Michael Hiltzik
Tue, October 29, 2024
Donald Trump addresses the New York rally Sunday at which speakers uttered unrelenting ethnic and racial slurs. (C-SPAN)
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways
"Well, Felix, this elects me."
The speaker was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was at home in Albany with his friend and advisor Felix Frankfurter, monitoring radio reports of a political disaster unfolding in Herbert Hoover's Washington.
It was 1932. Hoover had dispatched the military to break up a camp of World War I veterans who had massed to demand immediate payment of a bonus they had been promised for serving. News of the cavalry's gassing and trampling of civilians — the slain including an infant born during the nationwide march of the so-called Bonus Army — would dominate the front pages and tar Hoover's public image through the presidential campaign.
Flash forward 92-plus years to Donald Trump's rally Sunday at New York's Madison Square Garden, a bleak, lurid festival of racist hate and profane vituperation so vile that even fellow Republicans, who have turned a blind eye to Trump's character for years, are distancing themselves from the event.
Read more: Column: A conservative think tank says Trump policies would crater the economy — but it's being kind
Their fear may be that with this heavily promoted event, the fundamental loathsomeness of Trump's political persona and behavior may break through to the undecided voters he needs to win reelection.
The occasion evokes the line sometimes attributed (perhaps apocryphally) to Mark Twain that "History doesn't always repeat itself, but it often rhymes." For the attack on the Bonus Army and the Madison Square Garden rally share features that could bind them together as campaign turning points.
As Twain might have acknowledged, the comparison isn't perfect — among other differences, the Bonus Army attack occurred on July 28, 1932, in the middle of the presidential campaign, while the Trump rally came only 10 days before election day and after early voting by mail and in person has already started in many states. Trump threatens to turning the military on American citizens to quell demonstrations; Hoover actually did so.
But the events do rhyme. Let's take a look.
Start with the main characters. Hoover and Trump became president after winning their first campaigns for elective office, and both entered the White House as wealthy men. The similarities end there, however.
Hoover had made a name for himself in public service. During World War I he had served as chair of the Belgian Relief Commission, which shipped food to that German-occupied nation, and subsequently as head of the U.S. Food Administration, which aimed to keep food prices stable while the U.S. participated in the war. After war's end, he became director of the American Relief Commission, which provided food relief to the war-torn countries of Europe.
Hoover served as Commerce Secretary for Warren Harding and his successor, Calvin Coolidge — in which role he oversaw the interstate negotiations that would clear the way for construction of the great dam that would bear his name. Trump's public service prior to his election as president was nonexistent.
Well, Felix, this elects me.
Franklin Roosevelt to Felix Frankfurter, upon hearing of Hoover's attack on the Bonus Army
The two came to their wealth by different paths. Hoover was a self-made man, having earned a degree in engineering as a member of the first graduating class of Stanford University and making a fortune as a mining engineer. Trump inherited his wealth from his father, a real estate developer.
Hoover, like Trump, saw himself as a savior of the nation. "He has wrapped himself in the belief," his secretary of state, Henry Stimson, wrote in his diary, "that the state of the country really depended on his reelection." Trump often claims to be the only person who can save America from war and economic depression. Neither, obviously, saw themselves clearly.
On the Democratic side, Roosevelt and Kamala Harris were scorned by critics as intellectual lightweights, despite having had successful careers in government — Roosevelt as a New York state senator, assistant Navy secretary under Woodrow Wilson, and governor of New York; Harris as San Francisco district attorney, attorney general of California, U.S. senator and vice president.
Read more: Column: Trump's glorification of the 1890s in America displays his dangerous ignorance of economics and history
Despite that, FDR was disdained by former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. as having "a second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Walter Lippmann, the reigning public intellectual of his era, deprecated FDR as "a highly impressionable person, without a firm grasp of public affairs. ... A pleasant man who, without any important qualifications for the office, would very much like to be President."
Trump and his cohorts incessantly demean Harris as — to quote the ever-fading Tucker Carlson at the Sunday Trump rally — a "low-IQ former California prosecutor."
The Republican Parties of 1932 and 2024 were fragmented entities when they nominated their presidential candidates.
Hoover had proven during his term to be a technocrat utterly without political skills. GOP insurgents (led by Harold Ickes, who would go on to serve FDR as interior secretary) had mounted a "dump Hoover" movement at their national convention; it collapsed for lack of a candidate to take up the colors.
Trump prevailed at the 2024 GOP convention, though not without challenges from candidates fearful of his lack of appeal outside a core right-wing base — former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley collected a strong 40% of the vote in a series of primaries, but not enough to carry her to the nomination.
That brings us to what might be the turning points in both Republican campaigns.
For Hoover, it was his response to the Bonus Army. This was a national movement for early payment of a stipend Congress had voted for veterans of the war at a cost of up to $4 billion — but which was not scheduled to be redeemed until 1945. Veterans could borrow from the government against their bonus certifications, but only at a high rate of interest.
As the Depression tightened its grip on the nation in 1931 and amid soaring unemployment and the spread of shantytowns of dispossessed Americans known as "Hoovervilles," veterans began to gather in Washington, uncorking fears of civil disorder.
Read more: Column: The Nazi roots of the Trump-Vance smear of Haitian immigrants
Among their targets was Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, who was steadfast against early redemption. (Among Mellon's grandchildren is Timothy Mellon, who is the largest individual contributor to the Trump campaign and other Republicans in this election cycle.)
The Bonus Expeditionary Force, as the Bonus marchers called themselves, originated in Portland, Ore., with an unemployed ex-sergeant named Walter W. Waters as its commander. They started to move east — "hundreds of thousands of men, women, children, and babies ... walking, hitchhiking, hopping freights," as Paul Dickson and Thomas B. Allen reported in their 2004 book about the Bonus Army.
Most of the marchers fell away en route, but by the end of June a Hooverville-like camp housing as many as 15,000 bedraggled men and their families had sprung up in the desolate, muddy Anacostia Flats area of Washington. They were fed with donated food, treated at a medical clinic set up on the grounds, and mounted a series of marches to Capitol Hill, where a bill to accelerate the bonus payments to the present day was being debated. (It passed the House but was defeated in the Senate.)
Hoover and his aides became progressively more fretful about the settlement at Anacostia Flats, especially when its organizers began to talk about making it permanent. There was talk about its having been infiltrated by Communists and rumors of planned violence. Hoover decided early in July to have the marchers evicted and placed the responsibility in the hands of the Army chief of staff, Gen. Douglas MacArthur.
MacArthur assumed the task of deploying tanks, bayonets and tear gas on fellow citizens enthusiastically, calling the camp residents "insurrectionists." The prospect appalled MacArthur's adjutant, Maj. Dwight D. Eisenhower, who claimed later that he tried to convince his superior that the job was beneath his dignity. MacArthur rebuffed him.
On July 28, the attack began, including cavalry troops under the command of Major George S. Patton. Two veterans were killed in the operation and 55 injured. A 12-week-old baby died after being tear-gassed. The tent camp in Anacostia was burned to the ground.
The following day, Hoover issued a statement explaining that he had acted to prevent the government from being "coerced by mob rule." He kept petulantly defending his actions to the end of his life. In his memoirs he accused the Democrats of distorting the event, implying "that I had murdered veterans on the streets of Washington." He charged that the Bonus march had been largely "organized and promoted by the Communists and included a large number of hoodlums and ex-convicts."
As it happened, Roosevelt as president was no more willing to pay the bonus early than Hoover and Mellon had been. In 1936, Congress overwhelmingly passed a measure to pay the bonus immediately — over FDR's veto.
The ramifications of the Bonus Army attack live on. It set the stage for the creation of a vast administrative infrastructure of aid for service members and veterans, starting with enactment of the GI Bill, which paid for tuition, textbooks and supplies (and $50 a month for living expenses) to grant returning veterans a college education, making American society into a meritocracy.
The bill was signed by Franklin Roosevelt in June 1944, a couple of weeks after allied troops cross the English channel on D-Day.
It also stands as a warning for Trump that taking military action against civilians will inspire a massive public backlash, which in that case contributed — no one can say how much — to Franklin Roosevelt's landslide defeat of Hoover just over three months later. Roosevelt's presidency established a new principle in American politics through the New Deal, that government exists to succor all its people, not just the wealthy.
Michael Hiltzik
Commentary on economics and more from a Pulitzer Prize winner.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment