I do not agree with this statement. I would argue that TR
was a strongly principled man whose principles drove him to push for progressive
reforms. That is not to say that all his actions were progressive, but it is to say
that his progressivism was the result of principle as opposed to
opportunism.
First of all, it is not as if TR had to be
progressive in order to be popular. Progressivism was not the only strain of political
thought in the country at the time. TR was a leader in this respect, not someone who
simply went along with what was already popular.
Second, we
can see from TR's life that he was driven by principle. We know that he thought that it
was, for example, important for the white race to maintain its dominance over the
world. He wanted, therefore, to perfect the white race so it would remain strong. This
attitude (one can argue) drove his desire to use the government to help people perfect
themselves. His pushing of national parks, for example, was driven by his desire to
allow people to get out into nature and challenge themselves physically so that they
could become stronger mentally and physically.
I would
argue, then, that TR was motivated by principle. He believed in allowing regular
(white) people to have more control over the country (and indeed the world). This
pushed him to advocate for progressive reforms.
No comments:
Post a Comment