New Deal Historiography
Three major strains of writings about FDR and the New
Deal:
1: The New Deal was hostile to traditional American values such as liberty
and individualism and was taking America toward a socialistic
welfare state
2: The New
Deal was the heir of previous reform movements such as
Jeffersonian-Republicanism, Populism, Progressive; and the changes
in America’s
economy rendered older values obsolete
3: The New
Deal was a sham cover-up of the need for more fundamental
change in the economy; by altering capitalism FDR was saving it
from its
demise and the inevitability of the socialist state
Progressive School: Henry
Steele Commager; Arthur M Schlesinger Jr
New Deal is
another phase in the struggle against monopoly and special
interests
by “the people”
The New Deal was revolutionary in the sense that it signaled the
acceptance of government’s responsibility for the people’s welfare
and the justifiability
of
governmental intervention
Only appeared radical because of the speed of reform and the sharp
contrast between
the Harding to Hoover policies of hands-off
New Deal
was an integral part of the liberal tradition and the liberal-
conservative
cycle of American history
New Deal
was bound to have happened anyway as various groups became
alienated
from society in the 20’s
The
Depression gave the New Deal its unique character among liberal
movements
Major goal was to use the power of government to improve the common
man’s life and to save the capitalist system by eliminating the
obvious defects in it
and to avoid radical solution of revolution
Conservative View:
New Deal
was a violent departure from traditional values which rejected
everything that was positive in American
political tradition
New Deal caused an erosion of state and Congressional authority (which
was concentrated in the Presidency) and the creation of a staggering
federal debt
The New
Deal is in no way a continuation of the liberal tradition because
previous
movements had viewed govt. as an obstacle to further
democratization
and smashing of privilege; and viewed society as
relatively
healthy
The New Deal viewed govt. as a necessary initiator of changes to cure a
sick society, govt. has a positive, critical role in this reform
movement
Switched traditional roles of liberals (emphasizing concrete needs of
groups instead of appealing to morality and arousing the indignation
of the people) and conservatives (moral critics of radical nature of
the New Deal
instead of realism and effort to preserve institutions)
Rexford
Tugwell: Roosevelt had a grand opportunity to make sweeping
changes but he failed to use rational planning in New Deal programs
(he was
too pragmatic and short term in his thinking)
Neo-Conservative: Heinz
Eulau
New Deal
was not a reflection of ideological and class conflict, was not a
crusade,
and was not the product of rational ideology
Instead, the New Deal was evidence of the maturity of America’s economy
and politics
because it tried to solve problems through adjustment,
compromise, and integration NOT by ideological solutions or
violence
1960’s and the “New Left”:
If the New Deal had modified and humanized America, why is there still
racism and poverty? If it gave America a better role in world affairs
how did we get
caught by wars in Asia?
Liberal
reforms didn’t transform the system, they conserved and protected
corporate capitalism; it didn’t redistribute power, or help the
majority of the lowest sectors of society; it didn’t reduce racial
discrimination
Ellis W. Hawley:
Americans
were committed to two, incompatible value systems:
Liberty
and freedom (which implies competition in socio-economics)
Rationality and order (and wealth, progress, and abundance arose
from big
business which created this)
The New Deal embodied this contradiction: anti-monopoly but rational
planning