The New Nationalism: Osawatomie, Kansas, August 31, 1910
The Political Landscape: A Call to Progressive Reform
On August 31, 1910, Theodore Roosevelt delivered what would become one of the most consequential political speeches of the early twentieth century. The occasion was the dedication of a memorial to John Brown in Osawatomie, Kansas. But the speech itself transcended the memorial's dedication, becoming instead a comprehensive statement of progressive political philosophy—a roadmap for reform that would guide Roosevelt's politics for the remainder of his life and would influence American progressive politics for decades to come.
The speech was titled "The New Nationalism," and it articulated a vision of federal power, regulatory authority, and progressive reform that was decades ahead of its time. Roosevelt had returned from Europe and Africa as a man in his early fifties, vigorous and energetic, with a clear sense of what American democracy required. The Taft administration, in Roosevelt's view, had betrayed the progressive cause by moving too cautiously on conservation, by being insufficiently aggressive in antitrust enforcement, and by failing to embrace the progressive vision that Roosevelt believed was essential to American democracy's survival.
The New Nationalism speech was Roosevelt's response—a detailed exposition of what a truly progressive government should do and be. The speech called for strong federal regulation of industry, graduated income taxes, inheritance taxes, workers' compensation laws, the prohibition of child labor, and the direct election of senators. These were radical proposals for 1910, ideas that many conservatives viewed as bordering on socialism. Yet Roosevelt articulated them with moral clarity and political urgency.
Theodore Roosevelt addresses a crowd from the rear platform of the “Roosevelt Special” at Baldwin, Kansas, on August 31, 1910 — a stop on the whistle-stop tour that carried his New Nationalism message across the country. (Library of Congress)
John Brown and Osawatomie: The Symbolic Landscape
Osawatomie, Kansas, was not chosen as a speech location by accident. The town had been at the center of "Bleeding Kansas"—the violent conflict between pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces that had torn the nation apart in the 1850s. John Brown, the abolitionist martyr, had fought there for the cause of emancipation. He had killed pro-slavery settlers. He had been executed for his actions. Yet he had become, in the eyes of many, a hero—a man who had been willing to die for a righteous cause.
Roosevelt's choice to deliver his progressive manifesto at a memorial to John Brown was symbolically charged. Brown had believed that some causes were worth violence, worth sacrifice, worth the ultimate commitment. Roosevelt was suggesting a parallel: that the cause of progressive reform was equally righteous, equally demanding, equally worthy of commitment. If Brown had been willing to fight slavery with violence, surely modern Americans should be willing to fight monopoly, inequality, and corruption with the tools of democratic reform.
The ceremony itself drew a large crowd—estimates suggest 30,000 people gathered to hear Roosevelt speak. They came from across Kansas and from neighboring states, drawn by his reputation and by curiosity about what the former president would say. The crowd itself was heterogeneous—farmers and workers, small business owners and reformers. Roosevelt was going to speak to them about the future of American democracy and the obligations of government to protect ordinary citizens.
Kansas Governor Walter R. Stubbs leads a reception through the crowd at Osawatomie, where Theodore Roosevelt dedicated the John Brown battlefield memorial and delivered his New Nationalism address on August 31, 1910. (Harvard College Library)
The Intellectual Foundation: Herbert Croly and Progressive Theory
Roosevelt's New Nationalism speech was influenced significantly by Herbert Croly's The Promise of American Life, published in 1909. Croly's book articulated a progressive vision that went beyond trust-busting and regulation; it called for a fundamental restructuring of American economic life through federal intervention and reform. This philosophy would guide Roosevelt's approach to the Progressive Party campaign of 1912, arguing that the promise of American democracy—the belief that America offered opportunity and justice to all—could only be fulfilled through coordinated federal action to address inequality, to regulate monopoly, and to ensure genuine opportunity for all citizens.
Roosevelt absorbed Croly's argument and made it his own. He had read the book with great interest and had been struck by its intellectual coherence and its moral force. Croly was not a radical socialist calling for the destruction of capitalism. Rather, he was a reformer arguing that American capitalism, left entirely to its own devices and unregulated by democratic government, had become corrupted and unjust. It needed to be reformed from within, restructured through democratic processes, made to serve the public good rather than merely the interests of the wealthy.
The New Nationalism represented Roosevelt's conviction that America's industrial economy required strong federal regulation; that laissez-faire capitalism, left to its own devices, would produce inequality and injustice; and that the federal government had both the authority and the obligation to intervene in the economy on behalf of the public interest. These ideas were controversial among Republicans, many of whom clung to a more limited vision of federal power. But Roosevelt, once he embraced these ideas, did so with characteristic intensity and persuasiveness.
Theodore Roosevelt in a studio portrait from his post-presidential years, when progressive thinkers such as Herbert Croly helped shape the intellectual framework behind his New Nationalism. (Library of Congress)
The Specific Reforms: Decades Ahead of Their Time
The New Nationalism speech called for specific reforms that would not be enacted for decades—and some that would not be enacted until after Roosevelt's death. A graduated income tax (the 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913). An inheritance tax to prevent the emergence of hereditary wealth and hereditary class. Workers' compensation laws to protect workers injured on the job. The prohibition of child labor. The direct election of senators (the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913).
Roosevelt also called for regulation of labor hours, for a minimum wage, and for social insurance—essentially a forerunner of Social Security, which would be enacted in 1935 under Franklin Roosevelt. At a time when most American political figures were opposing these reforms as dangerous radicalism, Theodore Roosevelt was calling them essential to democratic survival. It was a remarkable political stance for a man of wealth and privilege from an aristocratic family.
The speech also emphasized conservation—the protection of natural resources from exploitation by private interests. Roosevelt had made conservation a centerpiece of his presidency; now he was articulating it as an essential element of the New Nationalism. The federal government should, he believed, protect the nation's natural heritage for future generations, preventing monopolistic exploitation of forests, rivers, and mineral resources.
Theodore Roosevelt makes his case to a seated audience during his 1910 speaking tour, laying out a reform program — a graduated income tax, workers' compensation, and regulation of corporations — decades ahead of its time. (Library of Congress)
The Moral Argument: Democracy Requires Economic Justice
What made the New Nationalism speech powerful was not merely its specific policy proposals but its underlying moral argument. Roosevelt believed that political democracy could not survive if accompanied by stark economic inequality. A system in which a few men controlled vast wealth while the majority of citizens struggled for subsistence would inevitably produce social conflict, political instability, and the corruption of democratic institutions. The promises of democratic equality would ring hollow to workers toiling in dangerous factories for subsistence wages. Democratic government would lose legitimacy if citizens believed—with good reason—that the system was rigged in favor of the wealthy.
The New Nationalism was, fundamentally, an argument that economic reform was necessary to preserve democratic government itself. It was not a radical call for socialism or the abolition of capitalism. It was a conservative argument for the reformation and regulation of capitalism in order to preserve the democratic system that capitalism was threatening to undermine.
This argument connected Roosevelt's vision to the democratic tradition of American populism and Progressivism, but it also represented something more radical: a conviction that the federal government had an affirmative obligation to restructure the economy in the interests of justice and democratic equality. This was a far cry from the laissez-faire philosophy that had dominated late nineteenth-century Republican thinking. Roosevelt was essentially arguing that the federal government's role must expand, that private property rights must be subordinated to the public interest, that the nation as a whole must take precedence over the interests of wealthy individuals and corporations.
Theodore Roosevelt drives home his argument to a crowd in Indiana during his 1910 tour, insisting that a healthy democracy requires economic justice and that human welfare must come before property rights. (Harvard College Library)
Political Consequences: The Bridge to Bull Moose
The New Nationalism speech was, in retrospect, the bridge between Roosevelt's presidency and his Progressive Party campaign of 1912. The speech articulated the intellectual and moral foundation for the Bull Moose insurgency. When Roosevelt broke with Taft and launched his own third-party campaign in 1912, he was running on the platform articulated in the New Nationalism speech. The Progressive Party platform of 1912 would flesh out in detail the reforms that Roosevelt had proposed in Osawatomie.
The 1912 campaign would prove unsuccessful in its immediate electoral objective—Roosevelt came in second, Taft third, and Woodrow Wilson, the Democratic candidate, won. But the New Nationalism, embodied in the Progressive Party platform, would profoundly influence American political development. Many of the reforms called for in the New Nationalism would eventually be enacted, not under Roosevelt but under his successor Franklin D. Roosevelt and under later progressives who built upon the foundation Roosevelt had established.
Continue Reading
- Post-Presidency Overview — Roosevelt's remarkable decade after leaving the White House.
- The Bull Moose Campaign of 1912 — How the New Nationalism platform shaped Roosevelt's Progressive Party campaign.
Primary Sources at the TR Center
Explore original documents and resources related to Roosevelt's progressive political philosophy in the Theodore Roosevelt Center Digital Library.
- New Nationalism Encyclopedia Entry — Comprehensive overview of Roosevelt's political philosophy and its historical significance.
- Theodore Roosevelt Encyclopedia — Complete reference on Roosevelt's political ideas and leadership.
From the Archives
Explore original photographs, documents, and illustrations related to this topic in the Theodore Roosevelt Center Digital Library.
- New Nationalism Speech Text — The full text of Roosevelt's 1910 Osawatomie address
- Osawatomie Event Photographs — Images from the Kansas speech and gathering
Recommended Reading
- The Bully Pulpit: Theodore Roosevelt and the Golden Age of Journalism by Doris Kearns Goodwin (2013). ISBN: 978-1-4165-4786-0
- Colonel Roosevelt by Edmund Morris (2010). ISBN: 978-0-679-60415-0
- Theodore Roosevelt, the Progressive Party, and the Transformation of American Democracy by Sidney M. Milkis (2009). ISBN: 978-0-7006-1667-1