Conservatives Need to Reclaim FDR

We are waiting for another - doubtless very different - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

There was a kerfuffle a couple weeks ago involving criticism of Winston Churchill as a leader. I find it strange the way that conservative Americans treat Churchill as if he were one of the greatest American leaders, as the third in the sequence after Washington and Lincoln.

I’m not the only person who’s noticed this. The academic Tanner Greer said, “The boomercon historical pantheon of heroes is something like this: Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul II, Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln. Your pick among Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton.”

Without taking anything away from Churchill, this is strange because America had its own incredible wartime leader: President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

My sense is that American conservatives alighted on Churchill rather than Roosevelt because of their deep hostility to the New Deal. Opposition to the New Deal was one of the major threads that congealed to create postwar conservatism. As with civil rights, conservatism ultimately made peace with the New Deal, but they originally believed it needed to be rolled back. Historian George Nash wrote in his canonical history of conservatism:

To Meyer and most of the Buckley circle, liberalism itself was the target, the New Deal was a revolution to be fought relentlessly, and Adlai Stevenson was not in the least a model for conservative political action. The enemy was the Left, period—not just its extremist fringe. National Review was not about to acquiesce in the post-New Deal Zeitgeist.

To these conservatives, FDR was thus a great villain. Again Nash:

Indeed, with rare unanimity the Right believed that the administration of Franklin Roosevelt inaugurated a revolution both in the agenda and structure of American politics. It was the second great crisis in the decline of the Republic.

While I don’t know exactly how the American conservative fascination with Churchill came to be, it’s definitely convenient in allowing them to continue taking a negative view of FDR.

Many conservatives today continue to have an extremely negative view of FDR. When I posted about him on X, I got a torrent of hate from both the left and right, for example.

I think it’s fair to say that there’s a lot to dislike and disagree with about many of FDR’s policies and actions. I’m not here to defend all of the particulars of his administration, which includes much I disagree with.

But there are many things he got right, and many patterns of his administration that are directly in line with what we need today.

1. FDR provided a needed institutional reset for the modern industrial age

America periodically resets its institutions to adapt to changing conditions. The first attempt at an institutional structure was the Articles of Confederation, quickly rejected as not working and replaced with our Constitution.

Sectional disputes, primarily around slavery, precipitated a national crisis that resulted in the Civil War. Northern victory lead to an institutional reset in which slavery was abolished, America was turned into a genuine nation rather than a confederation of states, and industrialization and the turning of the continent into an integrated “empire” was accelerated.

The second industrial revolution, along with its related large scale immigration and urbanization, created a lot of challenges for the country. Some of these started to be addressed during the Progressive era, but the old laissez-faire system still proved inadequate, first during the Depression and secondly in World War II.

While not perfect, Roosevelt’s New Deal and other reforms provided a second institutional reset that was badly needed in a modern industrial economy. There was, and is, no way we could go back to the old laissez-faire robber baron system, or get rid of social security and such programs. FDR’s reforms set the stage for the period of postwar prosperity in which industrial jobs became middle class jobs, and America experienced mass prosperity on a previously unknown scale. The postwar institutions like NATO, the UN, etc. coming out of Roosevelt’s war victory provided for America’ new global role and ultimate victory in the Cold War.

While there have been some updates, this is still the basic institutional structure of America. People like Christopher Caldwell argue that the civil rights revolution was a “second constitution” for America, but things like civil rights did not change the institutional structure of America in the way the New Deal did.

We are now 80 years on from FDR and facing a new set of problems in America. We are due for a third major institutional reset to address the very different needs of a post-industrial, high tech world. And to set the stage for the next phase of American growth and transformation.

Unfortunately, no one today seems to be able to think in those terms. It’s possible to imagine new policies in many areas, but the institutional framework seems basically taken for granted. In fact, daring to question the role of any of the old institutions like NATO is treated with horror.

I’m not saying we should get rid of NATO, but we do need an institutional reset - something that is completely within the American tradition. As a writer in Palladium said about the old upper class that spawned FDR:

To be an elite is to act in the world as an independent historical player with the collective power and ambition to not simply accept established institutions, but to change them. Our late American upper classes maintained a sense of stewardship over their institutions—from universities to the United States—because these were the vehicles by which they could act in the world. And when they need something different, a true elite creates and re-creates its institutions, rather than merely staffing them.

Today, our elite merely staff the institutions. But they need to be transformed. Hence, we need a contemporary FDR who can do that once again.

2. FDR was a populist who could execute

FDR was a populist, who was able to go direct to the masses through radio and other means. An inner party member of the upper class, he was able to use his connection with the people to effectively be a class traitor who helped tame corporate power. Remember, most WASPs of his era were Republicans.

But he wasn’t just a blowhard. He actually knew how to accomplish things. Did everything he tried work? No. But you can’t look at, for example, the rapid conversion of US industrial production towards war matériel, or something like the Manhattan Project, and say that he wasn’t able to pull off some pretty incredible things.

This ability to execute grew from his upper class background. He had lots of training and experience in leadership, and a vast network of high capability people to draw on in carrying out his work.

Today’s populists tend to come from subaltern backgrounds and do not have a track record of running large organizations or high level leadership in elite domains. This cripples their ability to make changes or even run the office they were elected to effectively. The result is often a circus.

We need a better brand of populist today. One who cares about the people, but has the background to get things done and willingness to betray his class do them. In short, someone a lot like FDR.

3. FDR built up our nation and our people

FDR was a builder, and also someone who cared about helping the people towards the bottom of society.

One of his notable initiatives, for example, was rural electrification. The Rural Electrification Act and the Tennessee Valley Authority were created. Prior to FDR, people said it would never be economical to provide electricity in rural areas. He helped bring modern technology, conveniences, and lifestyles to all of the country, not just parts of it. This shows his focus on helping the left behind.

His various public works projects also built a tremendous amount of infrastructure, some of which is still used today. For example, the school I attended in first through fourth grades was built by the Public Works Administration in the 1930s. It’s still in use as a community center building that includes a library branch.

Other pieces of iconic American infrastructure were built at this time, from the Hoover Dam to the Lincoln Tunnel.

The infrastructure that was built was high quality and beautiful. That’s one reason it still exists today. FDR even funded a substantial amount of artwork, lot of which was good. In fact, the postwar art world dislikes the New Deal era art because it’s too traditional and too pro-American.

Reclaiming FDR

In sum, America could use a leader in the style of FDR today, one who operates within the American cultural and political tradition, who has a populist connection to and genuine concern with the people who aren’t among the privileged, who is competent and capable of leadership and execution at the highest level, and who has a mindset towards building, beauty, institutional change, and national greatness.

The actual contents of this person’s program would be different from FDR’s of course. Our situation is different from his, and FDR flat out got some things wrong. But until they recognize the virtues of FDR, American conservatives won’t even understand the kind of leader they should be seeking, much less vote for one.

In today’s world, American conservatives need to reclaim FDR as one of their own.