Huey Long: “Every Man a King” Address

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

Why is it that the wealth of the country is concentrated in the hands of a few? This is the main question that Long puts forth in his signature speech, in a way that is direct and forceful, since he contrasts the power of twelve men with that of 120 million people (some 5 million less than the nation's population at the time), also emphasizing that his concern is with the future of America's children. Often called a populist—a politician who speaks for the people and works for their desires—Long states that the country is not facing a difficult problem. That is only the view in Washington, he insists, as he lays out a program in his limited time of thirty minutes, which, in fact, lends both urgency and cogency to his remarks. Long often imbued his audiences with the feeling that he was a man in a hurry while other politicians wasted the public's time, especially when they suggested that problems were difficult to solve. Long begins by suggesting that the problem is not the issue itself but rather the lack of political will to do something about it, which must involve confronting the superrich who are not willing to share their wealth.

Continuing in the same vein, Long praises Americans' love of their country but also points out that in a land in which the wealth is not shared, the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence cannot be implemented. That paragraph stipulates that all men are created equal. The laws and form of government are predicated on this principle, yet—as Long points out—a child can inherit $10 million or nothing. Equality cannot have the meaning intended in the Declaration of Independence as long as so many children begin life in such unequal conditions.

Next Long elaborates on the notion that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are not possible in a country where certain children can live on inherited wealth while others starve. Returning to his opening statement about the twelve and the 120 million, Long engages in the kind of simple refrain that made many of his speeches memorable and quotable. Rather than citing many statistics, he embeds this one key numerical comparison in a series of questions tending to expose the outrageous unfairness of depriving millions of children of what a very small number of wealthy ones receive.

The answer to the imbalance of wealth, Long states, is to return the government of the United States to its core principles as expressed in the Declaration of Independence—and as first delineated in the ultimate authority, the scriptures. Long made ample use of the Bible in his speeches, often quoting long passages from memory, because he believed—as he states in this radio address—that he was doing no more than returning his country to the teachings of Moses, Jesus, and the Lord, from whom all power and rights derived. The Bible argues against the concentration of wealth and for the relief of debt, Long notes; this was a powerful point in his career of attacks against banks that foreclosed on property and provided no escape from the cycle of poverty. In effect, Long then implies, the superrich have become anti-Christian and are living in defiance of the Bible, which teaches concern for the community's welfare, not just for the well-being of certain individuals.

Long then makes his interpretation of the Bible explicit: “I believe that was the judgment and the view and the law of the Lord, that we would have to distribute wealth every so often, in order that there could not be people starving to death in a land of plenty, as there is in America today.” He notes that many people cannot afford to buy homes or feed their families, even though farmers produce more than the country can consume.

Having invoked the Bible as his standard, Long is able to cast his criticism of the superrich in moral and religious terms, using vivid imagery:

We have trouble, my friends, in the country … because the greed of a few men is such that they think it is necessary that they own everything, and their pleasure consists in the starvation of the masses, and in their possessing things they cannot use, and their children cannot use, but who bask in the splendor of sunlight and wealth, casting darkness and despair and impressing it on everyone else.

Using such loaded words as greed, Long depicts the wealthy as positively enjoying the misery of the poor, depriving them not merely of happiness but also of knowledge, leaving them in darkness. His language becomes apocalyptic as his words draw on a biblical sense of evil overcoming the good.

Long pursues his point by specifying how the accumulation of debt and of massive fortunes has stifled the lives of millions of Americans. Not only the Bible but also the greatest philosophers of the classical age denounce accumulation of great wealth that deprives the average man of a living. Even Presidents Herbert Hoover and Roosevelt have argued for the decentralization of wealth, Long points out, but they have done nothing about it.

Early on, Long states that love of country is a kind of religion, a theme he develops by suggesting that the people must reclaim their rights as a kind of religious principle. Long's own contribution to this movement comes in the form of his “Share Our Wealth” societies, first mentioned in this speech. Long proposes to limit fortunes, provide old-age pensions, limit hours of work, and provide opportunities for adults to return to school. According to his plans, every man will be a king in the sense that no man will starve and every man will have a livable wage and income, based on calculations of national wealth to be redistributed as soon as the huge fortunes of the few have been reduced.

Long insists that only a comprehensive program such as the one he proposes will solve the country's fundamental problems, and this is why he rejects Roosevelt's piecemeal programs, which he refers to by their “alphabetical codes,” such as NRA (National Recovery Act) and PWA (Public Works Administration). These programs only serve to hide or mask the underlying economic problems. Only through concerted community action can the designs of a central government be thwarted, Long argues, touting his Share Our Wealth societies. In effect, Long was appealing directly to the American people, suggesting that only through their efforts could the country change. His speech features this direct appeal: “Get together in your community tonight or tomorrow and organize your Share Our Wealth societies.” A senator himself, Long cast himself as an outsider relying on the people to change the institutions of government and thereby create their own prosperity.

At the very end of his speech, Long asks the public to write to him and share their ideas. He ends on a personal note by sending his regards to his family and friends in Louisiana, thus burnishing his reputation as a straight-talking, down-to-earth man who is calling upon his government to abide by the country's democratic principles and by Christian beliefs. In his last sentence he effectively merges his own efforts with those of his clubs in the minds of the people listening to his speech: “I thank you, my friends, for your kind attention, and I hope you will enroll with us, take care of your own work in the work of this Government, and share or help in our Share Our Wealth society.”