The comment you’re responding to really doesn’t seem to be condoning those things

Then criticizing those things would be legitimate. To disagree that there’s legitimate criticism regarding those issues is to condone them.

the thing being argued here is whether there was a push in a progressive direction, you said these events are evidence against that, which they countered with the idea that war has a regressive influence, something your quote is supporting.

The fact that there were other factors pushing relatively progressive figures to do fucked up stuff doesn’t mean that the stuff they did wasn’t fucked up or that they shouldn’t be criticized for it. The New Deal/Great Society era was a progressive era but it was also very imperfect and it’s valid to critique the ways in which it failed certain groups of people.

I’d also point out that it cuts both ways, in addition to the factors pushing them towards regressive policies, their progressivism was also somewhat attributable to external factors. Even FDR wasn’t really so much of a believer in “big government,” in fact there were times when he tried to roll back aspects of the New Deal during the Depression. He was just someone who was responsive to the conditions of the time and willing to deviate from economic orthodoxy in order to respond to crises. Had FDR been president during different conditions, he might have been an unremarkable president, or perhaps he might have pushed for progressive policies but been stopped by institutional forces. The threat posed by communism may have also contributed to such reforms being implemented and permitted, out of a sense of self preservation.

I’m down to look at history through that lens, but if we’re gonna do that we have to do it consistently, not just with regards to people we like doing bad things.