Can't Make This Up. Hoover & Roosevelt as DoppleKabukiGangers

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson.)

"Given later developments, the campaign speeches often read like a giant misprint, in which Roosevelt and Hoover speak each other's lines."

- Roosevelt adviser Marriner Eccles, on the campaign of 1932

and

The fight that just won’t die.

It was all an accident?

Roosevelt eventually unintentionally DID what Hoover originally? intended, but wouldn't/couldn't/didn't get DONE in time to matter?

In retrospect, it seems clear that as nations and populations grow, that their fundamental operations must be re-organized, as a function of sheer scale alone, if not context. "Experts" such as Hoover can easily do more harm than good by unnecessarily opposing required change that they don't understand, while "beginners" like FDR can do tremendous good simply by having the courage to allow change, regardless of whether they understand it.

There is a fundamental difference between understanding process, and understanding process change - and especially rate of change.

Above all else, we need our entire range of people & personalities to have more humility, so that they can embrace and explore the potential of our constantly increasing diversity?

Have aggregate options, will explore!

That should be on our national business card.

Ever faster change, from grandparents to parents to grandchildren, is something we all have to embrace, if that generational cycle is going to continue unconstrained.

This Hoover/FDR tantrum may be a great lesson on intentions, adjustments and allowances, where both players come away looking better than all originally thought, but for reasons entirely different than ALL initially presumed! :)

History is never what we're actually told?

There's a fundamental difference between a tactical officer, and a LEADER willing and able to let tacticians operate?

It takes a different kind of leader, for every scale (and tempo) of policy development?