Alonzo Hamby is the author of the new book Man of Destiny: FDR and the Making of the American Century. His other books include Man of the People: A Life of Harry S. Truman. He is Distinguished Professor of History Emeritus at Ohio University, and he lives in Athens, Ohio.
Q:
You write of FDR that "he was the New Deal." What was the impact of
Roosevelt's personality on the New Deal programs, and how would you
characterize the overall success of the New Deal?
A:
Roosevelt's personality, transmitted over the airwaves, was central to the New
Deal. Radio transmission of a leader's voice was comparatively new and
projected a sense of authority and leadership directly into the households of
ordinary individuals. Television would have a similar impact for the next
generation of Americans.
Q:
What was the impact of Theodore Roosevelt on FDR's policies and world
view?
A:
TR clearly had an impact. He was the first of what political scientists
call "the modern presidents." He used the mass media (newspapers
and magazines in his day) to project an image of activism and authority along
with a concern for ordinary middle-class Americans.
He
also engaged in unprecedented activism in foreign policy (Panama canal; mediation
of the Russo-Japanese war). He combined images of being a reformer at home
and activist leadership in foreign policy. The young FDR much admired him
and in the large sense I have outlined tried to follow his example.
Q:
You write of FDR in World War II, "Underneath a veneer of national unity,
the president's diminishing personal and political resources steadily eroded
his leadership." What do you see as the reasons for this?
A:
By the time of WWII, FDR had been around for a long time. Every president
loses authority with time and familiarity. FDR was simply no longer the
new, impressive, and commanding figure of 1933.
We've
seen the same kind of thing happen with about every other two-term
president. The remarkable thing is that Roosevelt was able to hold on for
so long and actually win election to a fourth term. The book cites a 1944
poll in which a majority see him as the person best equipped to manage the
postwar peace.
All
that said, however, it is also clear that few members of Congress saw him as
the commanding figure of 1933.
Q:
Of the Yalta conference, you write, "Yalta was his final attempt to come
to grips with the cunning of a history beyond his control." How would you
characterize Roosevelt's actions at Yalta?
A:
Roosevelt came to Yalta wanting to nail down an accord with Stalin on the structure
of the postwar world. He pretty clearly felt that postwar peace depended
on it.
It
seems also clear that he thought the Soviet Union would inevitably be the
dominant force in Eastern Europe, perhaps Western Europe also, and that there
was little the U.S. could do about that. He did not anticipate a Cold
War.
Yet
right up until the day he died, he found himself handling "misunderstandings"
with the USSR. He likely thought Stalin an expansionist Russian leader in
the tradition of the Tsars rather than a committed Communist
revolutionary.
No
one can say whether he would have turned around in 1947 or thereabouts with his
versions of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan. We only know that he
hoped to manage a good relationship--and likely would have been disappointed.
Q:
What are you working on now?
A:
I have not dived into a new book-length project yet. I'm giving serious
thought to a book on major U.S. historians who established themselves as public
intellectuals with a following beyond the academy (e.g., Henry Adams, Charles
Beard, Arthur Schlesinger, Richard Hofstadter, C. Vann Woodward). If I
attempt it, it would be modeled on Robert Heilbroner's The Worldly Philosophers.
I've
just finished a piece on the FDR-Churchill relationship that will be published
in the Churchill Centre magazine Finest Hour.
--Interview with Deborah Kalb
No comments:
Post a Comment