Franklin Delano Roosevelt :: essays research papers

Franklin Delano Roosevelt is one of our countrys best known and most beloved presidents. He is commonly remembered for taking a tired, beaten, nation and instilling hope in it. This positive view of Roosevelt is held by ruin, who paints the picture of a humans whose conclusion was to alleviate our nations sparing pains. But, is this view too myopic? Is Roosevelt deserving of such a godly reputation? These questions are posed by Conkin as he points out the discrimination that underlies many New Deal programs, and as yet suggests that many of Roosevelts actions were for purely political motives. During the weeks preceding Roosevelts inauguration the country was tenanted in an economic crisis that was quickly spiraling downward. Banks failed, people panicked, and the nation looked to someone, anyone, for help. Hoover, perceive the countrys desperation, but realizing his lack of power, and the feelings of resentment harbored towards him looked to Roosevelt. He asked the presiden t-elect to join in economic planning, support policies, and most importantly to reassure the nation. While both authors whole tone Roosevelts unwillingness to cooperate with Hoover they site resistent reasons for it. Burns talks of Roosevelts belief that the nation was non yet his domain, and that Hoover had the authority to distribute the situation. In addition, Burns excuses Roosevelt by maintaining "Roosevelt did not foresee that the banking situation would founder a dramatic climax on Inauguration day. No man could have." (P. 148) This position is an exceedingly benevolent one when contrasted with Conkins who writes Roosevelt "did nothing, and helplessly watched the economy collapse, allow it appear as one last result of Republican incompetence." This circular allowed Roosevelt to emerge as the "nations savior," and ally the Democratic party with this image.Furthermore, the two authors differ in their assessment of the effect of public opinion on Roosevelts actions. Burns gives the impression of a president who looked to engage all in his coalition. He states, politically, his cabinet "catered to almost every major group." Burns also adds, "Roosevelt did not slavishly follow the wishes of group leaders." (P. 150). Roosevelt is portrayed as the paragon of a humanitarian, "he wanted to help the underdog, though not necessarily at the expense of the top dog. He believed that private, special interests must be subordinated to the universal interest." (P. 155) Conkin attempts to poke holes in this idealistic portrayal of Roosevelt.