[UA] Re: UA Digest, Vol 6, Issue 91

[Russell Rayburn]

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Josh MacLeod <alternity1 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>  Perhaps an attempt to become the True
>  Politician and replace the True King? It never quite
>  works, but doesn't fail either.

I kinda like that.

I'll admit, I had to read up on the new deal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_new_deal

This quote:
"There is no choice presented to American business between
intelligently planned and uncontrolled industrial operations and a
return to the gold-plated anarchy that masqueraded as "rugged
individualism."...Unless industry is sufficiently socialized by its
private owners and managers so that great essential industries are
operated under public obligation appropriate to the public interest in
them, the advance of political control over private industry is
inevitable."

Struck me as both anti-plutomancer and, perhaps, a swipe at the masterless man.

Further down, there's this:
"Historians on the left denounce Roosevelt for rescuing capitalism
when the opportunity was at hand to nationalize banking, railroads and
other industries."

and

"Historians on the right complain that he enlarged the powers of the
federal government, built up labor unions, slowed long-term economic
growth, and weakened the business community."

So in one sense Roosevelt is vilified because he didn't exert enough
control over private industry ( i.e. he didn't nationalize various
industries ) and on the other because he exerted some influence at
all.

In UA terms, an attempt at redefining the True King to be the True
Politician makes some sense.  Doing so at the expense of Plutomancers
would piss them off, but I'd expect the Demagogue might see a True
Politician as an attack.

-- 
I'm writing an unauthorized autobiography.

http://cthuloidgunnut.blogspot.com/