How objectionable is FDR’s New Bill of Rights?
Read it below and find anything so terribly objectionable and un-American; find something so outrageous and unfair; or Marxist, or Communist even.
Wed Jan 12, 2011
On Jan. 11, 1944, Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave an historic State of the Union address. In it he outlined an economic Bill of Rights.
“It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
• The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
• The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
• The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
• The right of every family to a decent home;
• The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
• The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
• The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.”
When I read this; my reaction was: What the hell are all these right wingers thinking? Even back then there was the minority who would have much rather have had the country languish in the doldrums of misery and in the grip of extreme poverty than to deprive its most affluent, abusive, greedy minority of their ability to further inflict injury on the American people.
I think there are some commonalities, some parallels if you will, between then and now. Just as President Roosevelt was denounced as a SOCIALIST, President Obama has a different vision of America than that which the super rich and the corporations have. Of course, being diametrically opposed philosophies, the clash that begun upon his entering the White House will continue and if the rich and powerful have their way…President Obama will not just have lack of cooperation but he will continue to encounter ruthless hostility and even political sabotage.
I also think that at the core of the LIBERAL-PROGRESSIVE’s set of beliefs lie these concepts, these wonderful rights that everyone should have. You would be hard-pressed to find anybody among that 98% of the middle class and poor who objects to this Bill of Rights; even the majority of the wealthy in some way or another embrace the concepts, the fairness and the vision of FDR’s Bill of Rights. There will always be those who are devoid of ethics, compassion, even be driven by pure greed who will object; but they are a minority and sadly, they are the ones at the helm and have the Republican Party and most of the politicians in their back pocket…ah, yes, there are some Democrats too, although far fewer but far too many for my taste.
SOURCE: http://www.dailykos.com/
