Some in the US consider the new deal a form of socialism leading the way for publicly supported infrastructure programs which financially benefited both the public and corporations. As part of the US "New Deal" workers, traditionally robbed of retirement benefits, were given some relief via the social security act. Yes, that new order of democracy was awful not allowing people to starve and be homeless and without healthcare after slaving their entire lives.
As for the liberal agenda, sorry to say this has been around for many thousands of years, you've just never noticed. Current media coverage is just a distraction, keeping the the public's attention on large shifts of wealth to a small group of individuals. The militant dispositions you're noticing are reactions of societies under gradual economic stress due to accelerated economic disparity.
I really like the phase totalitarian democracy, defensive administration of majority rule, an extreme territorial posture often seen as a result of chronic stress and uncertainty in humans. This is the elephant in the room.
As for the current liberal agenda, just remember: There are two great tragedies in life. One is not to get your heart's desire. The other is to get it. —George Bernard Shaw
Once they reach their goals, they will have to live with them. Like western feminists, they wanted to be equal to men, now men treat them like equals, ie other men, and feminists don't like it.
Unemployment was the same after the New Deal. FDR took the country into war, after promising not to, to keep his program going. And then helped Stalin and the Communists conquer large swathes of the world. Farmers got arrested for eating their own crops. Government healthcare made everybody fatter and unhealthier.
Hi Chris, That was a great interview. I hope you can have more opportunities or develop your own podcasts.
As for the New Deal... It was reported to create new, direct employment for through public works contracts. Direct employment was counted as 2.5 million (5%) of the 13 million unemployed (25%). There was another 5% employment gain from 1934 to 1940 in support services employment.
US involvement in WWII was resisted until the invasion of Great Britain and France, American allies with an unenforceable obligation of support. FDR felt the US had a moral obligation to stand by ally treaties and allowed Britain and France to buy US assets to prosecute a defense against the Nazi invasion. The cash poor British government traded 100 year leases of British military bases in lieu of cash. Moral of the story: Make sure you understand the implications of what you sign, contracts can last forever. Second moral of that story: Never expect a person of integrity and power to falter on prior commitments.
Also at around 1938, the New Deal $$ was running out, with over 2 million facing job lose. The scale of weapon sales to Britain and France would help offset the expected employment downturn.
Japan... In 1940, the French lost to Nazi invasion and the installed Vichy took control of the colonies including French Indochina. The US was supporting the rebels to overthrow the Vichy regime to ensure the Nazi's would be denied raw rubber while the US would have more favorable access. Japan wanted to abolish all western and western supported control over asia which put US access to raw materials at risk and softly invaded the French colony. Additionally, Vichy troops were indiscriminately machine gunning the civilian population including children. Remember, there was a strong morality in the US leadership.
As a result of elements in Japan wanting to purify asia from westerns and their expansion looking to potentially threaten US interests in the Philippians, the US halted oil sales to Japan. The Japanese military had no idea of the US's size and decided to attack pearl harbor to force the US into a negotiated a treaty for Japan's eventual control of asia. As a result, they provided the US the political will to help the British and exiled French government from the Nazi invasion.
Also, the US is not like African governments where a country's leader can declare war. The declaration of war against Japan was voted on by US congress. The US declared war on Germany only after Germany issued a declaration of war against the US hours after the attack on pearl harbor.
So, FDR did not bring the country to war, the US was an arms manufacturer and dealer to the British and Stalin. If Japan did not attack pearl harbor, the US would not have entered WWII and the Nazi's would still be in control of europe and africa where you'd be speaking German and Afrikaans would be a lost language.
Stalin was a different story than the US. I don't know enough about what happened there except for stories by friends' family members that lived through it.
I enjoyed the interview, good, important discussion. Fun to learn you're based in Kenya, a good place to observe the world as it goes mad.
Some in the US consider the new deal a form of socialism leading the way for publicly supported infrastructure programs which financially benefited both the public and corporations. As part of the US "New Deal" workers, traditionally robbed of retirement benefits, were given some relief via the social security act. Yes, that new order of democracy was awful not allowing people to starve and be homeless and without healthcare after slaving their entire lives.
As for the liberal agenda, sorry to say this has been around for many thousands of years, you've just never noticed. Current media coverage is just a distraction, keeping the the public's attention on large shifts of wealth to a small group of individuals. The militant dispositions you're noticing are reactions of societies under gradual economic stress due to accelerated economic disparity.
I really like the phase totalitarian democracy, defensive administration of majority rule, an extreme territorial posture often seen as a result of chronic stress and uncertainty in humans. This is the elephant in the room.
As for the current liberal agenda, just remember: There are two great tragedies in life. One is not to get your heart's desire. The other is to get it. —George Bernard Shaw
Once they reach their goals, they will have to live with them. Like western feminists, they wanted to be equal to men, now men treat them like equals, ie other men, and feminists don't like it.
Unemployment was the same after the New Deal. FDR took the country into war, after promising not to, to keep his program going. And then helped Stalin and the Communists conquer large swathes of the world. Farmers got arrested for eating their own crops. Government healthcare made everybody fatter and unhealthier.
Hi Chris, That was a great interview. I hope you can have more opportunities or develop your own podcasts.
As for the New Deal... It was reported to create new, direct employment for through public works contracts. Direct employment was counted as 2.5 million (5%) of the 13 million unemployed (25%). There was another 5% employment gain from 1934 to 1940 in support services employment.
US involvement in WWII was resisted until the invasion of Great Britain and France, American allies with an unenforceable obligation of support. FDR felt the US had a moral obligation to stand by ally treaties and allowed Britain and France to buy US assets to prosecute a defense against the Nazi invasion. The cash poor British government traded 100 year leases of British military bases in lieu of cash. Moral of the story: Make sure you understand the implications of what you sign, contracts can last forever. Second moral of that story: Never expect a person of integrity and power to falter on prior commitments.
Also at around 1938, the New Deal $$ was running out, with over 2 million facing job lose. The scale of weapon sales to Britain and France would help offset the expected employment downturn.
Japan... In 1940, the French lost to Nazi invasion and the installed Vichy took control of the colonies including French Indochina. The US was supporting the rebels to overthrow the Vichy regime to ensure the Nazi's would be denied raw rubber while the US would have more favorable access. Japan wanted to abolish all western and western supported control over asia which put US access to raw materials at risk and softly invaded the French colony. Additionally, Vichy troops were indiscriminately machine gunning the civilian population including children. Remember, there was a strong morality in the US leadership.
As a result of elements in Japan wanting to purify asia from westerns and their expansion looking to potentially threaten US interests in the Philippians, the US halted oil sales to Japan. The Japanese military had no idea of the US's size and decided to attack pearl harbor to force the US into a negotiated a treaty for Japan's eventual control of asia. As a result, they provided the US the political will to help the British and exiled French government from the Nazi invasion.
Also, the US is not like African governments where a country's leader can declare war. The declaration of war against Japan was voted on by US congress. The US declared war on Germany only after Germany issued a declaration of war against the US hours after the attack on pearl harbor.
So, FDR did not bring the country to war, the US was an arms manufacturer and dealer to the British and Stalin. If Japan did not attack pearl harbor, the US would not have entered WWII and the Nazi's would still be in control of europe and africa where you'd be speaking German and Afrikaans would be a lost language.
Stalin was a different story than the US. I don't know enough about what happened there except for stories by friends' family members that lived through it.