I was reviewing an assignment with one of my kids tonight. He is preparing for a test tomorrow. It’s in Social Studies/History. To my chagrin, I found lies that he is being told.
Immediately, I thought that the Georgia Public Schools must have bought into the Howard Zinn training materials. Howard Zinn is such a radical that most people by now realize his stuff is baseless. Unfortunately, though, the tentacles of progressivism run MUCH deeper, as this book is not one from Zinn, even though his fingerprints are all over it..
Here’s just ONE example (verbatim):
Herbert Hoover was President when the Great Depression began in the late 1920s. Hoover believed the federal government should not play a big role in the economy. He thought the economy would improve on its own, as it had in the past.
The economy did not get better though. Instead it got worse. People continued to lose their homes and jobs…
When Roosevelt took office in 1933, he gave hope to many. Roosevelt wanted people to feel the country’s economy would soon improve.
As soon as Roosevelt became President, he went to work to give the American people the “new deal”. He started a variety of government programs…(S)ome programs gave food and shelter to those in deed. Others put people back to work. All were federal government programs that Roosevelt thought would help the economy.”
Now, only a trained eye accustomed in liberal bias can see what is happening here. As is ALWAYS the case with socialism and capitalism; socialism is judged on its PROMISES; capitalism on its RESULTS.
Thus, we are told, Hoover oversaw an economy where people were losing jobs and homes. Roosevelt saw over an economy he wanted the federal government to help put people back to work. See the difference???
This distinction really wouldn’t be a big deal IF Roosevelt’s actions also lead to an economy where people were put back to work and their homes were saved. Did that happen? Well, let’s take a look, shall we?
Doesn’t look like it does it? In fact, unemployment under Roosevelt, before WW2, stayed well above 15% throughout his first 7 yrs, other than a TINY small blip below.
If people were losing jobs and homes under Hoover, they certainly weren’t getting them back under Roosevelt. But the textbook manages to leave that out. Why?
Because, as I stated above, liberalism is judged by its promises. The fact that Roosevelt WANTED the government to “DO SOMETHING” is enough for our esteemed history professors to write glowingly about him.
Did his government action actually do anything? That’s beside the point. “He tried!”
His attempts only exacerbated the problem, of course. But if you’re a natural believer in the power of government to rescue people you don’t care about results. You simply care about power.
And if Roosevelt did anything, he expanded power for the political elite which has only grown to gigantic proportions today.
“Roosevelt created government programs to help people through the Depression. Many of them still exist today”, the textbook declares.
Well, at least in this they speak the truth.