How to Combat Hitler

How to Combat Hilter

When Republicans damn the New Deal, they usually make an exception for the personal character, if not the ideas, of Henry Agard Wallace. Last week in his acceptance speech Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate Charles McNary said that his rival was "a high-minded and sympathetic Secretary of Agriculture." Last week Wendell Willkie said "Mr. Wallace is a fine gentleman."

Henry Wallace stood last week on the cornstalk-decorated stage of the Coliseum in Des Moines to undergo what was a political ordeal for a shy man--to accept the Democratic nomination for Vice President. His unruly hair combed back for a change, his wide features expanding in a boyish grin, he beamed on the crowd in a way that made it unmistakable--it was a great occasion for him. The crowd of 7,000 to 8,000, almost filling the Coliseum, roared back, waved banners WELCOME HOME, HANK and WHO WANTS WINDY WENDELL WILLKIE?

Magic Name. In his opening words warmhearted Henry Wallace spoke of the honor of running with "the one man who, more than any other, represents security for democracy in the modern world." There were roars for his sentiments:

"For nearly eight years President Roosevelt has battled for democracy and freedom. . . . Roosevelt believed in government by the people and for the people. . . . Roosevelt believed in putting the common man first . . . Roosevelt believed in the good-neighbor policy, among individuals and among nations. . . . Roosevelt believed in peace through preparedness. . . . Roosevelt believed in freer world trade and a higher standard of living. . . . Roosevelt was its [democracy's] eager servant and faithful defender. . . . Only Roosevelt had the unusual combination of many months spent as a boy in European countries, a comprehensive knowledge of history, experience as Assistant Secretary of the Navy . . . access to the day-by-day information . . . and wisdom to relate that information to its significance for America. . . ." All told he mentioned "Roosevelt" or "the President" 31 times, and the crowd cheered each & every mention.

Whatever the Motive. With ardent Wallace tributes ran sombre Wallace warnings against Adolf Hitler, which he made into a campaign argument: With Franklin Roosevelt standing for democracy and Adolf Hitler standing for dictatorship, those who opposed him were Hitler's conscious or innocent allies. Charging that Republican leadership has not understood the meaning of Hitler's rise, he declared:

"When Roosevelt tried to adjust the internal affairs of the United States to a sick world, they fought him at home as Hitler fought him abroad. Some of the bitter attacks on Roosevelt's program were directly inspired by the agents of Hitler in this country. Others were merely blindly partisan. But, whatever the motive, the effect was the same--these attacks on Roosevelt and his program played into the hands of Hitler. Every evidence of opposition to Roosevelt within the United States has been reason for rejoicing in Berlin. . . .

"I do not wish to imply that Republican leaders are willfully or consciously giving aid and comfort to Hitler. But I want to emphasize that replacement of Roosevelt, even if it were by the most patriotic leadership that could be found, would cause Hitler to rejoice. I do not believe that the American people will turn their backs on the man that Hitler wants to see defeated. Most Republicans may not yet realize it, but their party is the party of appeasement in the United States today. It is the rarty which the totalitarian powers will back in every way possible."

Reaction. Said Candidate Roosevelt: "A grand speech and splendidly given before an appreciative nation." Said Candidate Willkie: "Well, there can't be anything more wrong than 100% wrong." Said the New York Times with unusual asperity: "A line of attack which does no credit to him or his party. ... If this says anything, it says that a vote for Mr. Willkie is a vote for Hitler. That is an unjust charge, because the record shows that Mr. Willkie has been just as straightforward as Mr. Roosevelt in his condemnation of Hitler. ... It is an irresponsible charge. . . . Hitler may well believe that he will find tougher opposition in an American defense program run by a man who has had firsthand business experience than in a defense program run by a man who lacks that experience. It is a reckless charge, because [it] is an attempt to arrogate patriotism for the Democratic Party. . . ."

Henry Wallace had launched the most controversial argument of the campaign. If voters even half agree with him he may in one speech have virtually elected Franklin Roosevelt for Term III.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.