Could a fascistic Butler and the American Legion overthrow the U.S?
- Thread starter Caesar_33
- Start date
well he was a Republican OTL before 1933, so with the POD of him being the Pennsylvania Republican nominee in April 1933, he never sees radical socialism as a viable option, surrounded by republicans. he ends up disavowing hoover in July and rapidly rises to become a very popular president. But MacArthur would probably help in a coup.
I don't think they ever had a constituency. Certainly it's hard to stir the forces of conservatism into action against the Red Hordes when those people are led by a Roosevelt, of all people. You'd need additional POD work to make this even vaguely likely. Honestly, I wonder if you'd need no Red Scare, we were way too successful at stamping out American communism for it to seem like a big threat fifteen years later.
I just don't see how an event like the Bonus Army would push Butler in a more pro-Wall Street direction. If he were to run, it would most likely be as a progressive, Borah type Republican.
That seems...tangential to my post? Primaries weren't very representative at the time, and it's not like he ran on violently overthrowing the government, so that doesn't measure support for that, either.
A fascistic Butler wouldn't have to be pro-Wall Street, fascists have often been rather anti-capitalist after all.
Of course the most successful movements were those which managed to reach a modus vivendi with the establishment so that they weren't crushed out of hand. The radical economic views of American fascists like Pelley of the Silver Shirts didn't exactly endear them to the powers that be.
Fair point. My wall street claim was based directly off his post. That said, perhaps an interesting POD could involve Huey Long becoming president, establishing a dictatorship, and then being overthrown by Butler.
Do you understand that the American legion from day one as per it's preamble to the Constitution of the American Legion pledged to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. There is no way in hell it (the Legion) would support a coup against the government. In fact it would be one of the first to fight whom ever tried to overthrow the government.
Which is why the Long plan may work best. Butler would gain power in a constitutional way and overthrow a tyrannical Long, only to resort to increasingly desperate measure to keep order.
OTL the Legion was quite fascistic and two of its state commanders were willing to side with Wall Street in the Business Plot.
TBH I can't see Butler EVER acting any way other than how he did. The Legion had some rich SOB's in the higher levels, but a lot of others who were not. None of them cared for the Reds, very few cared for the Fascists. I don't see the whole scheme (the OTL one) as viable, nor can I see it being viable with any changes.
I think you're underestimating the ability of the Wall Street business men to use Red Scare demagoguery to inspire people.
I honestly have always wondered how legit the plot actually was. It seemed to be just so far from being even plausible that I wonder how much of it was real and how much of it was drunken ramblings of delusional people.
Besides, from what I remember, Roosevelt ran on a platform of deficit reduction, claiming Hoover was spending too much money. I don't think he would have been seen as a truly dangerous figure to anyone for at least a few years.
Besides, from what I remember, Roosevelt ran on a platform of deficit reduction, claiming Hoover was spending too much money. I don't think he would have been seen as a truly dangerous figure to anyone for at least a few years.
It had the backing of some of the American Legion state organizers (of an organization that numbered half a million veterans) and enough important businessmen to have the list of names 'mysteriously disappeared' from the Congressional hearing.
I disagree. I don't believe I am at all. We can often judge a historians viewpoint and objectivity by what he has published and the sources used to determine what side of the political spectrum he is on and how reliable the work is. A book I recently read now rests under a pile of papers and other books (on the desk that used to be my worktable and is now a catchall) dealing with Butler and the scandal. At some point I hope to go back and consider the historiography of the work and its author. This is a necessity in viewing any historical work, or forming an opinion on subjects. From what I have read about Butler (including the aforementioned book) he was as incorruptible a mortal man as ever walked the earth, his taking part in such an affair is extremely unlikely. The primary actors in the affair (rich businessmen, some Legion members) still had to convince the rank and file of the Legion membership this was all legitimate. That is unlikely in the extreme. The conspirators in this affair would have had to tread very, very carefully for this to have even an iota of success. once uncovered, Civil unrest, possibly even armed revolt against those seeking to impose such a change (essentially the conspirators sought to toss the Constitution out the window) is in my mind a certainty.
"Red Scare Demagoguery" is another area of history that should be looked into objectively. Was it actually demagoguery, or well founded suspicion? FWIW, elements of society flirted with both Fascism and Communism in this time period, neither was a large or successful movement. The common citizen would prove loyal to the nation, more grounded in common sense and with knowledge of right and wrong, and suggesting they would be swayed by the rhetoric of the press ( most Americans recalled all to well how they were suckered into the Spanish American War, and the WWI) or an evil political movement is to my mind, unlikely.
As to the conspiracy having the backing of SOME of the Legion state organizers, you are correct, but it was not nearly all. The businessmen got caught due to Butler, and their names were withheld (IIRC, along with some other evidence) from the published portions of the Congressional hearings. The fact that FDR later had no trouble from any of those involved indicates (to me) that he had their names, withheld them, and used that information to leverage his own agenda. Kudos to FDR for that!
"Red Scare Demagoguery" is another area of history that should be looked into objectively. Was it actually demagoguery, or well founded suspicion? FWIW, elements of society flirted with both Fascism and Communism in this time period, neither was a large or successful movement. The common citizen would prove loyal to the nation, more grounded in common sense and with knowledge of right and wrong, and suggesting they would be swayed by the rhetoric of the press ( most Americans recalled all to well how they were suckered into the Spanish American War, and the WWI) or an evil political movement is to my mind, unlikely.
As to the conspiracy having the backing of SOME of the Legion state organizers, you are correct, but it was not nearly all. The businessmen got caught due to Butler, and their names were withheld (IIRC, along with some other evidence) from the published portions of the Congressional hearings. The fact that FDR later had no trouble from any of those involved indicates (to me) that he had their names, withheld them, and used that information to leverage his own agenda. Kudos to FDR for that!
I appreciate the help, but these are all assumptions. You assume that it was in Butler's character to not participate in such an illegal and immoral affair, and assume that most American citizens would remain loyal to a government that would not exist after the coup. You also say that 'most' Legion state organizers would not support this, without providing any evidence.