[sushid]

That's interesting because we learn to associate positive policies and refer to them as FDR's New Deal (bills passed by Congress/signed by FDR), JFK's Peace Corp, Nixon's EPA, etc.

It's true that these policies are not made by one individual. But when we're crediting the presidents who merely signed bills passed by the Congress, should we not at least be give the same weight when they sign an executive order?

And I'm amazing that you're here generalizing what "presumably young people" do/think. It's not a matter of trying to feel superior.

Presidents are not good or bad, but rather, commit an array of decisions that lie in the spectrum. The decision to intern innocent US citizens (further regrettably by abusing data handed over by the US Census), unfortunately, lies in the spectrum of bad.

To only revere his positive actions and downplay the bad decisions made during his presidency (the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 is another one) would be doing disservice to those interested in learning about US history (or history for that matter).

[kmeade]

Thank-you for your replies and patience with me. (really)

"we learn to associate..." is a bit of a sad phrase. What we have done is experience a great deal of sloppy or propagandized reporting.

FDR's New Deal is a bit of an exception because, in addition to a set of programs, I believe it was purposely coined as a campaign slogan -- as was LBJ's New Society. When the verbiage was specifically created by someone in association with their own efforts it seems reasonable to include the name if it suits the writer's purpose.

Here's a challenge for your Google skills: Can you find a reference to the title "FDR’s Japanese Concentration Camps" anywhere in a historical record? I see plenty of references to the linked article, but nothing older, much less anything from the war or post-war eras.

By the way, I am less bothered by the use here of "Concentration Camps", although I believe that's also propagandistic revisionism. Historically, they were called "Internment Camps." But they were evil and I'm not going defend the camps because they absolutely don't deserve to be defended.

It's ironic to note that photographer Dorothea Lange did much of her work as part of New Deal programs. It would be interesting to hear her opinion on her work being associated with a smearing of FDR.

in/re your amazement -- There's no question that we're talking about what "young people" think. The old people are mostly dead and mostly not commenting on HN. I'm not (or don't intend to be) generalizing about young people as a whole -- I'm generalizing about these Internet discussions, which are frequent and essentially identical.

The near-endless criticism of the way people behaved during those desperate times is graceless and smug. I believe that it IS a matter of trying to feel superior. I think it's impossible for someone born after the War to put all of this into a realistic perspective. We should try to learn, be humble and grateful for the incredible sacrifices of those who went before us.

Having said that, it's certainly legitimate to examine the historical period - to consider the mistakes. What could the US have done to allay fear and preserve security, and also respect the rights of ALL US citizens and residents? That's a big question - that should be approached with respect and seriousness. To start out by blaming FDR for the situation is unproductive and silly.

[sushid]

Thanks for taking your time as well. :)

To be honest, I do understand what you mean. It was a different time (and a time that's difficult for younger people like me to fathom) back then. The US was in a turning point of the century and fear, uncertainty, and doubt affected the decision that led to the internment of Japanese Americans.

I apologize if my criticism is coming off as smug or graceless. I certainly don't intend to, but I do dislike how we in the US tend to gloss over those we've wronged in the past because "times were different." It's fair to say they had their reasons for making those decisions in the past, but also fair to criticize the practice.

As for smearing the legacy of FDR, that is not my goal either. He was clearly an effective president and is consistently ranked as being one of the best US presidents of all time. But all too often we try and frame someone as being categorically good or bad, rather than being somewhere in the middle, which is what most people are.

Trust me, I dislike those who snidely point out MLK's infidelity, Jefferson and Sally Hemings, etc. But we should openly point out these facts and let them be judged as a whole, as a positive influence in US history DESPITE their misgivings, not because they technically didn't have any.