Bully
Boy: The Neocons’ Favorite President
by
Thomas J. DiLorenzo
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
DIGG THIS
Most of the
high profile neocons are just wild about Teddy. Not the perpetually
inebriated one from Massachusetts but the other one – the New Yorker,
FDR’s cousin Teddy Roosevelt. To understand why, one must
understand that the bedrock political belief of neoconservativism
is the oxymoronic notion of "limited but energetic government,"
as David Brooks described it in the Winter 1998 issue of American
Experiment Quarterly. So-called national greatness conservativism
"insists that while government should be limited, it should
also be energetic," Brooks and William Kristol nonsensically
stated in a Sept. 15, 1997 Wall Street Journal article. So
government must be big, yet small. Unlimited, yet limited. Energetic,
yet lethargic. This is the neoconservative philosophy of government
in a nutshell.
In a September
25, 2004 Weekly Standard article the self-described "godfather"
of neoconservativism, Irving Kristol, explained that his heroes
are "Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, and Ronald Reagan." Roosevelt,
who the neocons affectionately label "TR," is listed first
because of the belief that "energetic" government was
"given new life by Teddy Roosevelt," as Brooks stated
in his 1998 article. Even Steve Forbes, who sometimes postures as
a libertarian, "has embraced Teddy Roosevelt," says Brooks.
(Forbes is also a Lincoln idolater. Not surprisingly, Bill Clinton
once said that Teddy Roosevelt was his "favorite Republican
president").
Understanding
the real Teddy Roosevelt is therefore important if one wants to
understand the mindset of the warmongering imperialists who control
the Republican Party (and the federal government) today. The truth
is, Teddy Roosevelt was an imperialist who was morbidly fascinated
with war and killing. He was a died-in-the-wool statist who considered
himself to be the political heir to Hamilton, Clay, and Lincoln.
He was a reckless, frenetic interventionist who displayed little
knowledge (especially on economic issues) or even concern about
the likely consequences of his interventions.
TR’s mental
stability was questionable, to say the least. Mark Twain, who met
him twice, judged that he was "clearly insane," as Tom
Woods recalls in an essay on Roosevelt in Reassessing
the Presidency (John Denson, editor). In biographies of
TR we learn that after an argument with his girlfriend a young Teddy
Roosevelt went home and shot his neighbor’s dog. When he killed
his first Spaniard in Cuba he "abandoned himself to complete
hysteria," as biographer Edmund Morris recounts.
As president
Roosevelt would take morning rides through Rock Creek Park wildly
shooting at tree branches with a pistol, oblivious to the harm he
might do to the nearby private homes in the District of Columbia.
He once strung a wire across the Potomac River so that he could
hang on it because, he said, his wrists needed strengthening.
Far more
important than Teddy Roosevelt’s insane antics, however, is his
misbehavior as president, which was a disaster for the nation. The
reasons why are catalogued in a new biography entitled Bully
Boy: The Truth About Theodore Roosevelt’s Legacy by Jim
Powell.
It was
TR who first declared that the U.S. should act as the world’s policeman,
a dramatic contrast to George Washington’s and Thomas Jefferson’s
policy of commercial relations with all nations and entangling alliances
with none. Consequently, writes Powell, "the United States
has become involved in dozens of wars, and hundreds of thousands
of American soldiers have died in wars that had little, if anything,
to do with U.S. national security." Here you have the principal
reason why the neocons are just wild about Teddy.
Roosevelt
warned of "the menace of peace," and was subsequently
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize! "His many targets [for war]
over the years included Cuba, Hawaii, Venezuela, China, the Philippines,
Panama, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and Canada."
He always masked his imperialistic impulses with humanitarian rhetoric,
says Powell, in the dishonorable tradition of the Party of Lincoln.
The U.S. couldn’t admit that it was seizing territory simply because
it wanted it, for example, so "he asserted that the United
States must intervene . . . when a nation failed to behave."
This was a philosophy of unlimited foreign policy interventionism,
not unlike the Bush administration’s claim to be busy eradicating
evil from the planet.
TR was
"the most outspoken advocate of an interventionist foreign
policy" and lusted for war and killing. The more the better.
The reason for this, Roosevelt once explained, is that "All
the great masterful races have been fighting races . . ." Master
Race. National Greatness Conservativism. What’s the difference?
Powell
shows how TR reinvigorated the imperialism of the early Republican
Party, especially of the activities of William Seward, Lincoln’s
secretary of state. To show just how imperialistic the late nineteenth-century
Republican party was, Powell quotes historian Warren Zimmerman as
explaining how Seward "wanted to push the United States north
into Canada, south into Mexico, and west toward Asia. In the Caribbean
he sought a coaling station for the U.S. Navy in the Dominican Republic,
signed a treaty with Denmark for the purchase of the Virgin Islands,
and won the agreement of Columbia for the right to build a canal
across the Isthmus of Panama. He also made . . . probes at . . .
Cuba, Haiti, Culebra, French Guiana, Puerto Rico, and St. Bartholomew.
He courted Denmark for both Iceland and Greenland."
Powell
describes how, as an assistant secretary of the Navy in the McKinley
administration, Roosevelt helped manipulate the media and Congress
into declaring war with Spain. Unlike today’s cowardly cheerleaders
for war (William and Irving Kristol, Rush Limbaugh, G. Gordon Liddy,
Sean Hannity, New Gingrich, William Bennett, and most of the employees
of the American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Weekly
Standard and National Review magazines come to mind),
TR did volunteer to participate in the war, and he did so
in Cuba. He did have the courage to put his own life at risk.
His famed "rough
riders" experienced a 70 percent casualty rate during their
brief Cuban adventure, after which "Roosevelt . . . lobbied
aggressively to have himself awarded the Congressional Medal of
Honor." (His efforts failed, but he was awarded the medal posthumously
by an admiring President Bill Clinton).
Powell
does a good job of describing the opponents to Rooseveltian warmongering
imperialism, namely, the Anti-Imperialist League, whose members
included Grover Cleveland, Mark Twain, Andrew Carnegie, and William
Graham Sumner. Roosevelt dismissed all of these men as "men
of a bygone era."
Teddy Roosevelt
became president by first serving as William McKinley’s vice president
and succeeding him after he was assassinated. One of his first proclamations
was that the Filipinos "must be made to realize . . . that
we are the masters." (There’s that master race notion again).
He referred to Filipinos as "Chinese half-breeds," "savages,
barbarians, wild and ignorant people." Having demonized and
dehumanized Filipinos in this way, under his "leadership"
the U.S. military would kill more than 200,000 of them. "Torture
became an accepted method of prompting Filipino villagers to disclose
what they knew about the identity of guerrilla leaders," writes
Powell, in a statement that must give chills and thrills to modern-day
advocates of torture like Rush Limbaugh. (At a recent Heritage Foundation
function Limbaugh thanked some of the actors from the television
show "24" for "making torture respectable").
Being largely
ignorant of economics and economic history, the neocon TR worshippers
also praise him for his "trust busting" activities. Powell
surveys the economics literature on Teddy Roosevelt’s celebrated
"trust busting" and shows how this Quixotic crusade was
a matter of using the blunt force of the state to punish and intimidate
many of the most competitive businesses and industries in
America, to the benefit of their less efficient (or sour grapes)
competitors. It promoted protectionism, not competition.
While proclaiming
himself to be a champion of the consumer Roosevelt supported the
Republican party’s hyper-protectionist tariff policy, inflicting
even further harm on hapless American consumers. No friend of the
consumer could embrace protectionism as Teddy Roosevelt did.
Roosevelt
also crippled the U.S. railroad industry by signing the "Hepburn
Act" which allowed the Interstate Commerce Commission to impose
price controls on railroads, all but outlawed volume discounts to
large freight customers, and regulate almost all other aspects of
the railroad business. The result was a flight of capital away from
the railroad industry that was a serious drag on the entire economy
for decades, writes Powell.
"TR"
also drummed up a phony "food safety crisis" in order
to heroically "save" America
from it. But as Powell shows, "there were no epidemics related
to commercial food processing" in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries. Roosevelt’s "pure food laws" were
aimed "at protecting producers," not the general public.
For example, as Powell recounts, some of these early laws set exceptionally
high regulatory standards on imported foods as a form of veiled
protectionism. Food inspection laws during the Roosevelt era were
invariably favored by larger corporations who understood that the
laws would disproportionately harm their smaller competitors. "The
1906 Pure Food And Drugs Act empowered the Agriculture Department’s
notorious quack, Harvey Washington Wiley, to conduct crazy crusades
against foods competing with the interest groups he served"
(mostly larger corporate interests).
Teddy Roosevelt
is also remembered as a "great conservationist" but in
reality his "conservation" policies were another disaster.
"In the name of conservation," writes Powell, "Theodore
Roosevelt squandered huge amounts of money and degraded much of
our natural environment. He launched a federal dam-building program
that flooded canyons, disrupted natural water flows, silted up waterways,
raised water temperatures, lost huge amounts of water through evaporation,
and increased the salinity of irrigated soil so much that very little
could grow on it. Roosevelt’s national forest policies contributed
to overgrazing of grasslands and to forest fires of unprecedented
ferocity."
Socialists
of all stripes praise TR’s "conservation" policies, nevertheless,
because he strenuously opposed the privatization of government-controlled
land. Private property is the mortal enemy of socialism. In reality,
TR’s "conservation" policies were just another Republican
party mercantilist scheme. Mostly western "lobbying groups
hoped to enrich themselves with . . . free dams, free waterway improvements,
cheap water, cheap timber, cheap access to grazing lands, and other
goodies, at somebody else’s expense."
Teddy
Roosevelt’s biggest sin was that he "revived the idea of a
federal income tax after it had been given up for dead." In
doing so, the Philadelphia Record editorialized, "Roosevelt
provided more encouragement to state socialism and centralization
of government than all the frothy demagogues have accomplished in
a quarter century." Having jump-started the crusade for the
nationalization of all income, TR’s successors Taft and Wilson finished
the job. Wilson would use the government’s newly-created riches
to finance America’s disastrous entry into World War I.
This is yet
another reason why the neocons are just wild about Teddy.
September
1, 2006
Thomas
J. DiLorenzo [send him mail]
professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the
author of The
Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an
Unnecessary War,
(Three Rivers Press/Random House). His
next book, to be published in October, is Lincoln
Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe
(Crown Forum/Random House).
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Thomas
DiLorenzo Archives at LRC
Thomas
DiLorenzo Archives at Mises.org
|