The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-07-16
Liberal Viewpoint
by DIR. HARRY ELMER BARNES

by DR.. HARRY ELMER BARNES
WE do not know whether Nero actually
w fddled while Rome was burning, but, IKE
the ostrich with his head in the sand, 1t Is
striking and useful phrase
Nothing in recent years more perfectly eX-
emplifies its point than the trivial and vulgar
squabble between the Republicans and Demo-
Gratis which lies in prospect between now ana
November.
If We wish to retain the American system OF
government, it may be necessary to SUCK 10
representative institutions and representative
government means party government. But IL
is time 10 secure some party alignment, winch
bears at least a slight relationship to the eco
nomic, social and political realities today.
The real issue before the American people
this fall in a congressional election is support or
disapprovai of the New Deal. All else is lr-
relevant and incidental Under the present set
up Mr. Roosevelt inevitably must appeal to
Democrats to support him and the New Deal.
He will have to imply that a Democratic victory
means a vndcation Of the New Deal, thus
seemingly identifying the Democratic party and
the New Deal.
The absurdity and iIlogicaIity of any such
Identification is obvious to anybody but the most
supplemented partisan. The American party
today does not permit the President to make
| clear issue out Of the New Deal.
Certainly the Democratic party, as SUCH is
not responsible for it. If its leaders could have
they certainly would have rejected Mr. Roose-
welt at Chicago or defeated him in the ensuing
campaign.
TINE Democratic congress swallowed the New
i Deal only because it was formally COM
mitted to it as result of Mr.. Roosevelts cam
paign speeches and his sweeping victory at the
polls. Even so, there would doubtless have been
a great deal of snarling and paving if Mr.
Roosevelt had not come into office in the midst
of a great national emergency when opposition
to progressivism could almost be identified with
treason.
1t is obvious that plutocratic and reaction
airy Democrats have no stomach whatever for
the New Deal. 1t is far more repulSive and
alarming to them than the BOurbonistic SOM
Violence Of the Hoover administration. Carter
Glass has been as much an obstacle to eman-
cpaUion from the mOney-changerS' dominion as
a Republican war horse. Senators Byrd and
Smith led the foolish attack upon Doctor Tug
well.
Once the emergency has passed its more
intense period there would have been an open
revolt on the part of the reactionary Democrats
had it not been for their yearning for the rich
patronage at the disposal of the President
Similarly with the Republicans, there is no
| clean-cut alignment on the issues of the day
Norris, La Toilette, La Guardia, Cutting and
others were more helpful to Mr.. Roosevelt in
promoting the New Deal than most of the rank
and file of the senators and congressman. On
the other hand, the regular Republicans in
congress have far less in common with La Fol-
| lette, Norris Nye, ct al, than they have with
Carter Glass or even with Joe Robinson.
CERTAINLY, the Republicans as a party
~ have nothing constructive to offer the
country in case they slaughter the New Deal
The party has not had a new idea since the
days of General Grant. In wounded rage it
| occasionally has been compelled to take some
note of civilized suggestions made by Theodore
| Roosevelt and other progresSiveS when on
rampage But it never gave any hospitable
reception to their views.
The whole Democrat Republican lineup is a
product of war times and has about as much
releYance to present day realities as a Civil
war Stagecoach has to modern transportation
systems
The differences between the two parties have
been relatively slight since reconstruction days.
Even the two topics on which they have seemed
to be most divided the tariff and the currency,
never have been clean cut issues as between the
parties. There have been plenty of high tariff
and hard money Democrats, as well as numer-
Gus Republican free-traderS, greenbackers and
silverites
If the controversy over the New Deal could
help to break up this absurd heritage from an
ancient past and give some logic to the Ameri-
can party system it would render an incom-
parable service to American politics. The
present controversy between Republicans and
Democrats may be compared aptly to two men
standing on a railroad track in the path OF
the new streamline train arguing over the
relative merits of a stagecoach and an OK cart.