Roosevelts - Betrayed and Betrayers -
but Loyal in Some Ways
Los Angeles Times
James MacGregor Burns and Susan Dunn
October 8, 2000
Last week, a Roosevelt -- Elliott Roosevelt, Jr., a grandson of
FDR -- publicly announced his support for George W. Bush. Mr. Roosevelt
contends that FDR would have approved of Mr. Bush's social security
plan. But the essence of FDR's landmark social security legislation
-- one of his most enduring and transforming legacies -- was the
pooling of the interests of tens of millions of Americans into one vast
program of mutual support, and Mr. Bush's plan for partial privatization
betrays that essence.
And yet, Elliott Roosevelt's endorsement of the Republican candidate
neatly fits into a pattern of revolt among Franklin and Eleanor's
progeny. Whereas George W. Bush and Al Gore -- along with myriad
Adamses, Tafts, Lodges, Kennedys, and others -- admire and follow
their fathers' politics and policies, Roosevelt offspring often
took a different tack.
Striding to the podium at the Republican National Convention in
1952 to second the nomination of General Dwight Eisenhower for president
of the United States was none other than John Roosevelt, FDR's youngest
son, still acting out his ambivalence toward his late father. John
would spend his last years in the gated and guarded enclave of New
York wealth called Tuxedo Park, choosing to live among people who
had been railing against progressives like Theodore and Franklin
Roosevelt for decades.
Earlier, in 1937, Franklin Jr. married Ethel du Pont whose family
was the financial backer of the Liberty League, an anti-New Deal
group. With a few exceptions the du Pont family was packed with
Roosevelt-haters. "For a variety of reasons I found it a bit
hard to swallow," admitted Eleanor after the wedding, though
perhaps the president savored the irony of the occasion.
In the late 1930s, Elliott Roosevelt, the most insecure of the
Roosevelt sons, spoke out on one of his Texas radio stations in
favor of the investigations of his mother's friends in the American
Youth Congress conducted by the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
He also opposed American intervention in Europe and a third term
for his father. After FDR's death, Elliott resorted to selling off
not only some of his mother's most treasured possessions but even
the Campobello house along with "Top Cottage," the Hyde
Park retreat that FDR had designed for himself, severely straining
his relationship with his mother.
Yet it could be said that Franklin and Eleanor themselves betrayed
their heritage. They left the confined, insular community of their
elite Knickerbocker class, rejecting the world of inherited wealth
into which they had been born, identifying instead with the aspirations
of the working class, immigrants, and the disenfranchised. Franklin
and Eleanor dedicated themselves to a social revolution whose goal,
Eleanor wrote, was to provide "all our people with an equal
opportunity to enjoy the benefits that have been the privileges
of a few." Their commitment to social change and economic justice
still stands at the heart of all progressive agendas.
Not only was Theodore Roosevelt's Square Deal the model for the
New Deal, Teddy had also preceded Franklin and Eleanor in betraying
their class. "The great bulk of my wealthy and educated friends,"
TR confided to an acquaintance, "regard me as a dangerous crank."
But whereas TR had waged a passionate war against the plutocrats
and scoundrels of wealth and privilege, his widow Edith would later
make an about-face, supporting a man her husband would have deplored.
At a Madison Square Garden rally in 1932, Mrs. Roosevelt, dressed
from head to toe in black, emerged from a decade of seclusion to
introduce Herbert Hoover to the rapturous applause of the audience.
And at the 1935 Lincoln Day dinner of the National Republican Club,
Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. in effect disavowed his father's progressivism.
FDR's New Deal, Ted Jr. declared, had "flouted the Constitution,
emasculated Congress, assumed judicial powers, used the emergency
legislation to break down important provisions of the Bill of Rights,
and shaken the foundation of our liberty and democratic government."
His father had been accused of most of those sins.
People have many potential disloyalties. They can betray a spouse,
a family, an employer or employee. They can be disloyal to their
religion, political party, social cause, ideology, community, region,
nation -- and to their world. And what about disloyalty to oneself,
to one's better nature?
People cannot be equally loyal to all the above. They must make
choices, even rank their loyalties in a rough set of priorities.
In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt was disloyal to his political power
base, the Grand Old Party. FDR was disloyal to his wife and was
accused of her disloyally "selling out" to Stalin at Yalta.
Eleanor would be disloyal to her class and occasionally to her family
as her loyalty to her widening circle of friends grew. But all three
were steadfast in their loyalty to their vision of equality, human
rights, and economic justice for all.
Through our loyalties and our disloyalties we shape our lives --
and leaders shape the destinies of their nations and the world.
• James MacGregor Burns and Susan Dunn are co-authors of
the forthcoming "The Three Roosevelts: Patrician Leaders Who
Transformed America" (Atlantic Monthly Press). Burns is a senior
scholar at the Academy of Leadership, University of Maryland. Dunn
teaches history of ideas at Williams College.