President Bill Douglas
by Scott Palter
Author
says: what if FDR had selected Bill Douglas as his Veep? muses Scott
Palter. Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not
necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). © Final Sword Productions
2010
April 12th 1945,
the sad, single term Presidency of Bill Douglas which began on this day
was born in a smear that ended in a debacle.
The sad, single term presidency of
Bill DouglasFDR had sent two names to the Chicago convention in
1944 - he would take either Truman or Douglas in place of the discredited
Wallace. Douglas's liberal backers solved the problem by leaking supposed
police reports showing that rather than being associated with the
Pendergast machine but clean, Truman had in fact been a bag man for the
mobbed up KC Democrats. It was a lie. Truman had been put up to keep an
exurban office in friendly hands but was himself clean [the same could not
be said of his friends and associates]. However with liberal prodding the
Chicago papers ran with the story long enough to sink him at the
convention. Needless to say he never forgave Douglas or the liberals,
remaining a persistent critic from his Senate seat.
"In actuality, of course, the Japanese were seeking
peace as far back as the spring of 1945. Truman, however, was dogmatic on
the issue of unconditional surrender--until, ironically, Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, when he decided he could afford to drop what had earlier been a
non-negotiable demand: the abolition of the Japanese imperial system.
Hirohito would keep his throne, albeit as a figurehead (he largely was one
anyway) and eventually pass it to his son Akihito. As for China, even
inout history, aftr the fall of Peking/Beijing/Peiping (take your pick),
Republicans bellowed that Truman had "abandoned" Chiang and "lost" China
and that there had to be a pony in there somewhere (treason, that is). And
it's unlikely that a President Douglas, armed with the Bomb, would have
accepted partitions of Iran and Norway. In the case of Iran, in 1946
Truman explicitly threatened the Soviets with nuiclear attack if they
attempted to enforce a partition. Douglas might not have been so blunt,
but I don't doubt the threat would be there. By '46, Douglas would have
had more reason to fear the right than the left in domestic politics" -
reader's commentsClick
to promote the site by sharing this article with your friends on Facebook.The
US public may not have realized that in reelecting FDR in 1944 they were
electing a walking corpse but the key players in the Democratic party were
quite aware. Labor and the liberals knew they could work with Douglas. The
urban bosses and Dixie had preferred Truman. When Douglas's presidency
turned sour this split would manifest itself. Douglas offered milder terms
to Japan at Potsdam breaking with FDR's Unconditional Surrender. He was
still not mild enough to get the Japanese militarists to face reality. It
took two atom bombs for them to see the light. Dougals's liberal
supporters never fully forgave him for using those weapons. Wallace from
his perch in the Commerce Department led the critics.
"Truman never changed the Japanese terms. Japan did
so unilaterally. When the US public went wild for joy at hearing the news
Truman let it slide. It was negotiation by radio broadcast. Truman's
problem was he felt he lacked the political strength to change FDR's
terms. He knew quite well he was an accidental President with no mandate.
Douglas was to the left of Truman and to the right of Wallace but closer
to Wallace which is where I hypothesized his positions from - two thirds
of the way from Truman to Wallace 1945-46 and half and half after the 1946
elections. The Republicans were going to have a cow over China policy,
over every attempt at appeasement and over South Korea [Rhee was plugged
into the coalition of missionaries and anti-Communists that we call the
China Lobby]. However the US public mostly didn't care. Public didn't like
Communists, foreign or domestic. That said there was zero appetite 1945-47
for a larger military much less any risk of war. Public wanted
demobilization and a return to a civilian economy so after 16 years
[1929-45] they could get on with their lives in peace and prosperity.
Stalin had to work hard at changing their minds and this took years. It
took the Czech coup and Berlin Blockade to really change public opinion
[and a big part of the change was that the last of the WW2 vets had been
demobilized]." - author's response to left panel commentThe
postwar demobilization and conversion to civilian production was a
debacle. The unions ran wild with the country repeatedly paralyzed by
strikes. Truman called for decisive presidential action, especially
against the railroad strike. Douglas would not break with the unions.
Inflation skyrocketed and the piecemeal removal of controls made matters
worse. Douglas's attempts to keep Lend Lease going took a good part of the
blame for the mess. The UK was bankrupt and Europe and Japan were
starving. So the need was there but the American public begrudged the
expense. The war was over and they wanted to forget the world existed.
Douglas's policy towards Communism exacerbated matters. Trying to avoid a
break with the Democratic Party's left, Douglas abandoned Chiang, accepted
partitions of Iran and Norway, allowed the Soviets to force Turkey to part
with territory and bases and watched Greece torn apart by civil war. He
kept trying to find a way to work with his old left allies internally and
refused to accept that many Americans regarded domestic Communists as
traitors.
This crystallized in the 1946 elections. Douglas campaigned for his party
on conciliation with the Soviets, an end to segregation and extension on
the New Deal. The Republicans captured both houses of Congress and a host
of state legislatures. Most of the south walked out of the party to form
independent state Democratic parties dedicated to segregation and white
supremacy. The victorious Republican slogan was ?had enough'.
"This would hand the Soviets much higher ground in
the Cold War. If they threw around the extra weight, America in its
impotent position would either bow and get rolled over or make a firm
stand, possibly leading to war." - reader's commentsFaced
with a heavily Republican Congress Douglas was forced to make some
compromises. He was forced to break with the Soviets. The Marshal Plan to
rebuild Europe was launched. "Actually the Cold War
changes from Stalin's extra territory are marginal. Giving Stalin
Yugoslavia, Albania, Norwegian Lapland, north Iran, northeastern Turkey,
north Greece, South Korea and a few bases at the Dardanelles simply
doesn't change much. These were marginal territories at best.
The big tokens on the board at the end of WW2 were Western Europe and
Japan. We got them both and held them 1945-48 against a fairly large
pro-Soviet internal movement in those countries [well armed in the case of
France and Italy] plus the US public's complete disinterest in anything
beyond bringing the boys home and getting rid of economic controls/back to
normalcy. At the margin Stalin's forces are a bit better placed for
a new war but again at the margin the Western European publics more
directly see that this is their fight. One could make a case in OTL
that Stalin only held what the Red Army took in battle and the whole Cold
War was American hysteria. Postwar advances such as north Greece and
the northeast of Turkey more clearly shows the Soviets are directly
expansionist. " - author's response to left panel
commentChiang was supported on Taiwan. Greece was
partitioned and the rump of Turkey was given large scale US aid although
the Soviet bases at Gallipoli remained.A German Federal Republic was
formed out of the allied occupation zones in Germany and Austria but at
the price of giving up the allied sectors of Berlin and Vienna. Macarthur
was replaced in Japan by Collins and the semi-New Deal experiments were
ended. Instead Japan was rebuilt as a bulwark against Soviet power.
Several million Korean refugees fled there when Kim destroyed South Korea
[Douglas had evacuated the US occupation force rather than sully his hands
dealing with the authoritarian and unpleasant Rhee regime]. Douglas also
danced on Palestine. The UN proved unable to approve either partition or
an extension of the British mandate so the British withdrew and the place
descended into chaos out of which an Israeli state was born with little
international recognition beyond the Soviet Block.
Domestically the high points of the new Congress were an anti-lynching
bill [which in turn required a large force of US marshals to enforce] and
Douglas's desegregation of the armed forces.The cost of these advances
were major race riots in several dozen cities as the white public rebelled
against being pushed and the newly empowered blacks pushed back. The
Taft-Hartley Act was met by another round of massive strikes, these
overtly political. Douglas sealed his political fate by always siding with
the unions.
"I never heard of this guy. I wonder what would
have happened if the real truth about the God-King's health had gotten out
to the US public? " - reader's commentsThe
1948 election was an anti-climax. Despite all the coddling, Wallace ran
for President anyway. Strom Thurmond ran a regional states rights campaign
in Dixie. Douglas and Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota ran as avid New Dealers
but the public had had enough. Thurmond carried 14 southern and border
states. Dewey carried the rest with 50 percent of the vote.
The icing on the cake came two weeks before the election when Stalin's
armies marched into Belgrade to bring Yugoslavia back into the Soviet
orbit.
Exposed as impotent at home and abroad, Douglas went off into
retirement leaving the Democratic Party to wish they had chosen Truman.
Author
says in our timeline: When, in early 1944, President Franklin D.
Roosevelt decided not to actively support the renomination of Vice President
Henry A. Wallace at the party's national convention, a shortlist of possible
replacements was drafted. The names on the list included former Senator and
Supreme Court Justice James F. Byrnes of South Carolina, former Senator (and
future Supreme Court justice) Sherman Minton and former Governor and High
Commissioner to the Philippines Paul McNutt of Indiana, House Speaker Sam
Rayburn of Texas, Senator Alben W. Barkley of Kentucky, Senator Harry S
Truman of Missouri, and Douglas. Five days before the vice presidential
nominee was to be chosen at the convention, July 15, Committee Chairman
Robert E. Hannegan received a letter from Roosevelt stating that his choice
for the nominee would be either "Harry Truman or Bill Douglas". After
releasing the letter to the convention on July 20, the nomination went
without incident, and Truman was nominated on the second ballot..
To view guest historian's comments on this post please visit the
Today in Alternate History web site.
Scott Palter, Guest Historian of
Today in Alternate History, a Daily Updating Blog of Important Events In
History That Never Occurred Today. Follow us on
Facebook, Myspace and
Twitter. © Final Sword
Productions 201078
Imagine what would be, if history had occurred a bit
differently. Who says it didn't, somewhere? These fictional news items
explore that possibility. Possibilities such as America becoming a Marxist
superpower, aliens influencing human history in the 18th century and Teddy
Roosevelt winning his 3rd term as president abound in this interesting
fictional blog.
Sitemetre
|