Why do people Revere this tyrant? So that communist and socialist can control our government...

>yeah retard fascism is left winged
t. dinesh d'souza

Just because you're talking about a historical figure does not mean you are not politically baiting. This has nothing to do with history, and only to do with politics.

Yes, clearly you’d pass the test and I’d fail. That’s why my posts have appropriate punctuation and capitalization while you don’t even use apostrophes for your contractions.

Not an argument

Why does this man attract so much butthurt from stormniggers, lolbertarians, and communists alike?

Back to your shitty molyneux videos you go LARPing faggot

huey long would've been better

You realize the United States was founded on what is essentially known today as libertarianism, right? Libertarians are the opposite of leftists, at least economically, though there are 'culturally right' leftists such as Strasserites and NazBols

The Articles of Confederation was Libertarianism and it didn't work well...or for very long before it was supplanted with the Constitution which was a drastic increase in federal power.
>Libertarians are the opposite of leftists, at least economically, though there are 'culturally right' leftists such as Strasserites and NazBols
He believes in muh 1,001 divisions of ideology in reference to the left-right dichotomy.
Right = centralized power
Left = decentralized
Policy and shit doesn't matter for left and right, just the distribution of power in who makes decisions. Monarchy is right wing and republicanism is left wing. The US was founded as left wing cause the revolution was a left wing uprising against a relatively right wing British government. We became more right wing with the above about the Constitution and Articles but not as right wing as Britain with its monarchy.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him

>muh fedrul reserve!

The New Deal was to stop radical left wing movements from springing up in the US during the Great Depression for gommies. The expansion of federal involvement in the economy for lolbergs. Stormniggers cause muh WWII.

But how could the US be founded on what is today known as libertarianism when Ayn Rand wouldn't be born until 1905

US was largely laissez faire (despite the practical expansion of federal powers to ensure the constitution could be enforced) until FDR. It wasn't until his policy that there was a paradigm shift into a belief that the government could regulate the economy.

I personally think that libertarian/egoist philosophy is the way to go. But I also understand that (1) you need a practically reasonably large government to ensure that the rights of the constitution are actually upheld and (2) that there is no reasonable way to return to the laissez faire system.

A lot of this isn't my own ideas, see Bruce Ackerman "We the People". But still. It's good shit.

Also, I just took a final on this shit, so I really would appreciate if you'd let me get drunk in peace Veeky Forums

FDR is normally top three in surveys of historians.

The idea of a Republic at all was far left back then. Early in the French Revolution even the most radical leftists still wanted constitutional monarchy.

Don't even like FDR, but these are just brainlet /pol/ tier responses.

The 30s pretty much blew libertarianism the fuck out, because the Keynesians recovered so much faster than the neoclassical economies.

Rhine capitalism best capitalism.

Exactly. This post is retarded. The US was founded by people who for the most part were ok with slavery and indenture, not libertarian.

They also didn't support a large electorate, or free rights to association. That came later.

No. Hoover had it right. The economy would have sort itself out.

>Thinks that revolutionary Left and modern Left is based on the same dichotomy implying that today's American Right is in favor of stronger central power in opposition the Left.................

Odd, because that hands-off fiscally conservative British recovered much worse than the hands-on US.

FDR and LBJ, being the primary creators of American welfare system, are largely criticized as a dog whistle for a general anti-welfare message.With LBJ, it also ties to the general skepticism white Americans tend to have over welfare, and their antipathy for a major constituent in the enemy party.

LBJ was the beginning of the modern left in the US. Kennedy was the last 'modern liberal'.

*classical liberal

Not modern liberal.

And the centralized managed, stimulus charged US economy again out recovered the austerity laden UK and the EU as a whole after 2008.

FDR set up a great deal of his programs to be self funding, Social Security in particular ran a surplus for years until congress expropriated the earmarked funds for pork barrel years after his death. Despite some people's perception of Roosevelt of being a spendthrift and a tax and spend liberal but at his core he had mostly conventional ideas towards fiscal policy and all in all was pretty fiscally conservative who was very much concerned with fiscal responsibility and limiting deficits. If you read his correspondence it was something that took up a great deal of his attention.

Not an argument

>elected 4 times
>could only be stopped by death
Literally the ultimate Chad

>Literally the ultimate Tyrant

You're a middle class white kid who didn't live through the Great Depression or WWII.

My gramps did and would shut anybody up who said shit like that. Motherfucker led the country through the hardest times since the Civil War.

Lincoln was a tyrant but he kept the country together, hard times, hard measures

He was a liberal, not a Communist. In fact the new deal was crafted in such a way to neuter Communist and socialist movements in the US, and it has destroyed any chance of revolution in the US to come by doing just enough to heal the country and please the worker

Yes it was you faggot ass illiterate ameritard.

Because he hurt America in a way that it still hasn't recover to this day