Evan Thomas: Teddy Roosevelt
In his appearances on Inside Washington Evan Thomas has always been a square shooter. He doesn’t seem to have an agenda, is pretty much immune to the trendy conformity of partisan opinion, and so can reasonably be listened to as an honest broker. He seeks to tell the truth without a fluorish and appears to have little need for contention. Thomas just wants to offer his take.
Thomas is the author of one of two books under review @NYT about Teddy Roosevelt.
The reviewer, a distinguished historian, applauds Thomas’ book,
In his absorbing narrative of men who found duty or fulfillment or personal meaning in a war for empire — and of other men, like William James, who feared that such a quest would rot the nation’s soul — Thomas has illuminated, in a compulsively readable style, a critical moment in American history. This is a book that, with its style and panache, is hard to forget and hard to put down.
The men in question are the aforementioned Teddy Roosevelt, W.R. Hearst and the patrician snob Henry Cabot Lodge. The review points out that the motives of these men were different in their desire for war with Spain over Cuba, and uniformly, their motives were without merit and the war a disturbing trumped up affair.
In Roosevelt’s case (for whom “just about any war would do”), Cuba offered an irresistible means for ego gratification, masculinity enhancement and self-promotion. With politicians pumping for action and journalists inventing tear-inducing atrocities, the nation was primed for war — just so long as it was thrilling, brief and involved little danger.
I had always admired Roosevelt as one of the few who were true scholars among American presidents. Overqualified by resume and exceptionally capable, I thought. This review by Ronald Steel reminds me of the hagiographic haze often conferred on historical figures.
≡≡≡≡≡≡
Update:
Thomas was just on Charlie Rose. I only caught part of it but it was quite good.
Even in the segment I saw though there was much to consider: Thomas noted that he did admire Roosevelt but again asserted Teddy Roosevelt’s war lover persona. He thought it might have something to do with TR being a sickly child and maybe relations with father…
Charlie Rose in theorizing about why Obama was so ineffectual — lost in the shuffle of partisan shouting — said Obama was too reasonable. Thomas seemed to agree.
It isn’t that Obama is too reasonable, but that he is incapable of leadership, as has been true of many recent presidents; a point Thomas did make at one point, although he didn’t parse it accurately: it isn’t the “detriment” of reasonableness, it is Obama’s inability to connect. That empathic connection great leaders have with the public is simply missing.
