In the time period between 1960 and 1989 America was being transformed socially, politically, and economically. America saw the emergence of the Civil Rights Movement, the Great Society, and the counterculture as well as the Vietnam War all of which pushed America farther to the left. America was becoming increasingly liberal and this could be attributed as the main reason to why new conservatism rose to prominence: many americans were upset and frustrated that the country had become, in their opinion, too liberal and wanted to counteract what they saw as a break from traditional American values and system of government by becoming conservative and promoting the traditional values of society and promoting smaller government. New conservatism
…show more content…
In a book by economist Milton Friedman titled Capitalism and Freedom he expresses how ineffective the “great ‘reforms’” had been in achieving their objectives, “A housing program intended to improve the housing conditions of the poor, to reduce juvenile delinquency, and to contribute to the removal of urban slums, has worsened the housing conditions of the poor, contributed to juvenile delinquency, and spread urban blight”(Document 2). Friedman is essentially saying that the liberal reforms made by the government were ineffective and did not work, but does later on express a solution that did work: “The United States has continued to progress; its citizens have become better fed, better clothed, better housed, and better transported; class and social distinctions have narrowed; minority groups have become less disadvantaged. . . . All this has been the product of the initiative and drive of individuals co-operating through the free market” (Document 2). Friedman feels that what actually improved society was the free-market, not government reforms, and this belief that the government cannot enact social reform and change and only the free-market and private sector can is a major tenet of the new conservative viewpoint. Friedman shared his belief of government ineffectiveness, especially in social reform, with many people and that made them …show more content…
In a book written by Barry Goldwater, a Republican senator from Arizona, called The Conscience of a Conservative Goldwater expresses his disappointment with the government and its spending habits: “The root evil is that the government is engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate business. As long as the federal government acknowledges responsibility in a given social or economic field, its spending in that field cannot be substantially reduced”(Document 1). What Goldwater is essentially saying is that the government should take no part in the social and economic spheres of the United States and that its spending in those spheres is detrimental to America. This shows that government intervention in society is problematic because the government is spending money on things that it should take no business in. This in turn made people frustrated that once again their tax dollars were going to things that they didn’t believe the government should be paying for, and this made them join the new conservatism movement. The point of view of this document is from a Republican, conservative senator who is probably trying to raise support for the Republican party as well as conservatives. Another example of bad government intervention was written about in the 1980 Republican Party in which they said this about the state of our overseas presence:
In a book by economist Milton Friedman titled Capitalism and Freedom he expresses how ineffective the “great ‘reforms’” had been in achieving their objectives, “A housing program intended to improve the housing conditions of the poor, to reduce juvenile delinquency, and to contribute to the removal of urban slums, has worsened the housing conditions of the poor, contributed to juvenile delinquency, and spread urban blight”(Document 2). Friedman is essentially saying that the liberal reforms made by the government were ineffective and did not work, but does later on express a solution that did work: “The United States has continued to progress; its citizens have become better fed, better clothed, better housed, and better transported; class and social distinctions have narrowed; minority groups have become less disadvantaged. . . . All this has been the product of the initiative and drive of individuals co-operating through the free market” (Document 2). Friedman feels that what actually improved society was the free-market, not government reforms, and this belief that the government cannot enact social reform and change and only the free-market and private sector can is a major tenet of the new conservative viewpoint. Friedman shared his belief of government ineffectiveness, especially in social reform, with many people and that made them …show more content…
In a book written by Barry Goldwater, a Republican senator from Arizona, called The Conscience of a Conservative Goldwater expresses his disappointment with the government and its spending habits: “The root evil is that the government is engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate business. As long as the federal government acknowledges responsibility in a given social or economic field, its spending in that field cannot be substantially reduced”(Document 1). What Goldwater is essentially saying is that the government should take no part in the social and economic spheres of the United States and that its spending in those spheres is detrimental to America. This shows that government intervention in society is problematic because the government is spending money on things that it should take no business in. This in turn made people frustrated that once again their tax dollars were going to things that they didn’t believe the government should be paying for, and this made them join the new conservatism movement. The point of view of this document is from a Republican, conservative senator who is probably trying to raise support for the Republican party as well as conservatives. Another example of bad government intervention was written about in the 1980 Republican Party in which they said this about the state of our overseas presence: