Reviews for The Plot to Seize the White House: The Shocking True Story of the Conspiracy to Overthrow FDR

The average rating for The Plot to Seize the White House: The Shocking True Story of the Conspiracy to Overthrow FDR based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2009-09-10 00:00:00 William Golden In 1860, leaders in many of the southern United States were faced with the election of President whom they feared would limit the geographic extension of slavery, as a precursor to the ultimate abolition of the "peculiar institution." Despite the fact that, for 56 of the 60 years prior to the momentous election of Abraham Lincoln, the presidency had been occupied either by southern slaveholders or their northern sympathizers, many southern grandees, led by South Carolina "fire eaters," pushed the South to secede from the Union. The lesson sought to be given to those remaining in the Union was that representative democracy, and the indirect election of a President--even with a method skewed to the benefit of small states and slaveholding states--was only legitimate if one's own candidate or ideology prevailed at the polls. If another candidate prevailed who was opposed to your ideology, then it was OK to stop the game in the middle, take your ball, and go home [and seize, by force of arms, the property and facilities of your "playmate" that happened to be located in your state:]. Now, it so happens that I'm too young to remember the 1930s, since I wasn't born until the 1950s. So it's hard for me to say whether the vitriol directed at Franklin D. Roosevelt by his opponents upon his ascendancy to the highest office in the land matches the vitriol we are now hearing from many of the "ultras" opposed to President Obama. My educated guess is that hatred spewed at FDR in the 30s was much worse than some of the name-calling going on today, and I pray that I'm correct. Given that we live in a democratic republic, in which opposition should not be conflated with disloyalty, and the robust expression of opinion is the nourishment on which we thrive, I'll give the majority of Obama's critics the benefit of the doubt, at least for the time being, that they have one or more legitimate or serious criticisms of his policy choices. Heaven knows, even a very liberal Democrat like myself has differences with him. And yet.... And yet many of those opposing Obama today are doing so with a tinge of violence in their voices, in their demeanor, and in their conduct that makes me fear that there is more than just a "whiff of Fascism" in the air. Which brings me to Archer's book. Written in 1971, this work brought to light the little-known history of what has since been dubbed "the business plot" to overthrow FDR and replace him with a quasi-Fascist corporatist regime, thus undoing the results of the 1932 election. The plan involved leaving FDR in office as a mere figurehead, with dictatorial power wielded by an "assistant president" who would be given some innocuous cabinet-style title. By the early 1930s, there were already successful Fascist movements that had seized power [in Italy and Germany/Austria:] or had seized the imagination of large segments of the populace [England, France, Belgium:]. Fascist movements had also apparently seized the imagination of several leading US bankers, brokers, and industrialists, including those who ran J.P. Morgan and DuPont. They reasoned that, with enough money distributed to various people, including the leadership of the American Legion, all they needed was a popular military figure who could rouse tens of thousands of veterans, who would march on Washington, compel FDR to capitulate under threat of violence, and reinstitute conservative measures like a return to the gold standard, while repealing most or all of the early New Deal legislation that was enacted in 1933. Talk about sore losers!!! The long and short of the story is that "it could happen here," and might have happened here, had the conspirators not approached one Marine Corps Major General--Smedley D. Butler--and asked him to be their man on the white horse who would lead the coup. Butler, an oft-decorated Marine, who saw action in China during the Boxer Rebellion, Cuba during the Spanish-American War, Mexico during the Huertas-Carranza dispute, Central America during the era of Wilson's gunboat diplomacy, and in France during WWI [as an administrator there, rather than in combat:], and again in China during the battles between northern warlords and Chiang-Kai-Shek, was committed to democracy, however, and blew the whistle on the conspirators before they could successfully organize themselves. Butler was the chief witness at a Congressional hearing chaired by [future speaker of the House:] John McCormack and Morris Dickstein, which determined that Butler's testimony was indeed credible, and that a well-organized plot, although in the early stages, was being organized by conservative businessmen to overthrow FDR and elective democracy in the US, solely to protect [or so they thought:] their investments and wealth. Archer, relying heavily on transcripts of the hearing, the public report issued by the Congressional committee in 1934, portions of the transcript that had been omitted from the public report that had been unearthed by investigative reporters, and a 1971 interview with Congressman McCormack, does an able job piecing together what was publicly known about the conspiracy. His writing is sharp. Nonetheless, I hesitate to rate this book much higher than 3 stars. The last several chapters describe, in detail, the contours of the plot, but repeat, verbatim, much of the text from the first several chapters. Additionally, the middle third of the book is more precisely a biography of Gen. Butler than an inquiry into the conspiracy, and seems to be included solely to flesh Butler out as completely incorruptible, so that the reader will have no choice to believe every word of his testimony. Although I certainly do accept what Butler said at face value, much of the book seems simply to gild the lily with respect to Butler's honesty, impartiality, commitment to democracy, etc. That said, much of the description of how right-wing businessmen mobilized an "Astroturf" movement [paying tens of thousands of dollars to send thousands of fake telegrams to an American Legion convention so that it would resolve that the Legion was in favor of the gold standard:], used name-calling and red-baiting [dubbing FDR and the New Deal as "socialist," "Communist," and "un-American," and describing FDR as a "traitor to his class" and "that cripple in the White House":], mobilized military vets as strike-breakers, dipped into the combined holdings of DuPont and Remington Arms to provide gunpowder and weapons with which to arm its minions when the time was ripe, should set off alarms in 2009. Ridicule and outrageousness is the lifeblood of politics and satire; threats of violence are, unfortunately, the lifeblood of many who vie for ultimate power, including those who finally lose an election after decades of success. Since Nixon left the White House in 1974--35 years ago--Democrats have controlled the White House for only 13 years. Yet, during that time, when Republicans prevailed in elections, I never heard of liberal, left, or progressive groups being organized for the purpose of threatening secession or violence. They've organized to register voters, get out the vote, recruit good candidates, and get their ideas into the media, believing that their candidates and ideas will ultimately prevail. There have been plenty of instances of heckling conservative candidates and politicians, but I've heard of none that threatened to spiral into physical conflict [except perhaps when local police forces are directed by local authorities to spirit away nonviolent protesters and potential protesters, as in NYC in 2004:] It wasn't a Senator in the minority who told Dick Cheney to "go f**k himself," it was a sitting Vice-President who told a Senator in the minority to do so. When Bush pushed through his wars, his tax cuts, his Patriot Act, his anti-environmental policies, and his deregulation, and mismanaged diplomacy, administration of domestic agencies, and the economy, Democrats in Congress did not shout out "you lie!" even though many probably thought that he did. When protesters as much as wore an anti-Bush t-shirt to a Bush rally, they were hustled out of the arena, and charged with various crimes But now it's OK to strap on your piece at an Obama speech without any fear that law enforcement might stop you from doing your worst. If you were a Democrat who opposed any of Bush's policies, you were a traitor, committing treason, un-American, "against us" [because you weren't with us:], supporting the terrorists---there was a war [or two going on:] and "you had to watch what you said [and read:]"; but if you're a Republican Governor of a state who seriously muses about secession, you're a patriot; if you're an allegedly "outraged" citizen spouting lies, falsehoods, and untruths about healthcare reform, you're a patriot; if you stock up on guns and ammo in order to prevent an imaginary federal constabulary from disarming you, compelling you to abort your fetus, and converting you to Islam, you're a patriot. In the 1930s, it took a stroke of good luck and the efforts of a true nonpartisan patriot to thwart what might have been a successful quasi-Fascist coup. Because of that luck and that man, the racist and antisemitic rantings of Father Coughlin, Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, the Liberty League, the America Firsters, and many lesser-known but more violent rightwing organizations funded by them, never became the policy of our nation, and those promoting those claims were ultimately subjected to the ridicule they deserved. Let's hope we have the intestinal fortitude to reject, as a nation, those fomenting hate and violence, and that any debate over the merits of various policies are truly on the merits of those policies. If Obama-style government activism is unsuccessful in restoring employment, prosperity, and economic security, the punishment comes at the polls. If it is ultimately successful, as I think it will be, the losers of the election should not be permitted to win, through force of arms or threats of violence, that which their votes could not.

Review # 2 was written on 2019-07-27 00:00:00 Sha-minah A Souza Then as now it becomes important for Veterans to defend those who need help against those who only want to enrich themselves. GEN Butler was a hero already before he chose to expose corrupt and selfish people at the highest levels of business and politics. This is a must read story for every American!