquo FDR’s BHAG &rdquo

A quiet shoutout (is that an oxymoron?) to those behind the scenes who make possible eventual public access to documents (digital or analog) at NARA. Behind each record that becomes available online are members of a NARA team. Their actions are so important whether they contributed to civic literacy in the past or are contributing now. The NARA team includes the records appraisal archivists who work with federal departments and agencies to help identify permanently valuable records for which the law requires retention and preservation. Without the important yet complicated process of records management for paper and electronic records, there could not be accountability of any kind. Records would be destroyed at will in the agencies for any number of reasons and never survive to be taken in by NARA, much less be shared online. And on the projects side of NARA, a nod of appreciation to those who handle disclosure review of the records the agency takes in. Not just of classified information, but unclassified and declassified records, as well. I so admire those who ensure that NARA releases what it can, protects what it must. Having done both appraisal of federal records and disclosure review while employed by NARA, the low key, dedicated public servants who work quietly behind the scenes to #makeithappen will always have a special place in my heart.


The Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself

Where did the line in FDR’s First Inaugural Address, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” come from? Did he write it?

Answer

Columbia University professor Raymond Moly wrote most of Roosevelt’s speech, and talked over his initial drafts with the president-elect. Several days before the inauguration, Moly delivered a typescript of his final draft to Roosevelt, who was staying at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. Roosevelt went over the speech then with Moly and copied it out in longhand. The line about “fear itself” was not in the speech at that point. Before leaving FDR’s hotel suite, Moly burned his typewritten draft in the fireplace.

The next day, former newspaperman and Roosevelt’s long-time close confidante, Louis McHenry Howe, arrived in Washington. According to Howe’s assistant Lela Stiles, a few days previously, Howe had talked with a newspaperman and friend about difficulties that the country faced, and during the conversation Howe told his friend, “I don’t care what else Franklin says in his inaugural address as long as he tells the people that the only thing they have to fear is fear.”

When Howe arrived in Washington, FDR gave him his handwritten draft of the speech. Howe made his own changes and additions and had a secretary type a new draft. One of Howe’s changes had been to add the line, “So first of all let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes the needed effort to bring about prosperity once again.” FDR liked Howe’s addition, but then, on the draft, changed the end of the sentence, from “to bring about prosperity once again” to “needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.” These were the words he used when he delivered the speech several days later at the inauguration, on March 4, 1933.

Roosevelt’s revision of Howe’s sentence was in keeping with the revisions that he and Moly had made to earlier drafts. One of the guiding metaphors in the first versions of the speech had turned on comparing the country’s economic condition to a sickness, but Moly had ultimately decided that Roosevelt would be better able to inspire the nation to profound and wide-ranging action if he did not compare it to an invalid, but rather to an army preparing for war. The imagery of sickness in the early drafts yielded therefore to martial language in the last drafts. FDR’s change of Howe’s sentence followed along with this.

Nevertheless, the new version of the sentence still refers to fear and a rejection of being "paralyzed." Whatever else FDR conveyed to his listeners with this sentence, a message of reassurance about his own health was surely part of what they heard. Concerns about whether his polio had incapacitated him had sometimes surfaced during the election campaign and two weeks before the inauguration he had avoided the bullets of a would-be assassin.

Frances Perkins, who served as FDR’s Secretary of Labor, reminisced in 1946, more than a decade after the speech, about Roosevelt coming to terms with his having contracted polio in 1921. She wrote, “He learned in that period and began to express firm belief that the ‘only thing to fear is fear itself.’ He never displayed the slightest bitterness over his misfortune.” Perkins was a little unclear here about whether she was referring specifically to Roosevelt in the decade before he became president, and whether she really meant to place the exact phrase “the only thing to fear is fear itself” in his mouth during that time.

If Roosevelt had in fact often expressed those words, it is difficult to understand why his closest colleagues and even his wife Eleanor did not assume that he had thought them up himself and inserted them into the inaugural address, but looked elsewhere for the ultimate source of the expression. When FDR’s associate and sometimes-speechwriter Samuel Rosenman asked Eleanor about the expression, she ventured that her husband may have found something very much like it in a volume of Henry David Thoreau’s writings, which she thought he must have had with him in his hotel suite in Washington.

Thoreau had written the sentence, “Nothing is so much to be feared as fear,” in his journal entry for September 7, 1851, in passing, as part of his comment on his contemporaries’ criticisms of Harriet Martineau’s arguments for atheism in her just-published Letters on the Laws of Man’s Nature and Development. Ralph Waldo Emerson later quoted his young friend approvingly, and the phrase was indeed included in later collections of Thoreau’s writings.

Professor Moly, however, pointed directly at Louis Howe as the proximate source, and doubted that Howe—whose reading habits focused on detective novels—had found the Thoreau quote. He later told William Safire, “I do clearly remember that the phrase appeared in a department store’s newspaper advertisement some time earlier in February. I assume that Howe, an inveterate newspaper reader, saw it too. …" To Howe’s everlasting credit, he realized that the expression fully fitted the occasion.”

Moly's reference to department store advertisements sounds like the campaign used by Wanamaker’s. During the first few months of 1933, Wanamaker’s department store placed large display ads in The New York Times. The ads included a small box with inspirational messages of business and commercial platitudes or sentiments “from the founder’s writings,” those of John Wanamaker, who sometimes quoted people like Benjamin Franklin or George Washington. I do not see any of ads for the first two months of 1933 in which Wanamaker quoted Thoreau or anyone else expressing precisely the statement about “fear itself,” nor do I see a quote of Wanamaker venturing the phrase himself. However there are many platitudes there about confidence, cheerfulness, a positive attitude, persistence, honesty, and integrity. Perhaps Professor Moly saw an ad that I have been unable to locate.

The phrase “The only thing to fear is fear” did have some currency at the time among businessmen. Julius Barnes, the Chairman of the Board of the National Chamber of Commerce, for example, gave a news conference in early February announcing the organization’s effort to promote efforts to stabilize business suffering during the depression. The conference was reported by The New York Times on February 9. One of the subheadings of the article was “Fears Most Fear Itself,” and quoted Barnes as saying, “In a condition of this kind, the thing to be feared most is fear itself. Confidence, tempered with prudence, is necessary to the operation of even the most perfect business mechanism. The retarding effect of a sense of insecurity is promptly communicated from worker to consumer, from consumer to producer and the whole machine stalls, and the anticipated evil becomes.”

Many in the business community were in fact convinced that the country was suffering from a kind of psychic sickness, caused not by systemic problems in industry or banking, but by the nation’s irrational lapse into fear, which had caused an economic paralysis. It was the fear itself that needed to be exorcised. FDR’s predecessor, Herbert Hoover, also often spoke in this way.

By this metaphor, the nation was an invalid who had been afflicted with a mental problem, a paralysis of action. Its thinking somehow had to be turned around, toward a positive confidence. By changing the patient’s thinking, his body would naturally recover his mobility. The nation needed a mental healer.

This sounds rather like the frame of reference of the quasi-religious “New Thought” or “Mind-Cure” or “Mental Science” Movement that blossomed in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As William James described it in his 1929 work, The Varieties of Religious Experience, “The leaders of this faith have had an intuitive belief in the all-saving power of healthy-minded attitudes as such, in the conquering efficacy of courage, hope, and trust, and a correlative contempt for doubt, fear, worry, and all nervously precautionary states of mind.” The movement was defined not so much by an organizational form as by the common assumptions and themes of a group of writers who specialties included what we would today called “alternative medicine,” speculative psychology, and inspirational literature. Their writings are dominated by perorations on healing and success. The business community, then as now, had a fondness for “motivational” speaking and writing, especially as it might make a sales force more effective. It is likely not an accident, therefore, that the head of the Chamber of Commerce would be diagnosing the chief of the nation’s problems as fear.

In fact, the precise phrase, “The only thing to fear is fear,” occurs in the 1908 book, Thought Vibration or, the law of attraction in the thought world, written by New Thought writer William Walker Atkinson. He counseled, “Remember, the only thing to fear is Fear, and—well, don’t even fear Fear, for he’s a cowardly chap at the best, who will run if you show a brave front.” In 1918, Atkinson wrote The Power of Concentration under the pseudonym of Theron Q. Dumont, in which he declared, “There is no justification for the loss of courage. The evils by which you will almost certainly be overwhelmed without it are far greater than those which courage will help you to meet and overcome. Right, then, must be the moralist who says that the only thing to fear is fear.”

Another “New Thought” writer, the “naturopathic doctor,” Henry Lindlahr, wrote in his 1919 book, Practice of Natural Therapeutics, “Avoid fear in all its forms of expression it is responsible for the greater part of human suffering. The only thing to fear is fear.”

Businesses had invoked these precise sentiments around the time they were published, during the domestic economic pinch prevalent during World War I, for example. On the 4th of July, 1917, the musical instrument firm of Edward Droop and Sons in Washington, D.C., paid for a large display ad in Washington Post, under the large headline, “The Only Thing to Fear Is Fear.” The firm’s ad continued:

We refuse to be perturbed by the alarmists, the pessimists and by the timid who see things at night. As prophets in the past they have a batting average of about .001. The only times they have hit the truth is when they themselves created the conditions they feared by fearing them. Our slogan during these earnest times is “Keep Business Going.” We shall retrench in nothing, cancel nothing, fear nothing. Our faith in the existing and eternal prosperity of the United States of America is immovable. … We believe that this is the very time of all times that you should buy what you want—whether it be in our line or in any other. The only way to stop your business is to stop the other fellow’s. The only thing to fear is fear.

The phrase “The only thing to fear is fear” and its variants, therefore, were demonstrably “out there” in circulation within the business community during the first few decades of the 20th century. William Safire makes the point that it does not really matter where the phrase came from because it was FDR that used it during his speech to inspire the nation and it was he, therefore, who transmuted the linguistic coin into rhetorical gold.

For more information

Text and audio of FDR's First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1933, at History Matters.

Bibliografija

William Walker Atkinson, Thought Vibration: or, The law of attraction in the thought world, Chicago: The Library Shelf, 1908, pp. 46-49.

“Business to Make Stabilization Study: National Commerce Chamber Is Forming Committee to Work Out Formal Program,” New York Times, February 9, 1931, p. 3.

Theron Q. Dumont (William Walker Atkinson), The Power of Concentration. Chicago: Advanced Thought Publishing Company, 1918.

Davis W. Houck, FDR and Fear Itself: The First Inaugural Address. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2002, pp. 119-120.

William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience. New York: 1929, p. 93.

Henry Lindlahr, Practice of Natural Therapeutics. Chicago: The Lindlahr publishing company, 1919, p. 447.

“The Only Thing to Fear Is Fear,” Display ad for E. F. Droop & Sons, Company, Washington Post, July 4, 1917, p. 2.

Frances Perkins, Roosevelt kojeg sam znao. New York: Viking Press, 1946, p. 29.

William Safire, “Nothing to fear but fear itself,” Safire’s Political Dictionary, rev. edition. Oxford: University Press, 2008, pp. 481-483.

Lela Stiles, The Man Behind Roosevelt: The Story of Louis McHenry Howe. New York: The World Publishing Company, 1954, p. 235.

“The Value of a Silver Tongue,” Bankers’ Magazine (May 1927): 666.


The “Four Freedoms” speech remastered

There is only one speech in American history that inspired a multitude of books and films, the establishment of its own park, a series of paintings by a world famous artist, a prestigious international award and a United Nation’s resolution on Human Rights.

That speech is Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1941 State of the Union Address, commonly known as the “Four Freedoms” speech. In it he articulated a powerful vision for a world in which all people had freedom of speech and of religion, and freedom from want and fear. It was delivered on January 6, 1941 and it helped change the world. The words of the speech are enshrined in marble at Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island in New York, are visualized in the paintings of Norman Rockwell, inspired the international Four Freedoms Award and are the foundation for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations in 1948.

On the 50 th anniversary of the speech in 1991 a ceremony was held in the U.S. Capitol featuring a remarkable bi-partisan group of leaders including Sen. Bob Dole, Rep. Richard Gephardt, Anne Roosevelt and President George H.W. Grm. President Bush said this about FDR’s Four Freedoms:

“Two hundred years ago, perhaps our greatest political philosopher, Thomas Jefferson, defined our nation’s identity when he wrote “All men are created equal, endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Fifty years ago, our greatest American political pragmatist, Roosevelt, refined that thought in his Four Freedoms when he brilliantly enunciated our 20 th century vision of our founding fathers’ commitment to individual liberty.”

To honor the 75 th anniversary of this historic presidential address, the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum joined forces with the National Archives Motion Picture Preservation Labs to create new enhanced versions of the speech in HD and Ultra-HD (4K) file formats. These new versions were transferred directly from the original 35mm film stock. Audio from the original disk recordings were then synced with the new video files to create an entirely new resource. The new HD video is now available to the public here, and the 4K video is available upon special request from the Library.

(Copyright Sherman Grinberg Film Library – http://www.shermangrinberg.com/)

It is important to fully understand the historic context of this speech. On November 5 th , 1940 Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected president for an unprecedented third term. It was a dark time as the world faced unprecedented danger, instability, and war. Much of Europe had fallen to the Nazis and Great Britain was barely holding its own. The Japanese Empire brutally occupied much of China and East Asia. A great number of Americans remained committed to isolationism and the belief that the United States should stay out of the war. President Roosevelt understood Britain’s desperate need for American support and attempted to convince the American people to come to the aid of their closest ally.

In his address on January 6, 1941, Franklin Roosevelt presented his reasons for American involvement, making the case for continued aid to Great Britain and greater production of war industries at home. In helping Britain, President Roosevelt stated, the United States was fighting for the universal freedoms that all people deserved.

As America entered the war these “four freedoms” – the freedom of speech, the freedom of worship, the freedom from want, and the freedom from fear – symbolized America’s war aims and gave hope in the following years to a war-wearied people because they knew they were fighting for freedom.

The ideas enunciated in Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms were the foundational principles that evolved into the Atlantic Charter declared by Winston Churchill and FDR in August 1941 the United Nations Declaration of January 1, 1942 President Roosevelt’s vision for an international organization that became the United Nations after his death and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations in 1948 through the work of Eleanor Roosevelt.

As tyrannical leaders once again resort to brutal oppression and terrorism to achieve their goals, as democracy and journalism are under attack from extremists across the globe, and as surveillance and technology threaten individual liberties and freedom of expression, FDRs bold vision for a world that embraces these four fundamental freedoms is as vital today as it was 75 years ago.

Special thanks to the New York Community Trust for their ongoing support of the Pare Lorentz Film Center.


This 4th of July, let’s remember to honor FDR’s 4 Freedoms | Mišljenje

1936: Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882 - 1945) the 32nd President of the United States from 1933-45. A Democrat, he led his country through the depression of the 1930's and World War II, and was elected for an unprecedented fourth term of office in 1944. (Photo by Keystone Features/Getty Images)

By Charles D. Allen

As America crosses the midway point of 2020, we can agree that it has been one heck of a year. Following the news and social media, we see ongoing and emerging challenges in the international arena. Domestically, we continue to struggle with this great experiment called democracy for our society and its culture, which defines the daily experience of Americans.

Col. Charles Allen (U.S. Armt, ret.). (Image via Facebook)

This weekend we will celebrate Independence Day to mark our declaration of intention to separate from a government that tread on our unalienable rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” What American colonists sought then was freedom from an oppressive system and subsequently demonstrated they were willing to fight and die for such freedom.

In the closing minutes of his January 1941 State of the Union Address and weeks after the nation’s entrance World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke of four freedoms as values of democratic societies.

In preceding years, totalitarian and fascist regimes of Germany, Japan, and Italy continually demonstrated disregard for such values. In his exhortation, FDR was building the case for U.S. intervention for the sake of others—that is, the security of allied governments and their people:

“In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms. The first is freedom of speech and expression — everywhere in the world.

“The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way — everywhere in the world.

“The third is freedom from want. Which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants — everywhere in the world.

“The fourth is freedom from fear. Which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor — anywhere in the world.”

The themes of FDR’s speech are poignantly captured by the imagery of Norman Rockwell’s series of paintings, “The Four Freedoms” featured in The Saturday Evening Post.

For each issue, the respective painting was accompanied by an essay from a renowned American writer.

As I read each one this weekend, the essay that spoke to me most in the current context of our American struggles was penned in March 1943 by Pulitzer Prize-winner Stephen Vincent Benét.

“What do we mean when we say ‘freedom from fear?’ It isn’t just a formula or a set of words. It’s a look in the eyes and a feeling in the heart and a thing to be won against odds. It goes to the roots of life — to a man and a woman and their children and the home they can make and keep.

“Since our nation began, men and women have come here for just that freedom — freedom from the fear that lies at the heart of every unjust law, of every tyrannical exercise of power by one man over another man….

“We do not mean freedom from responsibility — freedom from struggle and toil, from hardship and danger. We do not intend to breed a race wrapped in cotton wool, too delicate to stand rough weather. In any world of man that we can imagine, fear and the conquest of fear must play a part.

“But we have the chance, if we have the brains and the courage, to destroy the worst fears that harry man today — the fear of starving to death, the fear of being a slave, the fear of being stamped into the dust because he is one kind of man and not another, the fear of unprovoked attack and ghastly death for himself and for his children because of the greed and power of willful and evil men and deluded nations.”

Nearly eight decades later, the case for fear still exists in 2020 as Americans are facing a global pandemic, the potential collapse of international economies, and social, as well as political challenges to its democratic institutions.

We cannot be afraid to address injustice within our nation.

Benét also pointed back the Declaration of Independence when “… we, as a nation, asserted that all men were created equal, that all men were entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those were large assertions, but we have tried to live up to them. We have not always succeeded we have often failed. But our will and desire as a nation have been to live up to them.”

In the months ahead, and for the remainder of 2020, it is my hope that we so resolve and pursue freedom from fear for others in our American society and, in doing so, for ourselves.


This Week in Roosevelt History: July 15-21

July 18, 1940: FDR was nominated for an unprecedented third term as president.

ER addressing the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.
July 18, 1940
FDR Library Photo Collection. NPx. 69-96.

The New Deal Estore is a great place to shop for Roosevelt related books, gifts, and other treasures from the New Deal Store at the Roosevelt Library. Available at www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu, the Estore features everything from a selection of the latest books on the Roosevelts and their times, to T-shirts, ties and caps, multimedia, campaign memorabilia, and museum replicas. For items related to this week’s blog post, follow the links below:


Gledaj video: Ship review: USS Franklin D Roosevelt