ideology – what is government for anyway?

Ideology – What is Government for Anyway?

GOVT 2305

In this section, I want to go a bit further than the information providing about the key terms of government and politics and dig a bit further

into the concept of ideology.

Some of this material was introduced in the previous section so you should have general

familiarity with the terms “liberal” and “conservative.” In this section we dig a bit deeper into these and related concepts.

This is important because a full understanding of ideology helps us come

to grips with what people want government to do – or not do.

This section is meant to go over a full range of viewpoints that people tend to

have, and to focus on those that are most resonant in American politics.

Ideology can also provide cues for people to make evaluations about issue, candidates an many other things. It helps determine public

opinion, much like party identification does.

We cover this aspect of ideology in the section on public opinion later this

semester.

Ideology can apply not only to attitudes about the governing system, but the

economic system as well.

It often begins with a conviction an individual has about “how things ought to

be.” It then proceeds to positions on policy question that attempt to make that

conviction a reality.

Let’s repeat the definition of ideology offered previously.

A set of issue positions based on some underlying value.

But there’s much more.

Let’s review a few:

- The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual,

group, class, or culture.

- A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other

system.

- a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture

- a system of ideas and ideals, especially one that forms the basis of economic or

political theory and policy

- An ideology is a set of opinions or beliefs of a group or an individual. Very often

ideology refers to a set of political beliefs or a set of ideas that characterize a

particular culture.

“Ideologies are systems of abstract thought applied to public matters

and thus make this concept central to politics. Implicitly every political or economic tendency entails an

ideology whether or not it is propounded as an explicit system

of thought.”

But the term not only refers to an idea about how society ought to be

organized, but how that organization can be best achieved.

I hope these help.

Next Section

Let’s spend a few moments on political philosophy, or political

theory if you will.

There is an entire sub-discipline in political science devoted to this.

Here’s a definition from the Encyclopedia Britannica:

political philosophy, branch of philosophy that is concerned, at the most abstract level, with

the concepts and arguments involved in political opinion. The meaning of the term political is itself one of the major problems of political

philosophy. Broadly, however, one may characterize as political all those practices and

institutions that are concerned with government.

Political Philosophy has a long history. People have long discussed what the right structure of

society ought to be, and what relationship ought to exist between the state and the individual.

Also:

What extent of state control is appropriate? What are the legitimate ends of government?

If you are interested, here’s a link to an open Yale course: Introduction to Political

Philosophy.

And a few authors and books you might find interesting:

Politics

by Aristotle

The Republic

Plato

The Prince

Machiavelli

We will cover some of this material – at least that part that is relevant

to this class – in an upcoming section when we discuss the

philosophical history that lead to the philosophical argument

presented in the Declaration of Independence.

Next Section

The contemporary

ideological disputes we have

can be traced back to disputes over the French

Revolution.

Its an important story

The term “ideology” was once used to describe the study of the science of ideas.

It became used in the contemporary sense during the French Revolution when conflict emerged over how governments ought to be organized. This revolution was different than the American Revolution in that

ideas played a more prominent role and people were organized far more around those ideas. The American

Revolution was far more pragmatic and oriented around self rule. The US Constitution as we will see is rooted in a pragmatic view of human nature and self

interest. We will cover that soon enough.

The simple purpose of the French Revolution was to overturn the French social and governing order – it had

been an absolute monarchy - and replace it with a system that allowed for broader participation in the

affairs of government. That’s the simple story anyway. It was similar to what occurred in Britain in the late 1680s, but more extreme since the French actually

killed off the aristocracy.

Many of the ideas that drove the French Revolution can be traced back to John Locke, but as reinterpreted by Rousseau and Voltaire. Collectively we can call them

members of the enlightenment.

Many of these authors sought to rethink the basis of human society by imagining the

existence of a state of nature – a condition prior to the development of governments – and determining why rational individuals would

choose the leave the it.

This allowed for rethinking the reasons governments exist and the relationship between

individuals and the government. Some suggested that this allowed for radical

rethinking of what types of governing systems ought to exist.

This was also used to justify political revolutions against those existing systems that could not be justified under these new theories.

Like rule based on the divine right of the monarch.

The French Revolution turned violent, which included killing off much of the aristocracy. This led to an

influential line of criticism against the revolution from Edmund Burke, a member of the British Parliament

who was a supporter of the American Revolution, and the Glorious Revolution before it.

The French Revolution attempted to completely redo the governing system. The American Revolution did not

– as we will see, the American constitutional system was based on the British model. It did not reorder the

governing. It simply replaced who was in charge.

He wrote up his criticism in Reflections on the Revolution

in France.

Click here for some choice quotes from Burke. You’ll probably

recognize a few.

Example: “Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.”

He opposed the idea that governments should be creation

upon abstract principles and rights and was more in favor of building

governments upon ancient institutions and arrangements.

He is often argued to be the founder of the modern

conservative movement.

Many contemporary conservative ideas are traced to him.

Burke argued that by completely replacing the previous governing system, and

eliminating the people who knew how to run it, the new French government lost

pragmatic knowledge and was doomed to failure.

This was a criticism of ideology in general. He disputed the idea that someone could write out principles on paper and expect

them to work seamlessly.

Note that Burke was a supporter of the American Revolution however.

He also argued that members of Parliament should vote for the

long terms interests of the nation, not the shorts terms needs of their

constituents. The trick was to establish strong stable institutions.

His key point: Governing is difficult.

A good governing system contains features that evolve over time due

to trial and error. No one knows what will work or not work until it

is tried out.

Designing a political system from scratch – one that works well – is

difficult, and very likely impossible.

Burke was a critic of “state of nature” and “social contract” theories So was

David Hume.

Neither believed that a state of nature ever really existed, or that

governments stemmed from a contract people entered into where

they consented to form a government.

They believed that people were social by nature and always existed

in a governing arrangement of some sort which was modified

gradually over time.

There was never a state of nature, in other words.

They believed change is possible, but only if it done gradually in order to ensure that social order – and the benefits that results from a governing system that works – are

not lost while those changes occur.

He saw this happen in both the Glorious and American Revolutions. He did not see this in the

French Revolution which led to social disruptions across society.

This is important for our understanding of one aspect of

contemporary ideological conflict.

Can a better society be achieved quickly by implementing aggressive policies designed to pursue certain

aims, or can these only be established slowly?

One approach, which has come to be known as Burkean Conservatism holds that change must be done slowly. Certain goals – like equal protection before the laws and expanded suffrage – are worth pursuing, but

not at the risk of undermining social stability.

What has become known as the liberal approach – but was once known (maybe more properly) as

progressivism – argues that these goals must be pursued diligently. Delays are only intended to prevent their implementation and to limit the benefits of self-

government to a small set of people.

They supported reform not revolution.

In a very simple sense, conservatism can be thought of as the preferred

ideology of those whose interests are served by how things are already – the

status quo – and liberalism the preferred ideology of those benefitted

by change, especially change that expands participation and broadens

the benefits of self government.

Again, this can be contrasted with the idea that certain assumptions

about how society ought to be organized – based on the equal

rights of the individual – should be that basis of a governing system.

The status quo can be transformed.

Thomas Paine, among others,

supported such a view.

Paine is best known as the author of Common Sense,

which helped spread the arguments promoting the

American Revolution.

But was also a supporter of the French Revolution.

He argued against Edmund Burke’s position on the French

Revolution in the Rights of Man.

He argued that government should be more deliberately tied into the

general population and more aggressive policies should be

promoted to deal with the plight of the poor.

The book had two parts:

“In Part I, Paine urged political rights for all men because of their natural equality in the sight of God. All forms of hereditary government, including the British

constitution, were condemned because they were based on farce or force. Only a democratic republic

could be trusted to protect the equal political rights of all men. Part II was even more radical for Paine argued for a whole program of social legislation to deal with the shocking condition of the poor.” – History Guide.

These led to his arrest for seditious libel – a concept we will study

much later in class.

He was also a fierce critic of religion – though was not an atheist. His later book, The Age of Reason articulated his views:

“Paine rejected Christianity, denied that the Bible was the revealed word of God, condemned many of the Old Testament stories as immoral and claimed that the Gospels were marred by discrepancies.”

This also contrasts with Edmund Burke who thought that religious institutions provided necessary

stability in society.

In a recently published book, a

noted writer makes the argument that

the conflict between Burke and Paine is the course of the ongoing conflict

between conservatism and liberalism today.

Click here for commentary.

Conservatism can trace its roots to Burke, and his belief that government must rest on tradition and progress must be slow

steady and gradual.

Liberalism can trace its roots to Paine and his belief that government should rest on

reason – not tradition – and that broad based problems can be solved by

governmental programs.

Each is also rooted in different attitudes about the French

Revolution.

Over time, these ideologies have been described as being either left

wing or right wing.

Click here for a look at the left – right political spectrum.

From Wikipedia: “In left-right politics, left-wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social equality, often in

opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality. It typically involves a concern for

those in society who are perceived as disadvantaged relative to others and an

assumption that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or

abolished.”

From Wikipedia: “right-wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or

supports social hierarchy or social inequality.

Social hierarchy and social inequality is viewed by those affiliated with the Right as either inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable,

whether it arises through traditional social differences or from competition in market

economies. It typically accepts or justifies this position on the basis of natural law or tradition.”

This sets the stage for the growth of ideological movements in the

19th Century, much of which is still impacting our discussion of politics

today.

Keep this in mind as we go forward: Ideological disputes are

often tied into self interest.

If current arrangements benefit you, you might be conservative. If you are benefitted by change, you

might be liberal.

Next Section

The history of ideological movements after Burke and Paine

Here we will get familiar some of the standard terms used to

describe ideologies:

SocialismCommunism

FascismCapitalismAnarchism

NationalismLiberalism

Conservatism

Lets begin with two old terms from British politics from the 18th

Century:

ToryWhig

“Tory” refers to the political faction that supported the divine right of the monarchy. They were resistant to

reform and supported the traditional authority of the state. Toryism was popular with the nobility and

members of the King’s court.

“Whig” refers to the faction that supported a strong Parliament – legislature – and a constitutional

monarchy. They wished to reduce the hierarchical authority of the monarchy and put the monarch on par

with the legislature. Whigism was popular with the emerging middle classes, especially the merchants who were becoming more part of the House of Commons.

The Whigs would become influential in development of the concept of classical

liberalism.

Their name would also be adopted by an

American political party in

the 19th Century.

John Locke and Adam Smith – among many other British authors – also

developed a variety of ideas that would culminate in an ideological viewpoint based on the primary importance of

individual liberty.

Locke and Smith predate Burke and Paine, but let’s worry so much about that right

now.

We will also hold off on discussing Locke here.

This will wait until we talk about the development of the arguments embedded

in the Declaration of Independence.

These ideas are sometimes referred to as:

Classical Liberalism

Here’s a definition: Classical liberalism is a philosophy committed to the ideal of

limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion,

speech, press, assembly, and free markets.

And here’s a You Tube with one man’s answer to the question what is classical

liberalism?

Note that “classical liberalism” sounds a lot like what we now call conservatism, or

more properly libertarianism.

We will discuss this shift further below, but in the early 20th century the progressive

movement began using the term liberalism to describe themselves, specifically they would call

themselves social liberals. This has led to the obvious confusion about terminology.

Some background reading:

The Rise, Decline, and Reemergence of Classical

Liberalism

It placed specific emphasis on private property rights and argued

that the protection of property was a central function of a

governing system.

Its is argued that the founders of the American Republic – though they had differences – are best

referred to as classical liberals, or Lockean Liberals.

You might consider reading: Lockean Liberalism and the American Revolution.

Not surprisingly, the development of classical liberalism accompanies

the development of capitalism.

Capitalism

A definition of capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that

are determined by private decision, and by prices,

production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

Capitalism isn’t specifically an ideology, but it’s close.

It claims that societies are best improved by allowing individuals the ability to make and

implement decisions without immediate regard to the outcome.

Here are a few choice quotes from Adam Smith, who is

argued to have created the field of economics and laid the ground work for

the rise of capitalism.

He wrote out these idea in An Inquiry into the

Nature and Causes of the

Wealth of Nation.

You can find the text here.

“Every individual...generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to

that of foreign industry he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a

manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many

other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.”

His concept of the invisible hand of the marketplace continues to influence supporters of capitalism. It

provides one of the stronger justifications for a capitalist system.

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the

baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own

interest.”

“I have never known much good done by those who affected to

trade for the public good.”

Smith was suspicious that the public good could be improved by deliberate action. It was best

achieved by the allowing individuals the ability to pursue their self interest.

The role of government is to facilitate the establishment and maintenance of the

marketplace. This means providing a solid currency, security for the production and

transportation of goods, infrastructure, and a court system for the resolution of commercial

disputes. Little else apart from this is necessary.

Sounds more like Edmund Burke than Thomas Paine.

It also sounds like recent controversies between liberals –

who argue that government programs that intend to directly

solve social problems can be effective – and conservatives who

are more restrained in thinking this is so.

An early student – and critic – of capitalism was Karl Marx. Marx

was largely responsible for

He did, however, note the role it played in increasing productivity,

wealth and innovation.

In the Communist Manifesto Karl

Marx commented on how capitalism

unleashed the creativity of the “bourgeoisie.”

First: What is the bourgeois?

“of or characteristic of the middle class, typically with reference to its

perceived materialistic values or conventional attitudes.”

“The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal display of vigor in the Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much

admire, found its fitting complement in the most slothful indolence. It has been the first to show

what man's activity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian

pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions that

put in the shade all former exoduses of nations and crusades . . .

. . . The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of

production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations

of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the

contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant

revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting

uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. . . .

. . . All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and

opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All

that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real condition of life and

his relations with his kind.” – Karl Marx

His point: Individual freedom, which forms the basis for capitalism, allows

for innovation and growth.

But it creates problems because the benefits of capitalism are unevenly distributed. Industrial development led to the creation of urban poverty,

which was a largely new phenomenon.

He wrote these ideas out in Das Kapital. The first

critical analysis of capitalism.

Here’s an abridged version

of the book.

He saw increased competition between capital and labor.

He predicted increased political conflict as a result.

Some selected quotes:

“In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality,

while the living person is dependent and has no

individuality.” – Karl Marx

“Capital is reckless of the health or length of life of the laborer, unless

under compulsion from society.” – Karl Marx

“Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology, and the combining together of various

processes into a social whole, only by sapping the original sources of all

wealth - the soil and the labourer.” – Karl Marx

Even Adam Smith had cautionary things to say about the rise of

capitalism.

“No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the

members are poor and miserable”

“To feel much for others and little for ourselves; to restrain our selfishness and

exercise our benevolent affections, constitute the perfection of human

nature” – Adam Smith

Smith was concerned about growing inequality and did not agree with the idea

that people should ignore the plight of others.

As we will see in a moment, concern for growing inequality this led to the

development of socialism and communism, both based on egalitarian

principles rooted in the French Revolution.

To repeat a point: The classical liberal focuses primarily on the individual.

This made classical liberalism very different than the collective ideologies that began to develop in Europe in the wake of the French Revolution. These point out a key difference between ideologies: Some

are based on the individual, some are based on the collective.

Which raises a good question:

Is society best thought of as being composed of fully independent

people, or are we all interdependent?

And a related question:

Can – or should – government be used as a vehicle for attaining

certain goals?

The conservative tends to see it society as composed of individuals and that

government should orient itself primarily to protect the rights of individuals.

The liberal tends to see society as a collected of interconnected individuals and

that government should be actively used to improve the lives of those individuals.

Those on the left argue that the common good is best attained by deliberately working for it rather

assuming that it will inevitably follow from self-interested

individual actions.

This should help put into context the rise of socialism.

The expansion of individual freedom did allow for tremendous growth and wealth creation. But at

a cost: greater inequality in society.

The costs imposed on the poor led to ideological opposition:

socialism.

Socialism

A definition:

socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in

isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in

some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a

share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its

members. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Socialism is an ideology that takes a collectivist approach to society. It

developed soon after the French Revolution and began to be

popularized after the onset of the Industrial Revolution, which

transformed society, but also great inequality and urban poverty.

Socialism evolved as a response to capitalism. Early socialists promoted policies that would redistribute wealth and reorganize society. Sometimes, but not always, it would also include proposals to abolish

private property and allow for governmental ownership of the means of production.

Like many other ideologies, a great many groups claimed to be socialist and had disagreements with

each other over goals and methods.

The story of socialism in the United States is similar to that in Europe. It followed the rise of industry in

the United States and the increased inequality that resulted

from it.

Agrarian American was more equal that Industrial America.

These socialist movement were a response to what were seen as the

excesses of the Gilded Age.

Socialism was more of an urban than a rural movement. And it focused more on the needs of the working class, especially

labor.

No surprise that the first major socialist party in the United States was the Socialist

Labor Party. Click here for Wikipedia’s entry on socialism in the United States.

One of the products of socialism in the US was the creation of a

variety of utopian communities. One of the more famous was the

Oneida Community. Texas had some as well, for example La

Reunion.

Utopian communities in the US have their own unique histories apart from the political story we

are following here.

Communism

The most extreme form of socialism was communism, which was developed by Karl Marx in the

mid 19th Century.

Two definitions of communism:

1a : a theory advocating elimination of private property

b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed

2 a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and

Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production

communism, the political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based

economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines,

mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society. Communism is thus a form of socialism—a higher and more advanced form, according to its advocates. Exactly how communism differs from

socialism has long been a matter of debate, but the distinction rests largely on the communists’ adherence

to the revolutionary socialism of Karl Marx.

Marx saw political conflict as primarily based on class conflict and developed a historical analysis that argued that the communist state – where workers owned the

means of production – was the inevitable direction society was heading.

Marx thought that communist governments were most likely to emerge in the advanced economies of the west – like England, France and the United States

because having gone through a period of capitalism they had developed the “means of production”

necessary to grow. It was a bit of a surprise that they would emerge in Russia and China that had not

developed as capitalist economies.

Anarchy

Definition (s)

1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

2 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>

And another definition:

anarchism, cluster of doctrines and attitudes centred on the belief that

government is both harmful and unnecessary. Anarchist thought

developed in the West and spread throughout the world, principally

in the early 20th century.

Anarchism also evolved in the late 19th Century, but instead of

advocating for expansive government that can provide

goods and services for the general population, anarchists advocated

for the elimination of government.

Advocates argued that societies of people are capable of organizing themselves

“without a central coordinator imposing its own idea of order against the wills of

individuals acting in their own interests.”

Anarchism, at its simplest argues against the existence of publicly enforced government. The term can be confusing though because it is often

used negatively to describe the violence that can sometimes emerge when there is no peace-keeping apparatus in society. Many advocates of

reform were called anarchists by opponents who argued that their reforms – be they

classical liberals or socialists – would lead to chaos.

Here are some definitions:

Click here for a look at the history of anarchism in the United States.

Later this semester – when we cover the development of the

freedom of speech we will look at the case of Abrams v US, which

involved the speech rights of self described anarchists.

Populism

Definition:

“A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite.”

The elite may be connected to the government or to the private sector.

And another:

“any of various, often antiestablishment or anti-

intellectual political movements or philosophies that offer unorthodox

solutions or policies”

Populism can best be thought of as an ideological movement the

began in the mid 19th century by distressed farmers who – among other things – were increasingly

threatened by the power of railroads and bankers.

Read this brief essay for more detail: Agrarian Distress and the Rise of Populism.

Populism was especially powerful in the United States from the end of the Civil War to World War II.

It began with the Granger Movement, then the Farmer’s

Alliance. The People’s Party was formed in the early 1890s.

Positions taken by populists of that era – or at least the Farmers’

Alliance - included strong regulations of both railroads and

banks, inflationary monetary policy (the use of silver as coinage), lowered tariffs, a progressive income tax, and the popular

election of US Senators.

One of the better known populist candidates was

William Jennings Bryan, who was the

Democratic candidate for the

presidency for several elections.

The term populism is used to refer to almost any movement that

emerges from the grassroots and reflects a general disenchantment

with elites. Their precise policy positions can vary depending on

circumstance.

Here are recent examples

George Wallace – who ran several

times for president – represented the

interests of the Southern Populists who were argued to be upset that

liberal elites were forcing changes on racial relationships

in the South.

Ross Perot’s candidacy in 1992

and 1996 was fueled in part by groups turned off by the

existing parties and increasingly distrustful of

establishment politics.

Currently many argue that the Tea Party is at root a populist

movement.

Some claim it is anti-populist

though.

The same argument is/was made about the

Occupy Wall Street

movement.

Populists like to scream and raise their hands in the air.

This might be worth a read: Gore Vidal: The Virgil of American

populism

Populism is probably less an ideology than political movement that flares up from

time to time when the general population sours on the elites that run government

and business in the nation.

Populists can stand for anything that pits the little guys against the big guy.

Populists are an ongoing feature of political in the United States

As we will see, it also a feature that the founding generation did not think was especially beneficial.

Much of the design of the American constitutional system –

as we will see soon enough.

Progressivism

A precise definition of progressivism is difficult to

establish. Here’s one person’s attempt.

Contemporary liberalism can be traced back to the progressive movement, which

was especially active in the period from 1890 – the 1920s. The era has become

known as the Progressive Era.

While the era was argued to be over in the 1920s, the spirit of the movement

continued through the New Deal and the Great Society, and helped fuel the Civil

Rights Movement.

The movement was a response to the laissez faire policies common during the Gilded Age as well as the

hardships suffered during the Great Depression of 1890s. The impulses behind it were similar to those

behind both socialism and communism.

It saw government as a necessary means to solve a variety of social problems, especially those that

resulted from the increased inequalities brought on the by industrial revolution.

The progressive movement had many goals, including eliminating corruption from government and

improving governmental efficiency.

It also sought to expand participation and strengthen the

political power of the middle classes.

A lot of contemporary conservative politics is oriented towards undoing what progressives

established during this time.

The current divide between liberals and conservatives can be

traced to this dispute over the New Deal.

As opposed to socialism and communism however, progressives

didn’t push for nationalizing industry and other institutions, but rather to regulate them in order to

minimize their ability to perpetuate inequities and to restrain the growing political

power of corporations.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries both the Republican and Democratic

Parties had progressive wings. In 1912, ex-President Teddy Roosevelt formed the

Progressive – or Bull Moose – Party and took with him many progressive

Republicans. In the early 1930s, many progressives would join the Democratic Party as part of the New Deal Coalition.

Progressives were responsible for many of the regulations and

regulatory agencies established during this time.

Examples:

The Federal ReserveThe Interstate Commerce Commission

The Food and Drug AdministrationThe Federal Trade Commission

Security and Exchange CommissionNational Labor Relations Board

Each of these were designed to allow for the national government

to alleviate some perceived problem created by unregulated

laissez-faire capitalism.

This would be replaced with regulatory capitalism.

This movement had a major impact on the development of politics and government in the

early to mid 20th Century.

Nationalism

Fascism

While neither nationalism or fascism were major political forces in the United States, they did have major impacts on the U.S.

due to their impact on the politics of Italy, Germany and Japan.

One often hears these terms used in contemporary debate, so they are worth

knowing. See Fascism and Ideology.

Definition of nationalism:

loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially : a sense of national

consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on

promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or

supranational groups.

Definitions of fascism:

1 - a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above

the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader,

severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

2 - a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of

army fascism and brutality

The term is often used to refer to political forces that see

authoritarian control as preferable to a society that respects civil

liberties.

Both fascism and nationalism grew out of opposition to the growth of liberal

democracy, the rise of individualism and a rationalist orientation to government.

Fascism promoted a collectivist viewpoint of society where people are considered as

parts of national and/or racial groups.

Violence was a central component of fascism. It was celebrated and encouraged. And it helped with

recruitment.

Benito Mussolini is credited – blamed? –

with the development of fascism in Italy

between the 1920s and 1940s and the

creation of the National Fascist

Party. Adolph Hitler was an early admirer

and developed a similar party in

Germany.

Mussolini’s style

proved to be

influential.

Again, lots of screaming, this time with clenched fists.

Fascists movements were organized around a shared

national identity within each country.

It is argued that one reason that a strong fascist movement never

developed in the United States is that it does not have a similar strong – and simple – identity.

Next Section

Ideology in the United States after World War 2

In these last few slides I’ll try to outline the recent history of

ideology in the United States and clarify – to the degree I can – what

ideological terms means today.

I’ll also try to outline the internal disputes that exist within each

ideology.

These two paragraphs from Wikipedia’s entry on left-right

politics should help describe where the left and right are currently aligned in American politics:

1 - “The contemporary Left in the United States is usually understood as a category including New Deal liberals, Rawlsian liberals, social democrats and civil

libertarians, and is generally identified with the Democratic Party. In general, left-wing implies a commitment to egalitarianism, support for social

policies that favor the working class, and multiculturalism. The contemporary Left usually defines itself as promoting government regulation of business,

commerce and industry; protection of fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of

religion; and government intervention on behalf of racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities and the working

class.”

As mentioned in a previous set of slides, liberals tend to focus on

equality.

Most liberal positions can be understood as ways to enhance

equality, or equal protection.

Liberalism also takes a more collective approach to solving

problems.

Meaning that it sees governmental intervention as a legitimate way to

solve problems

2 – “The contemporary Right in the United States is usually understood as a category including social

conservatives, Christian conservatives and free market liberals, and is generally identified with the Republican Party. In general, right-wing implies a commitment to

conservative Christian values, support for a free-market system, and "traditional family values". The

contemporary Right usually defines itself as promoting deregulation of banking, commerce, and industry.”

Conservatism tends to prioritize liberty over equality.

Efforts to promote equality – like providing public education or health care –

compromise individualism by imposing public solutions on the general population

and using tax payer dollars to fund it.

Conservatives are more likely to support efforts by the private

sector or voluntary organizations like churches to solve public

problems.

And if they cannot solve the problems, then perhaps they

cannot be solved.

We’ve already discussed the transformation of the term liberal.

Classical liberalism has much in common with certain variant of contemporary

conservatism – or libertarianism. Contemporary liberalism is better seen as an outgrowth of progressivism, or social

liberalism.

Blog Posts

LiberalsLiberalism

While it still embraces market economies, it argues that market freedoms ought to be

balanced against the needs of the community. Economic and social issues like poverty, health

care and education are legitimate subjects government can deal with.

Liberals also support the expansion of civil and political rights and the equal protection of the

laws.

Modern liberalism generally sees government as a force that can be used successfully to address social ills, often

those created by the private sector: pollution for example.

Though we will be using the term “liberalism” its probably best to think of

what follows in terms of “progressivism.”

This was the assumption that formed the basis for the

progressive movement, the New Deal and the Great Society.

I mentioned before that the political divisions that evolved during the New Deal continue to define the nature of ideological dispute today.

Few conservative voices existed during that period. Liberalism became dominant with the

election of Franklin Roosevelt in 1932, and would continue to be so through the late 1970s, though it began to fragment considerably with

the election of Richard Nixon in 1968.

As we will note soon enough, the current Democratic Party tends to be liberal and the current Republican Party tends to be conservative. Though there are variations

within each. We’ll try to make sense of this over the course of the semester.

The positions of the parties shift however and its worth understanding the nature of

these shifts.

Theodore Roosevelt became a leader of the Progressive

movement. He has worked for civil service reform and against

police corruption before becoming president.

As president he aggressively sought to break apart

monopolies and established regulatory agencies. He also sought to increase American

influence overseas.

Franklin Roosevelt was elected president in 1932 with the promise to use aggressive government policies – the

New Deal - to deal with the problems related to the Great

Depression.

This included the imposition of regulations to prevent future depressions as well policies

designed to assist those hurt by the economic collapse.

John Maynard Keynes was a British economist who argued that aggressive

governmental intervention could help pick the

economy up out of the Great Depression.

His theories are still promoted as ways to jump start the economy when it

is recession. This is referred to as Keynesian

Economics.

This argument challenged the prevailing idea that the ordinary

operations of the free market would allow the economy to pick

itself.

This was also referred to as classical economics.

Harry Truman followed FDR

into the White House and

began to use his influence to fight

racial segregation.

Lyndon Johnson had the legislative influence to

muscle civil rights legislation through

Congress as well as Great Society programs that

attempted to use governmental programs to deal effectively with

poverty.

Johnson’s presidency proved to be the high watermark of liberalism in the United

States – the idea that governmental programs – notably national programs

could address social and economic problems.

But a backlash was underway which would lead to the development of the

conservative movement.

We are going to skip over a lot of the contemporary history of liberalism, but here’s a source to dig into a bot more

on your own.

Modern Liberalism in the United States.

Conservatism

conservatism, political doctrine that emphasizes the value of traditional institutions and practices.

Conservatism is a preference for the historically inherited rather than the abstract and ideal. This preference has traditionally rested on an organic conception of society—that is, on the belief that

society is not merely a loose collection of individuals but a living organism comprising closely connected, interdependent members. Conservatives thus favor

institutions and practices that have evolved gradually and are manifestations of continuity and stability.

Some blog tags:

ConservativesConservatism

Even during the New Deal, a conservative coalition in

Congress existed that attempted – unsuccessfully

– to stop New Deal programs. Their leader was Ohio Senator Robert Taft.

These folks were also referred to as the Old Right.

Liberalism/progressivism would be the dominant ideology for several decades following the onset of the Great Depression. If you need a

specific year for when this period ended, try 1980 and the election of Ronald Reagan who

represented the conservative wing of the Republican Party.

Conservatism was considered to be a non-factor until then, but forces would begin to develop

that would seek to change that.

A small handful of writers started articulating ideas that would become the basis for the rise

of the conservative movement beginning in the 1960s and is still powerful today.

As opposed to liberalism – which rested on the idea that government should be an active force

in ensuring equity in society – conservatism rested on at least two general ideas.

1 – That policies that promote equity by redistributing benefits and resources in society

violate individual freedom – which they consider to be a superior value.

2 – Traditional social relationship – especially those based on local communities, religion and

family – have merit, and they should not be interfered with by governmental policies.

In 1953, Russell Kirk wrote the Conservative Mind

which consolidated conservative principles.

Many at odds with the principles that guided the progressive movement –

notably the idea that societies could be

transformed based on newly developed theories.

“In a revolutionary epoch, sometimes men taste every novelty, sicken of

them all, and return to ancient principles so long disused that they seem refreshingly hearty when they

are rediscovered.”

Click here for lots of Kirk quotes.

He was also a critic of libertarianism

“Libertarians (like anarchists and Marxists) generally believe that human nature is good,

though damaged by certain social institutions. Conservatives, on the contrary, hold that "in

Adam's fall we sinned all": human nature, though compounded of both good and evil, is

irremediably flawed; so the perfection of society is impossible, all human beings being

imperfect.”

Along with William Buckley, Kirk founded the National Review, a magazine that

further helped develop and promote conservative

viewpoints.

Soon enough candidates began running for office

based on those ideas. These folks were respond to the

New Right.

This might be his most famous quote:

“A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling

'Stop!‘”

This has led to the accusation that conservatism is less about ideology and simply a reactionary movement

that simply opposes reform and wishes to return to a previous political state

where they enjoyed more power.

The movement began to pick up steam in the early 1960s.

The 1964 Republican Convention pit moderate – establishment, even liberal

– Republicans against an increasingly strong conservative sector. The later

was able to ensure its candidate became the party’s nominee.

Here’s background on “movement conservatism.” This refers to the ideological group that attempted

to first control the Republican Party and then the national

government in order to further its aims.

For more info click on Conservatism in the United States.

Barry Goldwater would also lead the conservative

coalition, and would be the Republican nominee

for the presidency in 1964 – he was defeated

handily, but set the stage for the election of Ronald

Reagan in 1980.

Goldwater opposed the welfare state, labor unions and the Civil Rights Act of

1964.

He would later also opposed some of the positions of the religious right –

like abortion, gay rights and the role of religion in the public sector – so he

would later become more identified as a libertarian than a conservative.

A couple images from the time

We will discuss this point further later in class – but the current ideological divisions that exist between the two major parties can be traced to this

period of time.

Each major party went through a process where the ideologues in each forced other out of power, or event

out of the party.

Ronald Reagan, who nominated

Goldwater at the 1964 Republican

Convention began to

implement conservative

policies.

He was limited in doing so because conservatives did not control the House of

Representatives.

Note that conservatives did not consider Republicans like Richard Nixon as being

conservative. In many ways Nixon expanded a number of liberal initiatives when he was

president. These included the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and

proposing a minimum salary rather than welfare.

In 1994 Newt Gingrich was responsible for

developing the electoral strategy that allowed Republicans to

control the House of Representatives for the

first time in 40 years.

It involved running a national election with a

large number of Republican candidates

for the House committed to a series

of legislative proposals collectively known as

the Contract with America.

The contract featured a number of substantive and procedural

components designed to reduce the size and scope of the national

government.

Click here for a survey from the Heritage Foundation.

Substantive Proposals

1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT2. THE TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT3. THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT4. THE FAMILY REINFORCEMENT ACT

5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT6. THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESTORATION ACT

7. THE SENIOR CITIZENS FAIRNESS ACT8. THE JOB CREATION AND WAGE ENHANCEMENT

ACT9. THE COMMON SENSE LEGAL REFORM ACT

10. THE CITIZEN LEGISLATURE ACT

Procedural Changes

• FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress; • SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse; • THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third; • FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs; • FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee; • SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public; • SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase; • EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.

Conservatism Today

There are a great many subgroups within the conservative

movement.

Conservatives push a variety of issues, but not everyone pushes the same issue with

the same degree of severity. There can also be conflict between these different groups. They don’t all agree on all the

issues that fall under the label “conservative.”

One way to get a handle on the internal conflicts is to look through the

American Conservative.

You’ll see these terms used a lot.

Lets very quickly look through the following terms:

Fiscal ConservativesSocial Conservatives

NeoconservativesPaleoconservatives

Fiscal Conservatism

This ideology looks primarily at the level of government spending and seeks to

maintain balanced budgets. Generally fiscal conservatives seek to balance budgets by reducing or eliminating

governmental programs. They generally support free markets and oppose many

regulations on business which they consider unnecessary.

Theoconservatism, or Social Conservatism

This ideology focuses on what it sees as traditional values, primarily the central role the traditional family, established

Christian churches and local governments play in the governing system. Recent focus

has been on the teaching of evolution, abortion, birth control, same sex marriage, and the relationship between the church

and state.

Neoconservatism

This was a movement developed by many ex-liberals who were disillusioned with the promise of liberalism. While this ideology takes positions on a variety of issues, it is

most closely identified with muscular, forceful foreign policy, and a willingness to

use American military power to pursue American interests.

Paleoconservatism

“Paleo” means “old” so this movement can be understood as an attempt to revive an older version of conservatism that dominated politics prior to the New

Deal, and helped prevent the United States from joining the League of Nations. It is distinct from other

versions of conservatism in its return to a more isolationist viewpoints. It is far more anti-immigrant

than other types of conservatism. They are less likely to support military intervention than other conservatives.

Reactionary

You will sometimes also hear this term used to describe, usually in a negative

sense, some conservatives – paleos especially. Generally this describes a

person who is opposed to recent political changes and would like to return to a

previous political regime.

Its important to keep in mind that while these groups can find common ground

when it is necessary to ward off liberalism, they fight amongst themselves for what

conservatism stands for and for what the goals of the movement ought to be.

Sometimes an group can find common ground with liberal groups though – which

can make the political environment confusing

A special look at libertarianism

Blog Posts:

Libertarianism

Libertarians are often considered to be part of the conservative movement, but they have a

distinct identity that sometimes puts them at odds with

conservatism.

Here are basic definitions of libertarianism.

“ a set of related political philosophies that uphold liberty as the

highest political end. This includes emphasis on the primacy of individual

liberty,[political freedom, and voluntary association.”

“Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the

equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty, and property-rights that people have naturally,

before governments are created. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping,

and fraud.” – libertarianism.org

Though libertarians disagree about what governments should do,

many argue for something called the Minimal State – also known as the night-watchman state “ with

powers limited to those necessary to protect citizens against violence,

theft, and fraud.”

Leading libertarian theorists include:

Friedrich Hayek

Ludwig von Mises

Robert Nozick

What do Libertarians believe?

Are you a Llibertarian?

There’s a way you can find out. An enterprising libertarian developed the

world’s smallest political quiz (take it here) which asks people their opinion on

whether government should have a role to play in economic and personal issues. The results show where someone belongs on

The Nolan Chart.

Here’s the chart:

It suggests that if you ask people a handful of questions on personal and

economic freedoms you can determine whether they are Libertarian, Liberal,

Conservative, Statist or Centrist.

What do these mean according to the chart?

Centrist

Centrists prefer a "middle ground" regarding government control of the economy and personal behavior. Depending on the issue, they sometimes

favor government intervention and sometimes support individual freedom of choice. Centrists pride themselves on keeping an open mind, tend to oppose

"political extremes," and emphasize what they describe as "practical" solutions to problems.

Liberal

Liberals usually embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but tend to support significant

government control of the economy. They generally support a government-funded "safety net" to help the

disadvantaged, and advocate strict regulation of business. Liberals tend to favor environmental

regulations, defend civil liberties and free expression, support government action to promote equality, and

tolerate diverse lifestyles.

Libertarian

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to

protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the

free market, and defend civil liberties.

Conservative

Conservatives tend to favor economic freedom, but frequently support laws to restrict personal behavior

that violates "traditional values." They oppose excessive government control of business, while

endorsing government action to defend morality and the traditional family structure. Conservatives usually

support a strong military, oppose bureaucracy and high taxes, favor a free-market economy, and endorse

strong law enforcement.

Statist

Statists want government to have a great deal of power over the economy and individual behavior.

They frequently doubt whether economic liberty and individual freedom are practical options in today's

world. Statists tend to distrust the free market, support high taxes and centralized planning of the

economy, oppose diverse lifestyles, and question the importance of civil liberties.

Here’s one person’s assessment of recent and historical personalities and

where they might fit on the chart.

This might be a helpful quote:

“Liberals favor government action to promote equality,

whereas conservatives favor government action to promote

order. Libertarians favor freedom and oppose government action to promote

either equality or order.”

Wrap Up

This is plenty to chew on.

But let’s walk out with a few random graphs regarding ideology in the

general population. Some of these are for entertainment purposes only