New Deal Liberalism in twentieth century American history
Introduction:
In 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt, in the midst of economic depression, was designated as the President of America. He made remarkable success in the elections while receiving 472 out of 531 votes with Electoral College. He inflicted the most awful defeat since 1912 upon his rival from the Republican Party. The reason behind this was the passionate support from general population to his proposal of New Deal. It was a vastly experimental program of lawmaking reforms with no exact ideology and was intended at stimulating economic recovery. After starting his practices as president, he acted quickly to deal with the issues at hand. At that time, the country was facing a continuously worsening economic depression, almost 13 million people was unemployed at that time. Within just first hundred days of his presidency passed “astonishing bursts of development legislation” which ultimately prevented the fall down of the economy and started to tackle some of the most significant social problems, basically- unemployment.
What is New Deal?
It refers to a series of economic policies president Roosevelt introduced after the period of great depression. Great depression left the economy of United States in a dismal state. Programs were put into practice for providing relief to millions of Americans being stuck in a state of poverty due to the consequences of Great Depression. Different programs were rolled over from 1933 to 1938 and covered a series of items including, bank, labor, and reforms for public relief. Many opponents of New Deal who had the view that implemented programs promoted capitalism and built up the power held by the government. With the start of World War II, programs generated by the New Deal practically became unnecessary as the rates of unemployment and GNP improved drastically as women took jobs previously held by the men and men became soldiers.
How liberal was the New Deal?
The economy was in constant declining state when New Deal was introduced first. Banks were failing and the banking system was collapsing, demand was decreasing, overproduction in agricultural sector reduced the prices and further droughts undermined the farmer’s income who was already struggling to pay their debt obligations and taxes, in towns, unemployment rate increased to 15.9% in1931, production was shrinking and wages were cut down in most of the fields. Due to these factors, workers suffered from destitution and malnutrition. If it is accepted that economic prosperity of minimal wages at least available to the common population is a compulsory requirement for the Liberal democracy, so it can be easily claimed that from the perspective of economics, later increasingly was under threat in America at the start of the 1930s because economic dilemma was intense and conditions were only worsening. It may also be claimed that unless a range of effective economic reforms was initiated, economic system may collapse while bringing an end to liberal democracy; the range of economic troubles was reflected in mood of dejection and the belief that depression was lasting as well as drastic fall in birth rate and even more migration of workers.
Nonetheless, perhaps surprisingly, the democratic government was not itself politically threatened in noteworthy way. At the same time, extremist parties of Europe made massive gains in parliament and their popularity scaled boosted up, America observed no such growth in the 1932 elections communists polled only 120,000 votes. Communists were the extreme party and were ready to challenge liberal democracy. In addition, general mood redundancy existed and no significant protests analogous to those are Europe was seen. Mine strikes, communist are demonstration and farm strikes occur, yet an alternative political system of communists was proposed, rather only expressed their objections. In there was a threat, it came from the implications to strengthen the executives powers, was thorough enough to propose dictatorship, a tyrannical of twelve people, single dictator simply or a super council. Yet, these suggestions did not produce aggressive opposition to the present democratic government. Although the government of Hoover was held responsible for depression, American people did not look to lose faith in the system of democracy as political system when new program was proposed by Roosevelt they supported it with enthusiasm and faith. The reason why liberal democracy in America was not threatened by the extremism as it did in Europe was that America was founded upon the values of freedom and liberty and never practiced effective tyrannical rules as did most of the European countries under their royals.
So, in the political sense, it cannot be claimed that New Deal have saved the liberal democracy as no significant threat exist actually. However, ironically, it may be claimed that New Deal brought such a threat in 1934, when riots and strikes started to spread. The dissents acquired such a powerful communist’s inclination and “share of wealth” organization of Long. This promoted redistribution of wealth and attracted more support. At the same time, textile workers, on Labor Day, carried out the greatest strike ever in America4. These threats, however, were effectively handled by the government using force in the case of great strikes. Public was persistent to fear the communist. This meant that no significant threat developed. The New Deal, also by espousing a more left-wing move towards economy, managed to dent the major reforms and obliterating the attractiveness of major parties. This development of a left-wing radicalism by the theory called “de Tocqueville”. According to this theory of evil becomes unbearable when the ways of escape are opened. When workers were awarded specific benefits, they started to want more. Therefore, in case the New Deal is to be applauded for managing a political threat to Liberal Democracy, it only can be with reverence to the threat generated by it. Further, it is supported by the logic that New Deal created a real threat of despotism on the part of Roosevelt as noted by the James Farley, the “attempt of president of dominating his party depicts his desire for personal power and members of congress accurately feared his ‘dictatorship’ ”.
Therefore, a great threat to liberal democracy was the collapse of economic and it is through preventing such an improvement that the New Deal can allege to have protected the system.
New Deal and influences of Economic Policy:
During the first century, different important pieces of fiscal legislation were passed by Roosevelt. Emergency Banking Act was the first among these pieces of legislation. This in turn, renewed the collapse of banking system and encouraged confidence in public that now banks are safe, so being a critical development as it motivated the development of faith among general population that economic depression was almost about to end and re-established regular relations within the country. Next move of Roosevelt was to create the balance of budget though Economy Act. This assured again the business community about the fiscal conservatism of Roosevelt and so encouraged the restitution of the business relations.
In common, first hundred years fetched the economic recovery. It also saved economy from falling down. However, not all ventures were successful completely such as National Recovery Act was despoiled by multiple enterprises and not nearly all changes altered the economic structure permanently in any way. This allowed for the identical problems, which caused the rise of depression later.
In addition, the extraction of capital from the financial system into reserve funds may be assisted to introduce the depression. However, in did, promoted a variety of stabilizers within the economy and prologue one lasting strategy. It may be claimed here that by saving America from crumple the first days (almost one hundred) proved that “a feasible alternative to totalitarianism was presented by the democratic reforms” in that way saving liberal democracy. However, the main driving force behind the legislation was the economic recovery not the saving of liberal democracy.
New Deal and preceding policies:
Many people have view that New Deal was an extension of the progressive policies that were continuing before the World War I. This view can be supported by the reality that there were many progressives in government i.e. Roosevelt himself and most of the policies, namely the Act of Social Security carried a great extent of resemblance to the policies of welfare that were being initiated under the progressives 4. Still, largely, this view is incorrect as progressives closely were associated with the laissez-faire, this was abandoned by the New Deal, and the welfare policies by “Victorian Humanitarianism” promoted it while the politicians of new deal adopted their policies out of liberal considerations and economic necessity. New Deal and related policies were also different from the Hoover administration program too; as it was not bounded by the “narrow ideological vision” and may embark on despite of more drastic policies that was necessary in case economy was to be protected from collapse.Conclusion:
New Deal refers to a series of economic policies president Roosevelt introduced after the period of great depression. Great depression left the economy of United States in a dismal state. Programs were put into practice for providing relief to millions of Americans being stuck in a state of poverty due to the consequences of Great Depression. Different programs were rolled over from 1933 to 1938 and covered a series of items including, bank, labor, and reforms for public relief. The economy was in constant declining state when New Deal was introduced first. Banks were failing and the banking system was collapsing, demand was decreasing, overproduction in agricultural sector reduced. Therefore, a great threat to liberal democracy was the collapse of economic and it is through preventing such an improvement that the New Deal can allege to have protected the system.
References
Badger, A. J. (1989). The New Deal: The Depression Years, 1933-1940 (pp. 1-2). Hill & Wang.
Capelli, P. (1999). The new deal at work: Managing the market-driven workforce. Harvard Business Press.
Jarvis, L. M. (2008). The new deal. Chem. & Eng. News, 86, 13-20.
Leuchtenburg, W. E. (1963). Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, 1932-1940 (Vol. 3025). New York: Harper & Row.
Sullivan, P. (1996). Days of hope: Race and democracy in the New Deal era (p. 3538). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
