Conscience of a Liberal
A government directly interfering with the economy of its nation is contrary to the ideals of basic capitalism. When the New Deal was introduced by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression, it was viewed with skepticism due to its perceived anti-capitalistic policies and seemingly communist-esque ideas, which struck fear in the eyes of Americans. However, Roosevelt proved that government involvement in the economy is not only stable, but also is a fair equalizer amongst a nation’s citizens. Paul Krugman’s, The Conscience of a Liberal, discusses the major political situations between the Great Depression and the twenty- first century. This includes the moral and statistical benefits of what are considered …show more content…
“After the 1948 election Republicans decided that the achievements of the New Deal couldn’t be reversed, and stopped trying, while Democrats… settled down to a program of incremental reform. The result was a generation-long era of muted partisanship.”(Krugman 155). This bipartisan cooperation was due to Republicans moving towards the middle in their policies. The Republican party needed to change the basis of its platform because “... the Great Compression greatly reduced the resources of the elite…. the Republican Party survived- but it did so by moving toward the new political center.” (Krugman 72). Evidence of similarity between the parties can also be seen in the massive shift which occurred in the South during the 1960s, after the passage of Johnson’s Civil Rights Act in 1964 (Krugman 99). While the South had been known to be a racist region of the United States, it is unlikely that an entire region of the United States would flip to a party polarly opposing that which they previously supported, simply because that party sided with civil rights. This flip could only have occurred, had the two parties been similar enough at the time. Subsequently, this trait was a deciding factor for white protestant southerners. The bipartisan attitudes of the 1950s and 1960s contributed to efficiency in the federal government that would continue until “...the modern era …show more content…
The New Deal did this in addition to bringing about the the promotion of equality amongst its population and making the “American Dream” a more realistic goal for the blue collar worker. However, with the rate of “progress” which movement conservatists have been making since the 1980s in reversing the programs introduced by, and in relation to, the New Deal, it is possible, and even likely, that these benefits from the plan will dissolve. Should more progressive politicians become elected, it is quite possible that the United States would introduce more programs which expand upon the New Deal. Many such programs, ranging from a more efficient social safety net to universal health care have been in place in European nations for years. We could use these formats of successful programs as a template for our own social programs. Should these formats be applied in American Society, it is quite possible that we would yield similar benefits to those nations who already apply similar policies. Benefits including generally higher quality healthcare, reduced poverty, and a higher standard of living for the general
A government directly interfering with the economy of its nation is contrary to the ideals of basic capitalism. When the New Deal was introduced by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression, it was viewed with skepticism due to its perceived anti-capitalistic policies and seemingly communist-esque ideas, which struck fear in the eyes of Americans. However, Roosevelt proved that government involvement in the economy is not only stable, but also is a fair equalizer amongst a nation’s citizens. Paul Krugman’s, The Conscience of a Liberal, discusses the major political situations between the Great Depression and the twenty- first century. This includes the moral and statistical benefits of what are considered …show more content…
“After the 1948 election Republicans decided that the achievements of the New Deal couldn’t be reversed, and stopped trying, while Democrats… settled down to a program of incremental reform. The result was a generation-long era of muted partisanship.”(Krugman 155). This bipartisan cooperation was due to Republicans moving towards the middle in their policies. The Republican party needed to change the basis of its platform because “... the Great Compression greatly reduced the resources of the elite…. the Republican Party survived- but it did so by moving toward the new political center.” (Krugman 72). Evidence of similarity between the parties can also be seen in the massive shift which occurred in the South during the 1960s, after the passage of Johnson’s Civil Rights Act in 1964 (Krugman 99). While the South had been known to be a racist region of the United States, it is unlikely that an entire region of the United States would flip to a party polarly opposing that which they previously supported, simply because that party sided with civil rights. This flip could only have occurred, had the two parties been similar enough at the time. Subsequently, this trait was a deciding factor for white protestant southerners. The bipartisan attitudes of the 1950s and 1960s contributed to efficiency in the federal government that would continue until “...the modern era …show more content…
The New Deal did this in addition to bringing about the the promotion of equality amongst its population and making the “American Dream” a more realistic goal for the blue collar worker. However, with the rate of “progress” which movement conservatists have been making since the 1980s in reversing the programs introduced by, and in relation to, the New Deal, it is possible, and even likely, that these benefits from the plan will dissolve. Should more progressive politicians become elected, it is quite possible that the United States would introduce more programs which expand upon the New Deal. Many such programs, ranging from a more efficient social safety net to universal health care have been in place in European nations for years. We could use these formats of successful programs as a template for our own social programs. Should these formats be applied in American Society, it is quite possible that we would yield similar benefits to those nations who already apply similar policies. Benefits including generally higher quality healthcare, reduced poverty, and a higher standard of living for the general