tv Franklin D. Roosevelts Four Freedoms CSPAN March 7, 2016 12:00am-1:01am EST
>> 20 freezing degrees below. now the prisoners come in. prime-looking lot, aren't they? we searched them. [wind howling] we smashed their weapons. >> we questioned them. this young kid says they killed his mother and father and gave him a gun. that's all he knows about the war. that these wise monks were tough. they clammed up. they wouldn't sing.
>> remember us. and remember us. rooseveltfranklin d state of the union address, he introduced four freedoms that he believed for universal and argued the united states needed the support of allies in securing these freedoms for all. freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear. next, a discussion of this beach as well as the fate of the four freedoms idea after fdr's presidency. franklin d roosevelt presidential library hosted this event. we'll hear portion of this address before congress. >> good evening and welcome to the wallace center.
i'm the director here and i want to thank you all for coming out. it's a fantastic turnout. i want to thank one of our make thisho helped evening possible and provided us with the mid stroke support -- mixture of support. we are live stringing the event tonight and we have american history from c-span here who will be recording it for playback later. we have a class from arlington high school. would you raise your hands? my daughter clancy goes there. i'm happy to see you tonight. franklin and eleanor roosevelt loved spending time with students. it's important that you study this history, a lot of what the roosevelt leave dennis what is
relevant to what is happening today. gingerinequality, , withlity, minimum wage the same things people were fighting for so i'm really glad we are here. january 1941, 75 years ago tonight, roosevelt gave a speech that was quite extraordinary. it was the state of the union adress that had followed speech in which he had declared that america had to be the arsenal of democracy. allies five the azis in europe. people were fairly isolationist at this point. a lot of them did not want to get involved in the war. a lot of them understood that the u.s. did not support these
countries and democracy was at risk. toward the end of the speech, he decided he had to lay out the reasoning why wasn't orton for americans to be involved internationally to support their allies. greeninghe premier's film. it was transferred over to ultra hd video files. we don't have the capability to show that, but this when into their original audio recordings on the discs that were transferred to audiotapes. , theeated a new version highest quality of the speech that has ever been seen. we will start with that and do our panel discussion with our extraordinary guests tonight.
but first i want you to see this video in get a feel for what roosevelt was trying to communicate when he laid out his vision for the future. we rolled tape. >> its freedom of speech. the second is freedom to worship . everywhere in the world. the third is freedom from want. means economicd .nderstanding
a healthy peacetime right everywhere in the world. the fourth is freedom from fear. means aed in real terms -- in such a fashion that no nation would be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor anywhere in the world. this places its destiny as part of its millions of free men and
and in freedom under the means humaneedom rights everywhere. it goes to those who struggle to and our unityghts conceptse, that high that there can be no end say victory. >> one of the things that's most interesting about that speech is what happened afterwards, over the next two years and became a rallying cry in a rather extraordinary way.
the postal service put out a stamp. there were books and movies and symphonies. irving berlin wrote a song. it really became a central tenet in the war. the four freedoms paintings by norman rockwell toured the country and they raise over $130 million in war bonds. that's how important these ideas were. we're going to get the experts here now. we have two great guests. the first is alexander heffner who was the host of the open line on pbs. the author of a documentary history of the united states. he has really established himself as the next generation of great pbs hosts. the other guest's harvey k who is really one of the great experts on the four freedoms. also the author of the fight for
the memory of my grandfather who long ago sent me here for the first time. the documentary book i use in my classes. enough of this banter. let's treasure that moment that we just saw in hd for the first time. how did fdr arrive at that mindset and come to enumerate freedoms, four freedoms, and what was the evolution in his mind from inalienable rights to 4 freedoms? >> one of the remarkable things about roosevelt is that i don't think there was any president who was more embedded in history than he was. we can go all the way back to the founding and thomas payne's common sense.
the declaration of independence and the preamble to the constitution. we can see the engineering of the four freedoms. it may seem an exaggeration to speak in grand historical terms like that. that is where it begins in roosevelt's mind. he once said when he failed to be able to write u.s. history that he wanted to create a narrative week as he was convinced that america was going somewhere right from the beginning. the age of roosevelt. we can see it already in his 1932 campaign for the presidency. in the commonwealth club speech that he gave in san francisco in the autumn of 1932. he said it was time for a new economic declaration of rights.
he referred to the declaration of independence but said it was time for us now to expand the idea of our social contract and create an economic declaration of rights. he doesn't return specifically to that argument until later. all the way through the 1930's we can see how the new deal itself and the struggles on the part of americans do not only recover the american economy, to rebuild it, and also to transform the landscape to create social security and the national labor relations act and to organize labor unions. to organize new civil rights organizations. we can see how americans themselves with roosevelts. i like to think of roosevelt as not necessarily an inventor. and articulate her of the ideals of the four freedoms. he was brilliant at articulating what the american people were onto. when he goes to deliver that speech, and they were through a number of drafts, somewhere around the fourth draft the idea of these lines what we heard
before in the film. freedom of speech and expression. not just in the first amendment. freedom of worship is not just in the first amendment. it is an american experience in the 1930's as roosevelt advances the idea of industrial democracy. not only will citizens be able stand on the street corner and be able to speak their mind. not only will they be able to write to newspapers. they will be would go into a workplace and have a voice in the workplace through labor unions.
it is that kind of thing. roosevelt is particularly bad articulating that experience. >> this was a radical departure from the roaring 20's. in his opening address to the nation he did talk about fear. fear from the greatest depression this country has ever experienced. he called for a and express us to experimentation. the four freedoms comes at a moment his political career when he is trying to justify american intervention in the war.
there was an immediate political motives behind it. did he intend to capture the permanence with which he wanted the new deal to be a domestic force for good in this country. or do you determine that this was primarily a momentary decision. because of the pressure he felt to persuade an unconvinced nation. to intervene. >> let's not forget that in 1936 he told the american people that this generation has a rendezvous with destiny. he knew that the challenges were not only of the great depression and fascism in europe and japanese imperialism in east asia. he also knew that americans themselves were wary of getting involved in any other world war global conflict. if you look at what he does in the late 1930's. even as he is trying to sustain the new deal against the conservative coalition.
you can also see the degree to which he is trying to remind americans, educate americans that two oceans do not afford the kind of independence that america had in the 19th century. i think as he goes into this speech. the question of permanence. i think he believes that he is articulating what the first two terms were about. what america was about. but also reminding americans. the generation that has this rendezvous with destiny. he realizes that if america goes into war is not going to go into war for no cause other than to defend itself. americans have a deeper spirit and he understood that. what he was thinking was what americans were thinking. when he speaks of the four
freedoms is this promise, he is speaking to what he thinks americans most deeply feel. it is not just permanence. it is that america is a perpetual revolution. he sees the four freedoms as the articulation of that idea that it is a perpetual revolution. >> was he afraid that the distraction of war would not enable him to achieve domestically this arsenal of democracy for which he fought? in the subsequent decades there is a pendulum swing the transpires. somewhere along the line the four freedoms was co-opted to
defend a capitalistic argument with which fdr did out of had may not have had sympathy. does he understand that this moment is not just going to shape the trajectory of the war but how we view progressivism going forward? >> let me come back to the idea of generations. let me go back to the idea of generations. i don't think roosevelt believed he was going to live very much beyond the war if that far. but he thought that in that generation, i like the way you rephrase it with a pendulum. pendulums operate apart from our actions. then you said there were those who co-opted it. the four freedoms were so
powerful in the minds of that generation that those who opposed it because there were many who opposed it. northern industrialists and also the southern democrats. >> what were they opposing? >> democracy was ok to them. not more democracy. the 1930's were just about, historians say roosevelt saved capitalism. he didn't save capitalism. he saves democracy by making the united states more democratic. that is what roosevelt understood. that is what great leaders understand.
it is not about defending that which exists, it is about enhancing that which exists. democracy in the minds of capitalists in southern democrats, we don't want more of this. we don't want to enhance democracy. the roosevelt administration was about enhancing democracy. not just civil liberties. the right to vote. also about industrial democracy. they are going to push it further. if we think about it later when the war begins republicans southern democrats and any number of capitalists in the north made it very clear they were willing to make the war about the four freedoms but not about making the four freedoms any richer and deeper in the united states. they also knew that americans wanted to do that. in 1943 and 1944 there were surveys commissioned by the white house. by the national opinion research
group at princeton. what they discovered is that 85% of americans at the war sand wanted to create a more social democratic america. they wanted social security to include national healthcare. they wanted to guarantee not only gis and education but all young americans. they wanted to guarantee employment. as one of the heads of the group said, if americans could get what they wanted at the end of the war, we would see a different kind of united states. they do not want to the thrift with their democracy. mandate for change is the title
of the book. what roosevelt is speaking these four freedoms and later in his speech of january 1944, the economic bill of rights state of the union address. he is not just offering rhetoric. nor is he believing that the united states should offer new policies to make this without better. he is offering a vision grounded in american experience, the revolution, the civil war, the 20th century, which sees america enhancing democratic life and also offering a model for the world and enabling by the atlantic charter that he and winston churchill signed democratic developments globally. >> there is a degree to which fdr was incapable of producing the liberal democracy that he foresaw. if you go through the exhibits here you will see the point counterpoint on civil rights, on
suffrage, where he could realize the progressivism that you hear senator sanders espousing today. democratic socialism. it is a rich time in the political environment. we wants to bring some informed context to it. when you think of i have a dream, dr. king, successive figures in the civil rights movement employed to that language and rhetoric, peaceful protests, nonviolence. think of john lewis. a generation that built on that foundation.
fdr's four freedoms. the director here alludes to how commerce and the capitalistic system identified the strands of four freedoms that is imbued in the postwar culture. take the audience through the evolution of the four freedoms from the moment of fdr's demise through the end of the war into the truman administration. stop at lbj because if there is a figure who got to know fdr from his younger days the congressman. that was the moment in which the pendulum was poised to swing back again. tell us what happened to four freedoms. >> when truman becomes president
among his first act once the war was completed, in the autumn of 1945, is the truman himself offers a vision-based upon the four freedoms and the economic bill of rights. he offers a state of the union kind of address and he attaches to it the economic bill of rights and the whole series of initiatives, the most dramatic eating a proposal for national healthcare. this is 1946. in 1946 the republicans win control of congress. it is very clear that the republicans are not about to extend american democratic life
as roosevelt and truman had envisioned it. the most telling development was the passage of the taft-hartley act. the taft-hartley act to does we can severely, disable the national labor relations act because it allows southern states to create right to work laws which disables the ability of labor to organize in factories. >> you could attribute that moment to the rise of the big banks? >> it was also southern racism. southern racism is a major factor throughout the postwar years. here's what i mean by that. southern democrats opposed civil rights and the labor movement. they thought it would mean the demise of their white supremacist regimes. most southerners wanted national healthcare. the south benefited tremendously
from new deal initiatives. the south was poor. they needed the money that came from the new deal. southern congressmen had no intention of allowing national healthcare to pass because it meant that they would have to integrate southern hospitals. it is hard to believe. truman's initiatives in the postwar. are blocked by republicans who are antagonistic to labor and southern democrats who have no intention of changing the south. the south is fine the way it is. so when you get into the 1950's there has already been this denial of the four freedoms. this is a generation that had its confrontation with fascism. they have been buying up to believe that they were about the four freedoms. if you look at surveys in the
1950's. more than 50% of americans wanted national healthcare but the american medical association campaign against it. the growth of the 1950's is phenomenal. everyone likes to believe that the struggles of the 30's and 40's are somehow forgotten. one out of every three workers was in a labor union. in the 1950's the civil rights movement really does begin to militantly challenge southern white supremacy and jim crow laws. the leaders of these movements, the leaders of the labor movement and the civil rights movement, these are veterans of the new deal and world war ii. they had not forgotten the promise of the four freedoms. in 1960 the democratic party
offers possibly its most progressive platform since 1944. kennedy is not the liberal that many of us might of wished for. but the democrats were poised to make history. lyndon johnson, southern white democrat, but had been a new dealer. in spite of his reputation as a southerner, he never actually voted against civil rights. when he becomes president he amazes his fellow citizens by redeeming the roosevelt vision at least to some extent. in the 1960's. in 1935 those that we think of as the greatest generation were 15 years old. in 1965 they are 45 years old.
they are the ones who enacted medicare and medicaid, expanded social security. reform to the immigration laws. they created the environmental protection agency. many of them had been veterans of roosevelt's ccc. the consumer product safety regulations. public employee unions. the occupational safety and health administration. that generation that had confronted fascism. suffered in the war. and fought the war. when they reach maturity they act upon roosevelt's vision. and thus in 1965
, it's the further realization of the four freedoms. i'm absolutely convinced. itgeneration likes to think made the 60's. we may have made them rambunctious and four star elders to act but it's our elders who only needed the push. the are the ones who made 1960's the progressive fulfillment in many ways of the 1930's and 1940's. >> to take it even closer to contemporary times, we talked about these four freedoms. first is freedom of speech and expression, freedom of every person to worship god in his own way, freedom from want, freedom from fear. and i want to hone in on freedom from want.
as you see this speech now in a contemporary context, the freedom that seems to be most forgotten is that, freedom from want. in fact, it is not fully understood. it is not a concept that is taught. what is freedom from want? harvey: freedom -- i wish i could remember all the words. steinbeck really did this well when he was in europe. freedom from want is not to fear that you are going to lose -- you forget freedom of fear. it is not to worry about your job, have to send your kids to school, it is to go out and work and make enough, make enough to make it like decent and with a decent future.
i can tell you something practical about it. when franklin roosevelt signed the national industrial recovery act in the next few days, it had the first real met minimum wage. he said no company, no country should be allowed to operate in the united states does not pay a living wage. he did not say a minimal wage, he said a living wage. i think that a living wage is freedom from want to begin with. that goes all the way back, and roosevelt would be the first to say to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. alexander: so let's see this in a historical context. i'm talking about is in the obama perspective, there is a school of liberal thought that the pursuit of affordable care distracted the presidency, so
did not tailor itself to -- or champion other progressive causes. it was president obama who promised to senator kennedy, the late senator kennedy on his deathbed that this would be the first public policy that he would tackle. and he did tackle it, and is law now. do you see truman's ability to deliver on comprehensive national healthcare as kind of the seminal full-line whereby we forget the living wage? we forget the quality of life because we see it popping up on the radar now, and there have been blips, but the living wage movement has been a mere blip in the radar of democratic capital d as opposed to republican, policies. even the candidates who were sidelined in successive
primaries, talking about a living wage, it was really out of the main stream. harvey: it is a success to consider that living wage has become more prominent. we have kennedy's from the other party promoting not freedom from fear but freedom from fear. i don't buy into conspiracy theories often, but the distraction we are suffering now to suppress these arguments, they should be at the forefront of agendas such as living wage. the living wage movement is not going away. if hillary clinton or bernie sanders wins the presidency, that is going to be there. hillary clinton can say $12 is
ok. labor won't let her do that. if she wins, we are going to see a $15 minimum wage. if bernie gets it, it we will definitely see $15 minimum wage. alexander: i am eager to invite the audience to participate. or now, maybe five more minutes of discussion between us and then q and a. before i hand the mic over to the audience, let me ask you about that. warmer senator, former secretary of state hillary clinton declared her candidacy, her second candidacy for president. as for freedom park -- how many of you have been at four freedoms park? the counterpoint of this wonderful establishment in the new york city metropolitan area.
if you are based there, you can find a memorialized fdr. they are really a library, museum there as well. within the family, the comments were that it was a compelling speech, it was impelling oratory for someone who we are talking about clinton. for someone who was not the charismatic senator obama, then senator obama. but that speech itself lacks a connection, or at least a deep connection, to a real sentiment and legacy of fdr. true or false? true or false? did her opening ensemble -- harvey: did it lack? i never give full testament in my courses.
[laughter] i refuse to answer on the grounds of incriminating myself. what i liked about her speech in terms of roosevelt legacy is that she referred to lines of his before she spoke of four freedoms, having to do with what we need to do as america. i did not hear her referred to the four freedoms, which was odd, because she was on the island at the time. to his credit, and i had been waiting for months or bernie sanders just begun that american history, when he finally spoke about what he meant by democratic socialism, he reached back into american history by speaking of franklin roosevelt, 1944 economic bill of rights speech. i put money on it that he did not refer to the four freedoms, because he did not want to remind people that hillary had launched in four freedoms park. he very smartly went to martin luther king, who was a democratic socialist.
the me put it this way, i think it is wonderful. i'm ecstatic both hillary clinton and bernie sanders, for the first time in decades, have made a point or redeeming, of renewing franken roosevelt's memory. democrats have been running from his legacy, and is wonderful to see both major candidates in the democratic party embracing roosevelt legacy. the real trick is, will we be as good as our grandparents' generation? will we leave up to his legacy? alexander: questions, if we are prepared -- mic, sir, right here. while someone is poised to us a question, i will follow up. those ideals, do you think they are largely uncontested in democratic circles today, because unlike the republican
party, which is sorely divided, there is a unity of purpose on the part of the democrats. as it is points out, they are still in effect, a corporatist model in which they participate. harvey: the last debate was interesting to the extent that hillary clinton was explaining her eagerness to embrace all democrats, rich and not so rich, and poor. bernie sanders was on the verge of what madison said, i welcome their hatred, when he referred to the 1% of his day, and the american liberty league, which is koch brothers and others. alexander: sir? >> i am wondering what you think is the future of the four freedoms in light of what we know now about the events of september 11? i mean, will you tell me, of
course, that you don't know anything about the events of september 11, because you are afraid of your government, but we have all seen building seven, 47 stories coming down at 5:20 in the afternoon neatly into its own footprint. 9/11 was a big ugly lie, and everybody knows it. i wonder what will become of the four freedoms. i think it is essential, really as long as we have some free speech, we exercise them. there is no point in having free speech rights if we don't exercise those rights. it is our responsibility to put you in the position now to either lie or tell the truth. harvey: you are asking me about 9/11? i am more than happy to say this, i have no intention of referring to 9/11 specifically, and that is my freedom of each.
i do tell you this, if we are ignoring a serious question in american life, we have been suffering a kind of surveillance from our own government for many years that we are unaware of. i think it is telling, and i can tell you that if you are in the election year, senator -- former senator russell feingold is running for the senator ship in wisconsin. he was the only u.s. senator to vote no on the u.s. patriot act. the only one. i have no doubt that he is going to succeed in the full election. he will enter into congress and maybe we will start hearing furthermore about the necessity of protecting citizen's privacy and rights. >> thank you. alexander: well we are waiting for another question, it has been said, as he reiterated,
that the democrats are masking themselves in a craft triangulation of policy in order to appeal to what the pundits told them was the center, a center-right nation instead of centerleft. a center-right nation that roosevelt, up until this election cycle, was largely touted in defense of the neoconservatism agenda. there was no very strong roosevelt compact in any democratic presidents trajectory probably until obama, in the sense of a recovery that he said was the worst recession, depression, since the great
depression. i am wondering if you agree with that analysis that largely roosevelt was a blank space for democrats, and really, what do you attribute their failure to politically capitalize on this most successful democratic president? for decades. harvey: the turn it from the fdr legacy begins in the 1970's. i can put a name on it, if you like. the rising star known as gary hart in the 1970's. he campaigned for the senate in colorado, which would be the end of the new deal. he wanted to change the democratic party, reduce the influence of labor, and turn it back on roosevelt. he was very open about it. jimmy carter, elected in 1976, came out of a family that had no affection for roosevelt. he talked about hating roosevelt. we get to democrats in the 1970's in the wake of the debacle of 1972, who are already running from the roosevelt
legacy, which is strange, because we talk about reagan democrats, people think it is an older generation that turns to reagan. it was a younger generation that was turning to reagan. when you look in the voting of the 1970's and where we are going, the generation known as greatest generation, now in their 50's, did not vote republican. it is the younger ones that did. it begins in the 1970's, this move to the right. the oddest thing is this. if you look at a public opinion of this, they actually move left. no one has fully explained this, even in the course of the 1970's and 1980's, most americans, when asked a series of questions about what they wanted american life to be like, they said overwhelmingly in favor of social democratic initiatives, a la roosevelt. and yet they are turning their back on this legacy.
how can i explain this? i can give you incidents that occurred along the way, the -- but can i explain the entire thing? no, because democrats in the party, including labor, which had moved the left, was pushed aside. and more and more democrats moved to social issues and away from bread-and-butter issues. and by the way, the working-class, working people have not seen a rise of real wages since the 1970's. democrats abandoned them. >> i just wanted to ask on the viability of the realization of the war freedoms, with citizens united, we see all of the
politicians seeing the influence of popular opinion. i know my generation really likes socialism, not completely socialism, but social democracy. public is supported their. is it really a possibility for democrats to enact these policies, and have these big influences like the coke brothers on wall street, is it possible? harvey: i will give you an historical example. if anyone ever said in the late 1920's, probably as far as 1931, is there any chance we would have something you and i would call the new deal? where we would see the creation of the civilian conversation corps, where 3 million young americans go out and transform the landscape, build bridges, streets, schools.
if you had said, could we create a national system of old age pensions? if you had said, i don't want to great depression. max lerner, the political evaluator once said, why does it take a crisis to break up fights? sadly enough, and actually you see my point. don't say never. this year there are no excuses. right now, bernie sanders, head-to-head, could be any one of the republicans. no democrat should ever say, i can't vote for bernie, i have to vote for hillary because we have got to save the supreme court. if hillary gets the nomination, but for her. but in the meantime, vote where you want to vote, for whom you want to vote. there is no excuses. bernie sanders on a head-to-head will beat any republican.
he will. [applause] having said that, this is something that is really crucial areas i am thinking of it as alexander was asking me. in the 1930's, american working people were engaged by roosevelt. not only to help american recover, but to change the united states in a progressive way. he was so effective and engaging that they question further than he had planned on going. the tragedy of the obama administration was, this was an incredible candidate barack obama. he has been a remarkable president, undeniably. i kept telling my students, they were thrilled at the prospect of obama's administration. i have never seen my students so enthused about politics.
you know, i just hope that your enthusiasm he isn't terribly disappointing. i can tell you this, if obama wanted to create a new new deal, the first that he ought to do is promise every high school graduate and every college graduate two-year national service opportunity where they can, using donald trump, make america great again. and empower people to make america great again by way of fighting for the employee free choice act, which would have made labor organizing even easier than it has been since taft-hartley. obama did not do that. this was the most incredible candidate who had more enthusiasm, especially among young people, that any candidate in regulation, except bernie sanders currently. i have to tell you, the 2010 debacle for democrats with a consequence, not of obama's a
year to communicate, because pundits don't know what they are talking about, the fact that obama did not empower the young people to make things happen. that is what happened. don't let anyone dissuade you from possibilities, ok? >> can i take that as her endorsement of bernie sanders? [laughter] harvey: yes. [laughter] alexander: we said we were going to touch on freedom of fear, and escaped us to some extent. listening to your last answer, it is worth bringing up as we conclude here. there is no more transparent expectation of that that president obama's recent press conference on gun rights and safety. finally, coherently, powerfully, and in a commanding speech and behind a lot of weight from progressives and in front of a huge national security issue, saying that we are going to act in accordance of the freedom from -- we are not going to let people be afraid. i was thinking, what is the next manifestation of this freedom
from fear? it didn't really have to look anywhere. there are crises, refugee crisis, continuing challenges in the middle east. but as you reflect on the four freedoms on this 75th anniversary, are you thinking about this most serious health challenge? harvey: yeah, i don't know if this is what you were referring to, but i gave a commencement address to fiu university. i could not believe it. my mind went to roosevelt. it went to roosevelt. i will talk about the four freedoms, because every one will think i am try to sell my book. but i went back to the generation as a rendezvous with destiny, and i was convinced
this generation right now that we confront, those of us in our 60's and older, and those who are younger, some of whom are here from high school. this generation has a rendezvous with destiny. we are not merely in the midst of a crisis which we can address by way of this policy and that policy. we need a dramatic change in the united states, a dramatic change that will not only mean electing a president, it will mean that americans themselves will have to reengage in public life in a fashion that is both radical and yet cooperative. that has to deal with plutocracy, the inequality in this country, weaponize in everyday life, and the serious debate, and we need to talk more about foreign policy. i want to talk more about the united states at home, that we will have a serious discussion
not dominated by neoconservatives on one hand and isolationism on the other hand, confronting the crisis in the middle east and the threat of terrorism. alexander: i think that president obama was saying the right to domestic tranquility in the context of roosevelt, read them from fear, freedom from death applies on the gun issue. the fact that the right to bear arms and the second amendment was not really a piece of four freedoms, perhaps speaks to a renewal of four freedoms on the issue of gun safety. i think we have one more question. >> so, i had two questions, but i had another controversial one i will leave off. you referenced mr. trump a couple of times when both of you
were talking, and now you are talking about freedom from fear, i was wondering if, looking at it from a certain angle, you previously said that donald trump -- his campaign is not about freedom from fear but freedom to fear, whoever it is. couldn't you characterize it in the opposite way that his campaign, those who support him, they want to be free of fear, they want to be free of an uncertainty, free of danger throughout the world and at home? couldn't you package trump voters essentially as someone try to inherit roosevelt legacy, not necessarily someone who is departing from its a drastically as to morph it into something larger? it like it could be a darker mutation of what roosevelt was arguing for. harvey: a good question, and rather than theoretical answers, let me give you a direct answer from history. during the depression years before
roosevelt, 350,000 mexicans and mexican americans, many of them u.s. citizens, were placed on trains and repatriated to mexico under a republican administration. under roosevelt, that was halted. roosevelt -- he remembered what happened in world war i. in world war i, there was this idea that 100% americanism, and it was his policy -- it was hostility and ethnic diversity. he did not want to return to that kind of fear. >> is about the same thing. harvey: no, let me keep going. the man has sins to answer for. if you think of donald trump as embracing the roosevelt legacy, i think it is a travesty of language. anyone who tells you those
before the the american people they are sending us the racists and others, they are causing you to fear. roosevelt got many sins to answer for, jim crow military. alexander: jim crow america. harvey: woodrow wilson might have more to answer for on those grounds. i can give you lengthy expirations for every one of those decisions that does not absolve but at least explain it. by the way, one of my dearest friends was born in one of the japanese american internment cap's. i made it a point of learning more about that when he reminded me that my family was here after his. when a man runs for president and says we have to fear people because they are rapists and
others, they are not try to give you freedom from fear, they are causing you to fear. there is not much more i can say about it, ok? on that note, let me thank you all for coming out tonight, and happy anniversary. [applause] >> a big round of applause. both the books are great. the door is not open, i wish it was. i have one last question, and then we will let everybody go home tonight. hillary or bernie? [laughter] i know you, you are in. you have given me an answer. hillary or bernie? alexander: i can play prognosticator. barring some unforeseen e-mails, which may be foreseen -- [laughter] hillary clinton will be the democratic nominee. >> and on that note, thank you all and good night. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the
national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> i am a history birth. i do enjoy seeing the fabric of our country and how things work, how they are made. >> i had no idea. it's something i really enjoy. >> it gives you that perspective. >> i am a c-span fan. ♪ year's student cam competition was one of our biggest yet. students produced documentaries answering the question what issues they want the candidates