, 1924-10-15
THE FOE OF PROCRESSIVISM

party protestinS against the use
of the title of Progressive by Sen
ator LaFollette n his radical fol-
lowers, accurately expresses the feel
ings of millions of citizens who par
ticipated in the memorable campaign
OF 1912. With unmistakable en-
phasis it declared:
THE movement in which we
united with Theodore Roosevelt and
millions of other Americans, under
the historic name of Progressive"
was not radical. Its purpose was to
improve American institutions. not
to substitute others for them. IL
STOOD for political and social justice.
not economic revolution. 1t believed
IN democracy, not socialism. 1t
sought the welfare of all the people.
not the welfare of class against
class. Many of its policies are now
the law, and we will continue our
efforts on behalf of the remainder"
1t was of Senator LaFollette that
Colonel Roosevelt said in 1917: HE
Is acting in such fashion as to make
MIN of the most potent enemies
OF TINS country and a most sinister
enemy of democracy" That iudg-
ment is even more applicable today;
Tor the radical leader is engaged
IN a determined effort to create in
THIS country a class cleavage which
would overturn popular government
and destroy national unity.
Those who resent LaFollette's
transportation of the name take
the incontestable stand that since
1912 the term Progressive has had
a definite historical and political
significance. Under this title a ma
tional party, with a great construc-
i've program and with Theodore
Roosevelt as its candidate and chief
interpreter, made a campaign cover
ing every state in the union, and at
the election polled 4,126,0OO votes.
Prior to that time the word pro-
gressive, like the word liberal and
conservative. had a general mean
ing in American public affairs; but
thereafter it denoted a distinct and
we~ll-recognized political philosophy.
program and group of voters. In
Great Britain the situation was, and
still is, reversed. Over there the
term progressive has a general ap-
%plication, while Liberal and Con-
servative are the official titles of
organized parties and designate
clearly defined schools of political
thought, just as Progressive does
in the United States.
Senator LaFollette rejected the
Progressive platform of 1912 and
bitterly assailed the candidacy of
Theodore Roosevelt, who p%ersonified
the Progressive cause. For him now
to pretend to usurp the leadership
of the Progressive movement is an
act of dishonesty and effrontery
without parallel in political history.
1t is as if a politician who had de-
nounced Lincoln and his platform in
1860 should have appeared in the
field in 1872 as the self styled in
terpreter of Republican principles
and the doctrines upheld by Lincoln,
while actually making war upon
Them.
The words R~ooseveltism and Pro-
gressivism have the same meaning,
denote identical principles and
aims. Senator LaFollette in 1919
chose to stand as the foe of the
Progressive movement and of Roose-
welt, its recognized leader. III de-
liberately adopting that course, which
he pursued with a venomous de-
termination. he forfeited all right
to speak for Progressives or as 4
Progressive. 1t is inconceivable tina
a candidate whom Roosevelt would
infallibly condemn. with a platform
~antagonistic to the democratic prin-
ciples and virile American ideals
which Roosevelt championed, Shout,
be accepted by Progressives today,
or that his assumption of the Pro
gressive title should be permitted to
pass unchallenged.
To Theodore Roosevelt, with his
deep love for his country and uli-
compromising devotion to its insti-
buttons. the greatest offense of
which an American citizen could be
guilty was disloyalty in time of
peril to the nation. But he regard
ed as hardly less dangerous and
J, odious any effort to array class
against class and thereby to OBJ
struct national unity, the promotion
of which was the dominating pur-
pose of his whole public career.
Turnout his life" writes Herman
Hagedorn, Roosevelt fought many
battles, in man. high causes, but at
bottom it was one cause which he
was always serving-the solidarity
of the American people. Wherever
he went he preached his doctrine of
the interdependence of the individu-
al of every section and race and
religion on every other individual;
and it stirred him that everywhere
he experienced the essential