• DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    FDR didn’t commit genocide. The Japanese internments were a national shame but were not genocidal in nature.

    He is only guilty of it you count segregation itself, which he didn’t start and couldn’t stop, though the New Deal coalition he assembled would evolve and become key to the growing Civil Rights movement even if the New Deal itself wasn’t as fair to black people as it should have been, like everything else in America.

    I personally would choose Lincoln as number one but FDR is definitely a contender for best. Certainly better than you should have expected from a segregation-era liberal.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not that either. A grave injustice that could very easily have become such, one that corrupt local officials certainly abused, but there were no death marches, no mass executions, and no cultural extermination.

        Misuse of the term genocide dilutes the impact of the accusation, and you should just be generally careful of trying to tear down one of the few presidents who tried to make things better for… Well, anyone. We haven’t really had one since before Reagan that did more than talk a good game and then stab labor in the back.

          • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            When they say “with the intent of making a region ethnically homogeneous” they do that by actually removing the people from the region instead of forcing them into camps in the region and then letting them out again.

            That and, you know, mass murder.