The First Lady of Radio (20 page)

In another letter which I have recently received, a well-meaning and public-spirited lady suggests that we undertake to increase our food supply by growing crops on every available piece of land. Such a suggestion may seem at first to have a great deal of value. But closer study shows that it does not take into account our complete national picture. I am afraid that this idea would not meet with the entire approval of the secretary of agriculture, because we now have surpluses of many types of food. There is an ample supply to meet the present or future needs of Europe as well as our own. This holds true even if many refugees can be
brought here, although this does not seem likely at present. Because the food supply is so closely related to world trade, we cannot entertain the idea of growing more crops without considering the future of American exporting. If the war in Europe does not end soon, we will not be allowed to trade with the greater part of Europe. If the war does end soon, we still do not know whether any kind of general trade will again return to the world.

I want to be most careful in criticizing the suggestions which have been sent to me. It is a beautiful idea that we should plan ahead. It is wonderful that people all over the country should be thinking along these lines, but we should remember that much planning for the future has already been done. It would be a pity to waste our national energy in increasing our food supply, for example, when there is at present sufficient reserve to meet any generous impulse we may have or to engage in any kind of trade that may be possible.

To demonstrate further how some suggestions for our national welfare can misuse our national energy, I should like to tell you about another letter I have received. A lady suggests that we engage retired army officers to drill all the women in the country. Isn't it obvious that those of us who are able to cook would do better to improve our cooking than to learn how to be soldiers? National emergencies call for the best efforts of every citizen in their own special fields. I can see how calisthenics, or any physical development which would improve the health of our boys and girls and older people, might be valuable, for health is certainly one of the things which I think is a vital part of a defense program. And speaking of public health, it seems to me that many of us might put our minds to the problem of securing better medical care for all of our people, so that we would be better fitted to meet any unusual strain which we might be asked to endure.

One generalization which I might make about all the suggestions I have received in the mail is this: let us look to the improvement of
America and Americans first. For example, the tragedy which has come to the children of Europe is dramatic enough to appeal to people who have known little or nothing about the tragedy which faces many of our own children and their mothers and fathers in this country. I hope that bringing some of the refugee children to this country and placing them in various communities will serve to point up for us some of the conditions which face our own children. I can quite well understand the feelings of the people who say: “Why is there so much excitement about saving Europe's children when comparatively little has been done to save our own?” The answer, of course, is that the tragedy in Europe has come more quickly and is so forcibly brought to us through the press, radio, and newsreels—that it cannot be ignored. It must arouse the sympathy of a warmhearted nation. Many people can live a long while in a community and not know that nearby live other people who are in dire need. Perhaps those very people will become aware of the conditions that have remained hidden in their own communities, by seeing the conditions under which some foreign children live.

I know there has been a feeling of discouragement among many people because democracy achieves reforms slowly. But I still feel that this arises from a lack of knowledge, which keeps us as a nation from being really unified in our efforts to improve the democratic way of life. In other words, we do not know each other. We have ignored conditions which endanger democracy in our homes and in our own communities. But the brightest hope that I see ahead, and it may be a real salvation, is that the dangers which face us today may draw us together. The conflict in the world around us may force us to know our homes, our communities, our nation—and thus compel us to grow into a unified country, ever improving our democracy.

23.

“Peace, Democracy, and Ideals”

Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt's Own Program,
presented by SweetHeart Soap

Thursday, July 4, 1940

ER: Good day, ladies and gentlemen. I am extremely glad to be able to speak to you today from Hyde Park, because there are so many things to do here on this particular day. I don't know how I would have been able to find time for the motor trip to New York City. It would also have been extremely difficult to fit this broadcast into my husband's plans, because later today the president is going to turn over the papers for the new library at Hyde Park to the archivist of the United States. This will complete the acceptance by the government of this new building.

I have watched with great interest as this library has grown from a dream into a reality. And I certainly should like to be present at the last step. I shall be very happy when the exhibits are finally in place and students come to work with the papers which will be available for research work, and when people just drop in for a view of the various
collections. There will be, I think, a Hudson River Room. Many naval items of historical importance from my husband's collection will also be included. Some of these will be loaned and some will be exhibited permanently. Part of the exhibit will be changed from time to time, so that everyone can visit and revisit the library always to find something new and interesting.

In England, at the Gladstone Library, they have built a small inn, not far away, where students may stay at a very reasonable rate until their work is accomplished. I hope that someday a similar arrangement can be made here, for I feel that this library offers a great deal of fine material which can be very valuable to students and writers.

The Fourth of July is not exactly a day of rest for any of us. When these semiofficial ceremonies of handing over the library to the government have been completed, we betake ourselves to the cottage and give our annual picnic for the newspapermen and photographers, who accompany my husband on this visit to Hyde Park. This is great fun, as I told you in last Tuesday's broadcast, and even if we all will be a little weary by the end of the day, it will be a satisfactory kind of weariness. I believe it is always worth getting tired when you are having a good time.

In the midst of what I am doing today, this thought flashes through my mind: How strange it is that we can go on during these days, living our usual normal lives, when only a few thousand miles away another nation—which has for many years celebrated its national holiday on July fourteenth—is now forced to face a completely changed status, and to start rebuilding its national life under very difficult conditions. I wonder whether we ever stop to realize, even for a moment, what it would mean to us if we were looking to a future as grim as the one which lies before that nation.

One of the things that I find most difficult these days is to keep a balance between ideals and realities. I am sure this problem is shared by a great many other people. Many have told me that they are prepared
to defend our ideals of democracy and to preserve the American way of life. They are opposed to the Nazi, Fascist, and Communist forms of government. But all of this goes under the heading of ideals. Now, what about the realities? The same people who dislike dictatorships say that, above everything else, they do not want to go to war. They hope that conflicting ideas can in some way be reconciled without resorting to force. They cling to the possibility that the dictators will keep their activities out of the spheres of our interests. While I share these hopes most ardently, I feel that it is necessary to continue to face the facts. The economy of the dictators is different from ours. They never worry about what things cost. The life of the individual is absolutely unimportant. The rights of minorities have long since been forgotten. The peace of the neighboring neutral countries has been violated over and over again. Everything is sacrificed to the will of the dictator. Democracies, on the other hand, move slowly towards their objectives because they are unwilling to sacrifice human lives and human liberties.

If a dictator does not have raw materials within his own borders, he must be able to get them elsewhere. If he cannot get raw materials through trade he will get them by force. And force is justifiable in the dictator's philosophy. If we, as Americans, do not want to meet force with force, we must at least meet force with facts. As far as I can see, there are only two things that those of us who want a peaceful world can look forward to. One is complete disarmament. The other is a world economy which provides all nations, great and small, with an equal opportunity to secure basic commodities. I am not an economist, but this seems so simple to me as I view the world situation today. I am sure it is not simple to work out the details of either of these alternatives. I know that it will take the best brains of all the countries in the world. But the principle of giving the people everywhere in the world an equal chance to obtain basic commodities is the only way that I can see by which
the causes of war can be removed. But such things as disarmament and balanced world trade are back in the realm of hope. The facts are that the dictators do not share the desire to work for the good of the world as a whole. As far as disarmament is concerned, they want everyone to disarm but themselves. As far as world trade is concerned, they want it at the expense of all the other nations.

We have a right to ask the question: Is such a thing as world peace really possible? Has there ever been a single instance in the history of mankind when individuals worked for universal good? I say there is. The field of science is a shining example of how the contributions and the genius of every nation have been used for the benefit of the entire world. The scientific viewpoint, which is completely unselfish, must become the viewpoint of governments and businessmen if we are ever going to organize a satisfactory world community. But until the world is more receptive to ideas for universal good, we must work furiously to preserve the good things in our own American way of living. We must not let the dictatorships outguess, outtalk, outwork, and outfinance us. And we believe that we can accomplish all of those things without sacrificing our democracy.

Our representative form of government was conceived on the principle that nothing shall be done unless the people consent to it. When the ideals of democracy were first formulated, the need was to slow down the speed of government. People were trying to build a defense against the lightning strokes of oppression at the hands of tyrants. Our fore fathers thought that, whenever the people had enough time to slowly and coolly consider legislation, they would have a better chance to see that it was beneficial to all. That is why our Constitution balances the authority of one branch of the government against the other, and divides the legislative and executive powers among many people. Today, we must try to preserve that same machinery of democracy but to accelerate its pace.
This does not mean regimentation. It does not mean that all points of view should not be given consideration. But it does mean that we must be quick to realize what should be done for our national welfare. And we must be quick to act accordingly. The representatives in our government take their cues from us. If we are divided, if we disagree, they will act accordingly. But if we are as one in our thoughts and desires, we can match even the pace of one-man dictatorial government.

It is easy to say that we should speak with a single voice. But I am fully aware that this is not as simple as it sounds. I know that our economic system is completely satisfactory to some of us, and not quite satisfactory to others. How then, you may ask, is it possible for both groups to act unanimously? But there is a way. It calls for equal sacrifice by all; it calls for equal unselfishness; it calls for the farsightedness to settle the differences within our own country in order to achieve a common defense against outer forces, which are by far more important and more threatening.

At a time when outer forces are becoming more ominous each day, America is beginning a political campaign during which this country will be told what can be done to meet those outer forces, and how we should cope with our internal problems. We may deal with these issues in high-sounding phrases which mean nothing. Or we may come down to “brass tacks” and let the people know exactly what we face. I think we, as a people, have come of age and we are able to understand and be strong enough to face any eventuality. To say that we are going to have armament and not pay for it is ridiculous. To say that sacrifices will not be necessary from all is equally ludicrous. Rich and poor, big and small, every single American is going to have to do something personally, unselfishly, willingly, for the preservation of our democracy. But today, and throughout every day of the future, let us keep in mind these immortal words whose birthday we celebrate today: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by
their creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Upon our intelligence as a nation to understand these words, upon our willingness as a people to keep them alive, depends your future, my future, and the future of America.

24.

“Address to the Democratic National Convention”