Through his trailblazing and innovative research, the philosopher Karl Popper emphasized the science world's constant need to try disproving widely accepted axioms, paradigms, and conceptions, while reexamining their basic assumptions and underlying foundations. However, a look back at the political, social and economic history of the United States teaches us that there's a giant chasm between necessary spontaneous action and accepted, often rigid ways of thinking.
In the past, American leaders stubbornly and dogmatically adhered to their original worldviews even after holes and internal contradictions were exposed. In retrospect, it is clear what was required was disengaging from their fundamental premises and taking completely different courses of action. For example, the actions or lack thereof in the wake of "Black Tuesday" on October 29, 1929, when the stock market completely crashed, led to the Great Depression.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
For three whole years, President Herbert Hoover clung to the "sit-and-do-nothing" strategy, with the expectation that the old and proper order would make a quick comeback – by default or through strictly voluntary activity. Only after Hoover's resounding defeat in 1932 did his successor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, mobilize a dramatic revolution on a national scale and create the infrastructure for a welfare state.
The Hurricane Katrina crisis, which battered New Orleans on August 29, 2005, proved that the America of the 21st Century had already forgotten at least some of the lessons from the Great Depression.
President George W. Bush's weak response to the mass flooding, which caused death and devastation, was particularly glaring. Not only did the president continue vacationing at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, for two more days after the levees broke (returning to Washington only on August 31, after his 29-day break), but the federal measures he ordered were exceedingly paltry. His general conduct projected apathy, disconnect, and disaffection.
In complete contrast, in 1965 President Lyndon B. Johnson responded with empathy and warmth when he visited the people of New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Betsy, and ordered the federal government to take immediate action.
George W. Bush's slow response was a facsimile of his initial reaction four years earlier when his voice was barely heard for 11 whole hours after the September 11 terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon.
However, following the financial crisis of 2008, in the twilight of his presidency, Bush Jr. somewhat redeemed himself. He didn't hesitate to break from traditional Republican financial policy, and in October 2008 he approved the first bailout package worth $700 billion. By doing so he paved the way for a series of additional incentives which his successor, Barack Obama, implemented in February 2009.
Today, although it is too early to evaluate Donald Trump's performance during the coronavirus crisis, it appears that after a slow and hesitant initial response, which included efforts to downplay the problem and its implications, the White House has regained its composure and kicked things into another gear. The massive transfer of funds he initiated (in parallel to the dramatic measures the Federal Reserve took and continues to take), points to a large discrepancy between Trump and Hoover's conduct: the current president is willing to adopt the dexterity of thought and approach preached by Popper.
We can only hope his efforts bear fruit, and quickly.
