Study Notes on The Defining Moment: FDR's Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope
Introduction to American Political Framework
American politics is often viewed through a lens of liberal versus conservative struggles.
A more relevant framework is the rivalry and reverence surrounding Franklin Roosevelt (FDR) and Ronald Reagan.
The Legacy of Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan
Contextual Comparison
Nancy Pelosi's Reference to FDR:
Pelosi asserts that mentioning FDR refutes claims that modern Democrats lack ideas.
This highlights the enduring legacy of FDR, whose presidency ended over six decades ago.
Significance of FDR and Reagan:
Both have become symbols of hope and resiliency in American politics.
Their similarities and differences reveal deeper insights into American political ideology.
Biographical and Historical Similarities
Rise to Presidency:
Both men started their presidencies in times of economic despair, prompting a sense of hopelessness among Americans.
They faced external threats (tyrannies abroad) and internal skepticism regarding their actions.
Assassination Attempts:
Both FDR and Reagan survived assassination attempts shortly after they assumed office.
Political Transformation:
They reshaped the political landscape:
Their successors (Vice Presidents) inherited their political momentum.
Subsequent presidents struggled against the legacies of their accomplishments.
Legacy Impact on Opponents:
Eisenhower, after the election in 1952, felt compelled to maintain the New Deal programs.
Clinton faced constraints from the political realities shaped by both FDR and Reagan.
Historical Interpretations of FDR's Presidency
Perspectives of Early Historians
Historians like Frank Freidel, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and William Leuchtenburg sought to create a favorable view of FDR's legacy.
They portrayed FDR's enemies as adversaries of American progress.
These historians conveyed that the Great Depression stemmed from capitalist greed and corruption.
FDR’s rhetoric about “economic royalists” and “privileged princes” reinforced these views.
Jonathan Alter's Perspectives
Critique of FDR's Economic Strategies:
Jim Powell’s arguments suggest FDR failed to stimulate business effectively.
Alter speculates on the historical interpretations of FDR's significance, noting he may have been seen as less impactful without WWII.
Alter diverges from previous historians, questioning the efficacy of FDR’s economic nationalism and tariffs.
He criticizes the New Deal policies as lacking a coherent growth agenda beyond public works.
Economic Theories in Context
Comparison of Economic Strategies: FDR vs. Reagan
FDR's Keynesianism and Economic Isolationism
Early suspicion around stimulating growth.
FDR adopted economic nationalism without consistent ideologies in mind.
Evolution of Economic Thought Post-New Deal:
After WWII, Democrats adopted a more stabilizing, less restructuring sentiment about economy.
Keynesian theory emphasized regulating aggregate demand through counter-cyclical spending.
Limitations of Keynesian Economics:
Timing issues in government response to economic downturns can exacerbate cycles.
Governments tend to stimulate rather than restrain economic activity due to incentives.
Reagan's Economic Philosophy
Reagan’s administration was influenced by monetarist and supply-side economics:
Monetarism:
Emphasizes the money supply's growth relative to real wealth.
Inflation occurs when money outpaces tangible wealth.
Supply-side Economics:
Government revenues are the product of tax rates multiplied by tax bases.
Reducing taxes can increase economic activity and, consequently, tax revenues.
Comparison of results:
Reagan's policies showed better results against 1980s economic issues than the New Deal did in the 1930s.
Evaluating the Outcomes of FDR's New Deal
Impact on the Great Depression:
The New Deal did not effectively end the Depression; evidence indicates it might have prolonged economic struggles.
The recession of 1937, a notable occurrence, demonstrated faltering progress.
Aftermath of WWII:
The war was crucial for ushering economic recovery in the U.S.; post-war, the U.S. produced a significant share of global industrial output.
The Psychological Impact of FDR's Leadership
FDR's Image as a Leader:
FDR was perceived as a beacon of hope; his confidence reassured a distressed populace.
His public speeches (e.g., fireside chats) fostered trust and optimism among citizens.
His poignant rhetoric addressed societal despair without disassembling capitalism.
Cultural Shifts Post-New Deal:
The prolonged Depression legitimized arguments for social welfare as a political necessity, creating an American welfare state.
Conclusion and Reflection on Future Historians
Alter’s work emphasizes a reevaluation of FDR's greatness on narrower grounds, considering longer-term economic implications and outcomes.
The assessment of FDR’s presidency relative to Reagan’s policies may influence future political discussions and ideological stances on economic governance.
To address your discussion prompt, you can structure your response by tackling each question using the insights from the provided notes:
Discussing Revisionism and Restoration of The Great Depression and Economic Policy surrounding FDR
Revisionism: The notes highlight how earlier historians (like Frank Freidel, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and William Leuchtenburg) sought to create a favorable view of FDR’s legacy. They portrayed his enemies as adversaries of American progress and attributed the Great Depression to capitalist greed. Jonathan Alter, however, represents a revisionist perspective by questioning the efficacy of FDR’s economic strategies and offering a critical re-evaluation of his impact.
Restoration: Alter's approach can be seen as a form of historical restoration by revisiting and critiquing aspects of FDR’s policies that were previously presented in a positive light, pushing against the established narrative. This is particularly evident in his questioning of FDR’s economic nationalism and tariffs.
Challenge Respectfully: Was the New Deal good or bad for The Great Depression?
When challenging a classmate, you can respectfully argue that the New Deal, while providing psychological reassurance, did not effectively end the Depression and might have prolonged economic struggles. The notes specifically mention the recession of 1937 as demonstrating "faltering progress." It's suggested that World War II was actually crucial for ushering economic recovery in the U.S., not solely the New Deal policies.
How Jonathan Alter differed from other historians with revisionist beliefs:
Jonathan Alter diverged from previous historians by:
Questioning the efficacy of FDR’s economic nationalism and tariffs: Unlike earlier historians who portrayed FDR's actions as unequivocally progressive, Alter scrutinizes these policies.
Supporting Jim Powell’s arguments: Alter suggests that FDR failed to stimulate business effectively.
Critiquing the New Deal’s growth agenda: He criticizes the New Deal policies as "lacking a coherent growth agenda beyond public works." Older interpretations often lauded the New Deal without such reservations.
Speculating on WWII's impact: Alter speculates that FDR's significance might have been seen as less impactful without WWII, a nuanced view not typically emphasized by historians focused on a solely positive portrayal of FDR.
How Alter showed a primary source of historical restoration through tariffs:
While Cordell Hull is not explicitly mentioned in the notes, Alter's "restoration" perspective is evident in his questioning of the efficacy of FDR’s economic nationalism and tariffs. By challenging these specific policies, which would have been central to economic decision-making during the Depression, Alter provides a critical re-evaluation that pushes against the prevailing favorable historical interpretations. This implies a restoration of a more critical or cautionary view regarding the impact of these economic measures, which were part of the broader context of the Great Depression and government intervention.
The conceptual flaw of the New Deal according to Alter:
Jonathan Alter criticized the New Deal policies as lacking a coherent growth agenda beyond public works. This is presented as its primary conceptual flaw, suggesting that while public works provided employment and infrastructure, they did not foster sustainable economic growth in the long run.