In 1918, Long was elected to one of the seats on the Louisiana railroad Commision. Long perfected his tactics here, by circulating posters, campaigning all over Louisiana, and insulting all his competitors. Long's political power, similar to Hitler's, was based largely on catering to the poor and offering them the opportunity to thrive economically. This was especially effective in Louisiana, where over 75% of the residents there lived in poverty. By 1928, Long had gathered a significant support base and was able to win the gubernatorial election in Louisiana.
As governor, Long was ruthless. He immediately fired hundreds of political opponents and filled all those vacancies with his own men. Additionally, any state employee whose job was dependent on Long had to pay part of their salary to Long, almost like a tribute to staying in the favor of Long. This money was called "Long's political war chest" and the money could be spent on anything Long wanted. This authoritarian rule began to resemble a dictatorship, where Long controlled everything.
After trying to create a tax on oil barrels, big oil companies immediately tried to impeach Long. An enraged Long essentially bribed 15 senators to argue that the impeachment was illegal and later rewarded these senators with state jobs and other favors. Afterwards, Long backed all of his enemies opponents and fired all of their relatives from government jobs. He also tried to prohibit newspapers from publishing articles that did not support him, all to consolidate power over Louisiana.
By this time, Long began receiving death threats, and in order to protect himself, began to raise a private police force loyal only to him. This shows many parallels with Hitler's initial rise to power with the Nazi party, as well as his own private police force, the Schutzstaffel or SS. Long began traveling nationwide and garnered immense support from the poor. He created a share our wealth program, which gave everyone a house, a car, and a radio. Even though the math never worked out, and it wasn't realistic at all, Long's bombastic speeches gave the unemployed and the poor around America hope. In 1935, Long had nationwide support and was campaigning for president. Sadly, he was never able to run, as a son of a defeated political opponent shot him.
http://www.hueylong.com/
http://www.history.com/topics/huey-long
Alan, I liked how you explained the origins of Long's beliefs as well as what he did to gain power. I also found your comparisons of Long's tactics to what Hitler did to be very interesting. In my opinion, it may have been beneficial to America that Long was unable to run in the election. With his support from the poor and his populist beliefs, he had a good chance to become president. However, his nonsensical plan for sharing wealth, his bribery, and his dictatorial actions all indicate that he would have made a poor president. He probably would have abused the power given to him and may have actually exacerbated America's depression problems.
ReplyDeleteI liked your explanations of Long's similarities to Hitler in his beliefs and his strategies of appealing to popular sentiment. Adding onto your discussion, it is interesting to note that the people of Louisiana were split over two opposite views of Long. On one end of the spectrum, people thought of him as a corrupt dictator and tried to impeach him. On the other end, people thought of him as a populist hero who advocated for their liberties, as evidenced by the admiring crowd at his funeral. Do you think these two conflicting views are common for people to have of dictators such as Long and Hitler?
ReplyDeletehttp://time.com/4020709/huey-long-anniversary/
I really appreciated how you were able to explain how both Hitler and Long were able to cultivate outrage by the current system and the norms that existed in society at this time. This eventually led to their respective amounts of power for each of their groups. This led to their demises however. Both Hitler and Long had ideals that would eventually become unsuccessful, and their demises. Unlike Long, the mystery of Hitler's death is one of the most confusing in history. He committed suicide, however, those results never confirmed until nearly 10 years later. Either way, it is important to remember that good prevailed in both situations, and they were able to be defeated by the demolition of their ideas.
ReplyDeleteSource:
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/adolf-hitler-commits-suicide-in-his-underground-bunker
Alan, I think it is very interesting to see how Long was able to accumulate as much power as he did, especially in a strong democratic society like America. However, while both Long's and Hitler's rise to power might have been through similar tactics, I think it is important to note that these strategies are typical of any authoritarian ruler. Dictators must appeal to the masses, at least at first, otherwise they have no way of gaining support. Caesar was loved by his army and the people of Rome, Stalin and communism appeared to be a superior alternative to the oppressive governing of the tsars, and Napoleon brought stability to France and represented ideas seemingly contrary to the Ancien Regime. But to compare Long to Hitler is to imply that Long both had and executed atrocious ideas like Hitler. Long wanted to redistribute wealth and attempted to do so with corrupt tactics, he never wanted to conquer a continent or exterminate a race of people.
ReplyDeleteAri gives a good point, that although his tactics may resemble the same structure as Hitler's, they are just common amongst authoritarian leaders during times of stress. The best point Ari brings up is that these authoritarian rules bring what the people want the most: stability. Through their seemingly brutal policies, many times these rulers are able to accomplish more and restore stability within their regions. In some senses, Roosevelt could be looked at the same way; he went beyond his given powers and did things no other president had done before, but it was all for the purpose of keeping stability. While Huey Long may have used some authoritarian tactics, I agree with Ari, and I too, find it unfair to classify him as America's Hitler.
DeleteI do admit that my title was a bit misleading and sort of click-bait, but I think it is important to understand I was trying to draw parallels between Long's rise to power and his efforts to maintain this power, and Hitler's similar rise to power and then his efforts to grasp all of germany under him. In both cases, they used a scapegoat in order to gain the support of the poor and desperate majority, and were also very charismatic and skillful public speakers. Afterwards, they also both had a private police force loyal solely to them. However, I do agree that the similarities basically end there, and Long did not target or try to annihilate a certain type of person.
DeleteThis is a well written post about the political life of Huey Long. I appreciate your attempts at comparing his tactics to Hitler's, however, the connection is a bit far fetched and there were more things to say on the similarities. Two things I must point out as possible improvements are that for one, the title mentioned "Kingfish", which I can assume was a nickname for Long, but no connection or explanation was given in the post. Secondly, the statement that his political strategies were inclusive to a dictatorship would have made you point much clearer. Lastly, the comparison to Hitler is off because while Long's strategies are more suggestive of communism and socialism, while Hitler was a Nazi, a form of fascism. Overall, a great informative post about Huey Long.
ReplyDelete