Will Tanner Profile picture
Oct 22, 2024 12 tweets 8 min read Read on X
In my opinion, FDR was one of the evilest men in American history, particularly since he bankrupted the British while simultaneously aiding the Soviets with no strings attached

The result was communism controlling half the world, killing tens of millions in the process🧵👇 Image
First, FDR had used his power well before the Second World War to destroy old America

He not only was a class traitor whose own family despised him, as @NormanDodd_knew pointed out in a recent podcast, but used the "New Deal" to demolish non-leftist power and rule across the country

Particularly, he would ensure that funds were withheld from those jurisdictions and localities that were politically opposed to him, hindering relief and recovery for those who simply wanted to live like Americans ought rather than being part of some socialist hellhole.

He then directed the funds only toward New Dealers, ensuring that those who pushed his brand of socialism and Big Government, both of which were formerly abhorrent to Americans, and solidified the power of such thought in the country

And, of course, he destroyed the legitimacy of SCOTUS by browbeating it and threatening it with court packing to get it to go along with his unconstitutional, un-American agendaImage
As a result of FDR's firehose of money to socialists, Old America, a land of ordered liberty, small government, and little regulation, died

What replaced it was the bureaucratic state of today: a massive governmental apparatus, welfare and social aid programs, high taxes to pay for it, a predilection for relying on the national government rather than community members, and federal agencies that reach into every aspect of formerly private lifeImage
As might be expected of such a man, FDR didn't just push socialism on the country

He also filled his administration, from the Cabinet-level positions to minor bureaucrats, with Communist Party members

For example, Harry Hopkins was a Soviet agent; he was close with FDR and headed much of the New Deal, then handled American WWII relations with Britain and the USSR, with which he was quite friendly

Then, as Whitaker Chambers, himself a former Soviet agent, exposed in "Witness" and Congressional hearings, much of the low-level bureaucracy was full of Soviet agents

That included men like Alger Hiss, who "aided" FDR at Yalta and was behind closed doors with FDR as he handed Europe to Stalin, letting communism advance like a murderous wave across half of EuropeImage
Image
Then there's World War II

FDR has a reputation for saving our Anglo brothers across the ocean, which isn't true

Instead, he bankrupted the Empire, drawing every last ounce of gold out of Britain and taking over its bases. The Brits even had to confiscate wedding rings to pay for the outdated equipment, from rust bucket old destroyers to near-useless airplanes, that FDR sent them

He also prodded the Germans into war with us by sending US destroyers to, under the flag of neutrality, sink German U-boats or radio their locations to the British, much as Wilson had done during WWIImage
Meanwhile, as @realDianaWest exposed well in "American Betrayal," and Sean McMeekin notes in "Stalin's War," FDR did everything possible, well beyond necessity, to aid the Soviets

In addition to the weapons and equipment, from trucks and tanks to planes and trains, we sent in massive numbers, FDR provided them with all the bases of American success. Industrial secrets, intellectual property, factory processes and equipment, and so on, were sent to the Soviets en masse, along with vast amounts of raw materials. The Soviets were, as Diana West exposes, allowed to steal whatever secrets they wanted, whatever the cost to American business and industry, as a matter of FDR policy

None of that was done for the British. They got to bleed themselves dry financially while the Soviets were freely given whatever they asked for

The aid to the Soviets continued even as the war's end was a foregone conclusion, and much of it ended up in the hands of post-war communist guerillas, while the industrial aid led to Soviet economic might that long threatened Europe and challenged AmericaImage
Meanwhile, as the Soviets were given all they wanted, they also tormented our men and even imprisoned Americans in their slave labor camps

Sailors who braved U-boats to deliver supplies were berated and demeaned, and airmen who landed in the USSR were often thrown in gulags. At the end of the war, potentially 15,000 Americans remained imprisoned in the USSR, never to be released. Neither FDR nor Truman did anything of note to help them; even non-military, economic aid wasn't conditioned on their release

So, like the German units and Eastern Europeans that FDR handed to the communists, thousands of Americans rotted and died in Soviet slave labor camps thanks to FDRImage
Then there's the matter of war policy. "Unconditional surrender" needlessly prolonged the war and led to the Soviets r*ping and killing their way across Eastern Europe, r*ping millions, if not tens of millions, of women and killing millions of civilians

FDR's Morgenthau pressed to deindustrialize Germany after the war, something that would have meant endless suffering and yet more Soviet power over Europe, as there would be no German bulwark. FDR entertained the idea

Meanwhile, Ideas like invading through the Balkans to block off Soviet forces from invading Europe were scorned, and instead we trodded across France and Germany as the Soviets gobbled up territory

Throughout the war offers from the Germans to kill Hitler and replace him in exchange for peace and an alliance against the Red Menace were shunned; instead, FDR wanted the Soviets to march across Europe and commit endless atrocities as they did soImage
FDR was all on board with such behavior

A particularly gut-wrenching story shows that: during the Tehran conference, Stalin said the Allies should execute 100,000 German officers after the war to break the back of Prussia.

Roosevelt joked that, "maybe 49,000 would be enough." His son and aides laughed

Only Churchill was outraged and stormed out, and it was only at that point that Stalin pretended he was joking.

Then after the war, Americans and Brits often handed German units to the Soviets, who proceeded to work them to death in slave labor camps, well exceeding the 100k Stalin initially suggested

FDR, though dead for most of that, would have been all on board with that, as Truman wasImage
So, if a man is to be judged by his accomplishments, what did FDR achieve?

The r*pe and murder of half of Europe

The turning of the Soviets into a global hegemon, armed and industrialized by America

The bankruptcy and demolition of the British Empire

The destruction of Old America and replacement of it with a bureaucratic welfare state administered largely by Soviet agents of the Alger Hiss and Harry Hopkins mold

In short, pretty much all of it was evil, worst case scenario for the formerly free worldImage
FDR is regarded as a savior of sorts

If you're a communist or Soviet sympathizer, I suppose that's true

But if you support Western civilization, if you view the modern bureaucratic welfare state with horror and despise what the Soviets did to Europe and the post-colonial world, often with the aid of communist run-America, then FDR was one of the most evil men America has producedImage
And following WW2, of course, was the Cold War “against” our former “ally”…

But what was that period really about?

I wrote about that here: theamericantribune.news/p/egalitariani…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Will Tanner

Will Tanner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Will_Tanner_1

Jun 26, 2025
NYC's communist is quoting Nelson Mandela, a communist terrorist known for murdering white civilians

As a reminder: Nelson Mandela was not a kindly leader as presented in Invictus. He did not want peace; he explicitly rejected it

A short 🧵on Mandela's terror campaign👇Image
For one, Mandela was in prison because he created a civilian-bombing terror group called "Spear of the Nation," and premised it on the success of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara in Cuba

He then carried out dozens of bombings on civilian farms and infrastructure

MK was backed by the Soviet Union, co-led by a Lithuanian communist named Joe Slovo, and the Mandela-era leadership was convicted of trying to violently overthrow the state

This was after Mandela convinced the ANC, in the '50s, to request arms and support from the People's Republic of ChinaImage
Once in prison, Mandela refused to renounce violence

In fact, the South African government offered to release him from prison if he would simply pledge to not engage in terrorism anymore. He refused

He then smuggled messages to MK's new leadership through his murderous wife Winnie, and those messages helped them plan their attacks and tactics in the terror bombing campaign of the '70s and '80s, which led to hundreds of white civilians killed and thousands woundedImage
Read 5 tweets
Jun 21, 2025
In the Medieval period, most states in Europe executed between 0.5% and 1% of their population every year, as punishment for lawbreaking

Turns out, when you do that for half a millenium, you essentially get rid of the "crime" gene and crime becomes a non-issue
*I typed this incorrectly. It was this percentage per generation, not per year. However, the same study estimates that around the same percentage died at the scene of the crime, in some form or another, or while awaiting trial, which would boost it to 1-2% per generation
So yes, not per year, per generation. Still a lot of people and enough for a eugenic effect over time
Read 4 tweets
Jun 18, 2025
All you think you know about King Leopold II and the Belgian Congo is wrong

You were told it was a hellish land of cruel exploitation. That's a lie

In reality, Congo was a colonial jewel, the atrocities didn't occur, and the Belgian years were the only good rule it's had🧵👇 Image
First, it's important to note what state of things existed in what became the Belgian Congo before King Leopold II became its ruler

That tale is best told by Henry Stanley in his book, How I Found Livingstone, his tale of searching for Dr. Livingstone in the heart of Darkness

In it, he describes hell on a grand scale. Arab slavers from Zanzibar pillaged the anarchic territory, taking gangs of fettered slaves back with them to be castrated and sold to the Arab slave market

The interior, when not being raided by Arabs, was in a state of horrid chaos. Random violence, cannibals, the ever-present threat of famine, and all the rest we think of when we think of pre-colonial Africa is what life was like in the Congo. Rotting vegetation, insect-infested huts, farms barely maintaining subsistence, and tribes raiding each other and explorers were the basic aspects of life in the pre-Belgian world

In short, life before the Belgians was like life in the Stone Age: nasty, brutish, and short, with the only law being the law of the jungle

Stanley and Livingstone did much to expose this state of things, and it was the greedy, exploitative traders who followed in their wake, before Leopold and the Belgians, that are recorded by Conrad in his The Heart of DarknessImage
It was about a decade and a half later that, during the Berlin Conference, King Leopold II was granted control of the area now knows as the Democratic Republic of the Congo

He controlled it through the Congo Free State, a private attempt he founded and fully owned, with the goal of colonizing and bring order to the anarchic territory

To do so, he started sending to the state Belgian officers and administrators. They, along with a bevy of monks, nuns, and traders, were the ones who set out to turn the anarchic Congo into a well-administered area that turned from animist paganism to Christianity while becoming prosperous and stable

The military/police arm of that rule was the Force Publique, which was mainly officered by Belgians but otherwise consisted of natives allied with the Congo Free State. They protected the nuns, protected the traders, kept out the Arab slavers from Zanzibar, and generally tried to first impose and then maintain orderImage
Image
Read 15 tweets
May 22, 2025
South Africa is back in the news because of its anarcho-tyranny and Mugabe-style land expropriation

Missed is that this is Mandela's vision

The ANC's "National Democratic Revolution" concept—using liberalism to establish communism—is going exactly as he planned & hoped for🧵👇 Image
"National Democratic Revolution" (NDR), is originally a Soviet concept that was adopted and built upon by the South African communists, particularly the ruling ANC regime, to suit their unique situation and goal

Their goal, as one might expect of an anti-colonial communist group, is race communism of the sort seen in Zimbabwe under Mugabe

Their unique situation, however, was that they had the world's sympathy and were expected to create the "Rainbow Nation" rather than just another nominally democratic hellholeImage
Hence, the NDR concept. By slowly boiling the frog, they could use the slogans and methods of liberalism to first establish socialism, and then, from ther,e move to communism

It's that final step we're seeing now, and they might not have boiled the frog slowly enough, as they're getting more resistance than was expected

Still, it's gotten them this far, so it's worth reviewingImage
Read 15 tweets
May 19, 2025
The American left is embracing race communism of the sort that destroyed South Africa + Rhodesia

Here, e.g., the Chicago mayor admits to anti-white racism in permitting: “Every dime [blacks] were robbed of, I’ll make sure is returned two- or threefold”

Here's what's coming🧵👇
Mayor Johnson's spewed absurdities are, essentially, the same inane nonsense the African communists pushed before destroying their countries

In South Africa, Mandela's ANC has long insisted that the white farmers "stole" the land from blacks, and thus it needs to be "returned" to them

Much the same was true of Mugabe's thuggery in Zimbabwe, where he and his cronies insisted that "land reform" (farmland expropriation) was a necessity because the white farmers had "stolen" the land when they founded RhodesiaImage
In every case, it was absurd: the supposed "thieves" built everything that existed, they didn't steal it

South Africa is a great example. When the progenitors of the Afrikaners arrived in 1654, they found a nearly uninhabited land, and those few Khoisan there were roving pastoralists who had settled nothing. The Afrikaners then built South Africa from the ground up, turning an untamed wilderness into a thriving colony with hugely successful farms. They gradually marched to the north and west, settling the land as they went and eventually finding the Xhosa and Zulu, both of whom arrived in what's now South Africa from the north well after the Afrikaners did. Once again, it was the Afrikaners who built civilization, with their labor and hands, in that mostly untamed land. Over the mid-19th to mid-20th century, Anglo settlers and capital poured in as well, helping build civilization where none had formerly existed in South Africa

Rhodesia was much the same thing. The British South Africa Company did, admittedly, find the Matabele and Shona in what became Rhodesia when settling the territory began. But agriculture was limited. No cities, roads, railroads, or the like existed. Populations were limited and sparse. Anglos then poured in and settled it, turning veldt into farms, building cities on open land, and gradually raising civilization on land where little formerly existed. Further, what land the BSAC obtained, the land on which civilization was built, was bought from the Matabele, not "stolen."Image
Read 15 tweets
May 15, 2025
Why are Afrikaners fleeing South Africa?

Well, here's what prominent SA politicians say: "We will k*ll white women, we will k*ll white children, and we will even k*ll your pets"

Importantly, this violence is part of Mandela's legacy and happened because of American policy 🧵👇
This should be quite clear as the Afrikaner refugee situation heats up

For example, an ANC (Mandela's party, long aided by the Soviets) hack calling himself "Staling" released this statement about Trump's refugee program and demanded the Afrikaners stay so that they can face "accountability" for "historic privilege"Image
What does "accountablity" mean in this situation?

It means he wants them to be slain in some of the sickest, most horrific ways imaginable

This is what the farm murders and home invasions across South Africa are: aided by the government (the military, for example, provides them with signal jammers), thugs r*pe, m*rder, and k!ll Boers in their homes

The farm attacks are almost always black on white, almost always involve sexual assault, and frequently involve murder. The same is true of home invasions in urban zones, what few are left in the years after MandelaImage
Read 13 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(