Customer Reviews

Bully Boy: The Truth About Theodore Roosevelt's Legacy

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

In FDR's Folly, Jim Powell relied heavily on the work of empirical economists to draw conclusions about FDR and his policies. While contrary to other historians who have largely ignored economic studies of the great depression, Powell evaluated FDR and the New Deal based on the actual outcomes and consequences that they produced. In a similar vein, Powell documents the policies of TR in his new book, Bully Boy, and concludes that they largely did more harm than good. Specifically, Powell discusses the following in Bully Boy:

* How TR's regulations, tariff and "trust busting" policies harmed consumers

* How TR's foreign policy undermined the Monroe Doctrine and set precedents for future intervention in conflicts with no clear threat to U.S. security

* How TR's Meat Inspection Act and Pure Food and Drugs Act were used predominately as special interest legislation and set the foundation for the future FDA "drug lag," which has killed thousands

* How TR's conservation policies were counterproductive

* How TR's tax policies help to establish the federal income tax

While Powell's assessment of TR cannot be found in most history books, Bully Boy is well researched and documented with approximately 29 pages of notes and a 21 page bibliography. I enjoyed the book and would recommend it to people that either love or loathe TR.

Many people will obviously disagree with Powell's conclusions or will support the consequences and precedents of TR's policies that appear to trouble Powell. I look forward to reading both the positive and negative reviews of this book. My hope is that those who disagree with Powell can provide more substance than the ad hominem attacks (e.g. "smut," "garbage," "reactionary claptrap") and other rhetorical fallacies that were the main locus of criticism for FDR's Folly and Wilson's War

After reading Jim Powell's book FDR's Folly, I wasn't sure I wanted to follow that one by reading Bully Boy, Powell's critique of Theodore Roosevelt's political life. So, I thought I'd give my brain a rest and just check it out of the library and do a mild overview. Unfortunately, you can't read a Powell book like that, so after reading just the introduction, I was hooked.

Powell's view point in Bully Boy is similar to that in FDR's Folly, but a little less detailed. He provides a strong chronological look at T. Roosevelt's entire political career, with his major focus on its consequences, especially during Roosevelt's presidency.

One area that evidently eluded me during my years in school was the fact that T. Roosevelt was a Republican (pretty much in name only), but his politics were radical, liberal and progressive. As a result, he believed in a huge, powerful central government, led by a president who has a lot of individual power at his disposal. Roosevelt felt America's involvement in war was the noblest of endeavors, and as an aggressive expansionist president, continuously involved the American military in senseless, imperialistic takeovers of foreign governments like the Hawaiian Islands, Panama, Cuba, the Philippines, and even eyed countries in South America, even though not a single one of these military actions involved the national security of the United States. And many, if not most of these conflicts were done without Constitutionally mandated congressional approval. As the president, Roosevelt felt he had the power and the right to commit American military forces anywhere he deemed them necessary, and without anyone's approval.

Powell asserts that Roosevelt's famous "trust-buster" reputation was a sham. As president, he created governmental monopolies, while damaging America's free-trade economy and harming consumers by the use of tariffs, breaking up of worthwhile businesses, and resurrecting the dreaded income tax.

Bully Boy is a compelling, well-documented, and controversial book. Regardless of your view point, Powell has written another thought-provoking volume, worthy of serious consideration. The end notes and bibliography in this book are a gold mine of historical information.

Whether you love and admire Teddy Roosevelt, or can't wait for his face to be sand-blasted off of Mount Rushmore, Jim Powell's book "Bully Boy" is truly a worthwhile read. All I ask is that if you're going to write a review or add comments to another "Bully Boy" review, please respect the author, Amazon.com, and the other reviewers by at least reading the book, the entire book, and also please refrain from spilling your ideological guts out all over Powell and the rest of us instead of adding a beneficial and thoughtful review.

Although I consider myself very much pro-laissez faire capitalism, a few of the chapters in this book are not very convincing, which detracts from the overall utility of the book. However, it is still one of the few books that critiques the Theodore Roosevelt Administration (henceforth T.R.) from a pro-laissez-faire capitalist perspective, and is therefore still worth reading.

T.R. became president at a crucial turning point in U.S. history. At this time, there was a raging political debate between Classical Liberalism and Progressivism. Classical Liberalism was the idea of the Founding Fathers, which essentially argues that the proper role of the Federal government is largely to protect civil liberties to allow all citizens to pursue happiness. Progressivism encouraged the federal government to serve as an advocate for the weak and take a more active role in public affairs for the "greater good" of society. Unfortunately, with T.R., Progressivism won, which set numerous political precedents for government regulations in business, food, medicine, the environment and just about every other facet of public life. Since the T.R. was a *decisive* victory for Progressivism over Classical Liberalism, this makes T.R. arguably the worst president in U.S. history.

Although Powell seems to miss the broad philosophical turning point described above, he does identify a large collection of loathsome policies of T.R. The chapter on "trust busting", which describes the dissolution of Northern Securities and Standard Oil and the subsequent hampering of economic growth that resulted from anti-trust laws, is very good. Similarly, the chapter on the massive pricing regulations on the railroad industry and the crippling economic results is also very eye-opening. The chapter on food and drug regulations contains a lot of informative facts, such as the ludicrous campaign against Coca-Cola (well after cocaine was removed as an ingredient), but it is a little less convincing. The chapter on environmental regulation was probably the least convincing of these four.

Although Powell is very good at revealing how in many situations, the government regulations did not actually make consumer products safer or the environment cleaner in many situations, his argument seems to boil down to how these things inherently became less safe in every situation, because the government got involved. While this is certainly true in many situations, it is definitely not true in all, as there are legitimate cases of fraud or negligence in consumer products or pollution that the government should be involved in. Instead, Powell's argument would have been much more compelling to base his arguments on moral rights. For example, a chronically ill patient has the right to risk his life with a non-FDA-approved drug, if he indeed rationally perceives it to be his only hope to recovering.

Moreover, the chapter on Roosevelt's foreign policy is not persuasive. Roosevelt did indeed think that a country should routinely go to war to maintain national pride and would toughen men into "real men". This is indeed an alarming view for a Commander in Chief to have, since wars should be viewed as something a country is forced into to defend the rights of its citizens, not as a means to boost national moral. However, Powell goes well beyond this. Powell is heavily critical of the Panama Canal because its construction was made possible by a U.S. government backed revolution in Panama. While I think there can be a serious discussion on the propriety of this actions, to fixate on the fact that the Panama Canal was made possible by "interventionism" overlooks the prodigious achievement in civil engineering and international commerce that this canal truly represented. Furthermore, Powell labels T.R.'s handling of the Ion Perdicaris hostage situation as unnecessary interventionism, which overlooks how T.R.'s actions boldly declared that the U.S. would have zero tolerance for those who violate the rights of U.S. citizens overseas.

Overall, this is a good, but definitely not great, book on the Theodore Roosevelt administration from a pro-laissez-faire capitalist perspective.

A great review of TR, his idea's, and their consequences. Systematically shows how TR was in fact not one of the greatest presidents of the US, but in fact a disaster. More depth would have been nice in certain areas, but a good intro to TR.

If you've always wondered what happened between the great laissez-faire post-war expansion of the late 19th century and the nanny-state socialism of the 20th, Bully Boy is for you. Not that TR is fully responsible, but he certainly paved the way. From destructive international intervention to stifling regulation of business, TR's systematic reduction of America's freedom, her true source of greatness, is well documented in Bully Boy. Powell's language is easy to understand and not unduly boring. If the size of the book intimidates you, know that a good portion of the back is filled with references. While no amount of reference material will silent those who come to Amazon to provide negative reviews of books they haven't read, the information is persuasive for those struggling to cast free the shackles of pro-TR indoctrination. A good read and not a huge investment of time. If nothing else, Bully Boy provides an interesting glimpse into a pivotal time in American history, unencumbered by political correctness.

For a book that I just happened to pick up, Jim Powell's book was a very excellent read. Theodore Roosevelt is often looked at as one of the most vibrant, enthralling presidents. This picture often gives people the impression that he was the quintessential American man. Although he was a very interesting person, his political views severely crippled a thriving democratic republic. Powell points out that Roosevelt's ideas were as socialistic, if not more so, than his cousin's FDR. I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know more about the roots of why America is in its current position.

As a historian and economist the times Roosevelt lived in were dramatically tilted toward the industrialists with an immense amount of power and do what you want attitude. As a Republican I am for less government but not no government and that is the situation Roosevelt found himself in. His chief accomplishments set a precedent for latter governmental powers expansion but any rational person aware of the situation on the ground at the time would respect that the overwhelming bulk of the steps he took were completely necessary.
Sometimes it is good to read mediocre works because they challenge your knowledge, force you to dig into the facts and learn but then again this is an embarrasingly off the mark book and should be shouted down in bully boy fashion for the foolish among us will take it for truth.

I failed to see any mention of the hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of Filipino wonen and children killed by Americans. Roosevelt was said to have been elated by the slaughter of "savages" for the American cause