What FDR "sold down the river", was the sovereignty of nation-states and the freedom and liberty of peoples he could not and the American people between 1945 and 1949 were unwilling to protect. The US Army might have made it to Berlin by June 1945, it vertainly made it to Vienna and almost to Prague. But it wasn't going to reach Budapest or Warsaw, much less Bucharest or Sofia before the Soviet (Red) Army. What FDR did was trade a temporary control over an area long considered a Russian "sphere of influence" to the Soviets to save a hundred thousand or more US casualties in the destruction of the Nazis. And in doing so created the basis for a free and democratic Western Europe, West germany and the eventual victory in the "Cold War".

BTW the US government never recognized either the Soviet occupation and incorporation of the Baltic Republics or the land transfers between Poland, Germany and the USSR or the validity of the elections and coups that created Communist governments in most of Eastern Europe. It just recognized that the limits of US power prevented any other course of action.

On FDR and the "New Deal". Without FDR, without the "New Deal", this country had every chance of sliding into anarchy or a "right wing" or "left wing" authoritarian government, whether it was the Communists, Long or Coughlin or their like that came out on top. Whatever the "legality", whatever the economic impact, the "New Deal" worked. And it worked because FDR and his advisors and his supporters reconginzed that desperate people make desperate decisions (sans the Germans and their elections in 1932 and 1933, which was a choice between the Nazis and their allies and the Communists) and that people with money in their pocket to buy food, clothing and shelter wouldn't be interested in overthrowing the government.

And economically, such programs are sound, just as they are today. It takes just about as many people, say ten in one day, to build a Ford Taurus as a Bentley, only a Taurus costs $25K and a Bentley costs $300K. Instead of having a man with $10M buy a single Bentley, you let him buy his Bently and tax him $300K and give the $300K to 12 Americans, who buy a Ford Taurus. You've just created work for 120 people, who, like the 12 Americans that received government assistance can now buy a Ford Taurus, which sustains the market. On top of that, 3K of each car is profit, so that the guy who was taxed $300K gets $396K back on the deal, where if he wasn't taxed in the first place, no one would buy cars and he wouldn't get any revenue from the sale of cars. I know this is a simplified analogy, but the reality of American capitalism is that the desire for short term gain, the insatiable greed, prevents the most extreme American capitalists from looking and thinking long term. So when a company lays off 10,000 workers or defaults on their pension plans and then complains about falling revenue, becuase now 10,000 people can't or won't buy their product, the first thing they ask for is government relief through tax cuts.

BTW, government taxes are overhead, you blithering idiot capitalists. The taxes you pay on corporate income pays for the State Department, whose major mission is US economic interests in overseas markets, the Commerce Department which helps protect you from unfair foreign competition, the Defense Department who provides a secure, stable environment overseas for your markets and suppliers, etc, etc. You would have to pay a commercial provider for the same services if there wasn't a government to provide them for you, and the government's cheaper because other taxpayers are helping to carry the burden. And taxation on individual income from investment is not "double" taxation. The individual is paying for those government services from which the individual, not the corporation benefits.