At any point during the most recent presidential contest, you may have heard references to Godwin’s Law if you spent enough time in the swampy feculence of Facebook comment threads. While I don’t entirely reject the comparison – both men are unhinged sociopaths who seek adoration and fealty – I doubt its effectiveness. It’s a tired analogy and invoking it tends to end the dialogue. If the larger point is that we need to be exceedingly careful in deciding who we hand the keys to, that danger (potentially) looms with the granting of power to the temperamental, then let’s look instead to our own history for precedence.
When Franklin Roosevelt was first elected to the presidency, his Secretary of Agriculture was a generally affable man named Henry Wallace. In the early years of FDR’s leadership, Wallace enjoyed wide popularity despite being somewhat of an outsider, and joined the presidential ticket as VP for FDR’s historic third term. He didn’t drink, and was far more interested in the ethics of legislation and governance than cocktail parties and backroom glad-handing. He was a peaceful and spiritual man, and this may have played a role in his eventual relegation to historical footnote. As World War II waged on and it became clear FDR would seek and win a fourth term, he was pressured by the more conservative and segregationist wing of his party to dump Wallace off the ticket in favor of Harry Truman. He did so, and after 82 days as VP, FDR died and Truman suddenly found himself in the big chair. By his own admission, Truman stepped into the presidency ill-informed and unprepared. He was known to have a fiery temper, to act decisively and not second guess himself.
Does this sound familiar? A combustible personality, tragically illiterate to the expectations of the office, suddenly finds himself in power. My point is not specifically to align Truman with Trump – in fact Truman was generally regarded as an honest and well-intentioned man, who was not ignorant to the presidential politics of the day by choice (his first 82 days were spent outside the Cabinet). Instead I think it serves as a reminder of how the history of the world can change irreparably by way of election. There’s no way of knowing how differently things would have turned out had Henry Wallace remained FDR’s VP, and had stepped in upon the president’s untimely death. But we do know that Wallace opposed the cold war, while supporting labor unions, national health insurance, and women’s equality. He was a thoughtful civil servant who believed in a “common man” approach to global relations.
We also know that Harry Truman dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing nearly 200,000 men, women, and children. He did so despite the objections of many of his advisors, who believed Japan’s forces were so battered that the hostilities were already essentially over.
Oliver Stone released a ten-part documentary in 2013 that explores forgotten moments from decades past, and he spends some time on this story. As a nation, we would be wise to study our history before casting votes for our future. Instead we respond to fact-free accusations and salacious tweets. We get the government we deserve.