HAVING A RIOT WITH
DOMESTIC HISTORY
1898-1945
Fun with Early American History was certainly fun. Domestic History
Since 1945 was even more fun. But, listen to what the critics have
to say about Having A Riot . . .
“Reading this made me wish I had lived in a different century!”
-- Thomas Jefferson
“Next time we’re studying sports in the 1920s in my PE classes, Having a Riot will be
required reading for all my students – it will be absolutely great for context.”
-- MaryBeth Rykken
“Good.”
-- Calvin Coolidge
“Having a Riot is really cool stuff – very hip.”
-- Maynard G. Krebs
“Having a Riot provided some great reading on the campaign trail. The section on DuBois
and Washington is insightful and penetrating in its analysis.”
-- Barak Obama
“Next year I’m planning on having my AP students write an interpretive essay on Having a
Riot. I’m trying to decide whether we should do it before or after we read The Invisible
Man.”
-- Karl Wallin
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
1
“Bully, I say! This is really a riot! I haven’t had this much
fun since the charge up San Juan Hill!”
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
2
AP AMERICAN HISTORY
DOMESTIC US HISTORY: 1898-1945
THE SET UP
Due to the time crunch related to the National Exam, we have had limited time to analyze the
domestic history of the nation in the 20th century. During term 3, we used class time to read a
rather extensive summary of post-1945 domestic history (you have that with your materials) and
now we need to do some work with the first half of the century. This reading is meant to be
thorough enough, but concise. Use the skills you have learned for the past many weeks and bring
your best analytical powers to bear on what you read here. I also suggest having your text in front
of you for reference as your proceed.
Also, remember that we have explored the foreign policy history of this period during the past
several weeks. Keep that history in your mind as we add another layer here. In your very active
and energetic minds, think about the connections between foreign and domestic history – one is
usually playing on the other, wouldn’t you agree? Think, for example, of how the current recession
is connected to oil prices and America’s Mideast policies or overall trade policy.
One other note: Remember the Exam Review Site that I have created on-line – there’s a good
outline there (by 50 year time increments) and a good set of review slides. That can help you,
particularly with weak areas prior to the exam. Work hard and work smart.
The information I am summarizing here comes from some of my own research from a variety of
sources and also draws heavily from Mark Epstein’s book, Preparing for the AP United States
History Examination (2006).
LET’S START WITH 1898-1917: THE PROGESSIVE ERA
We have analyzed the foreign policy of this period and you know that by 1900 we were in the
category of a “world power.” Remember that much of our involvement internationally was being
driven by a dramatically altered US economy – one that was becoming an industrial giant. The
ever-expanding economy of the nation, however, tended to benefit those at the very top of the
social ladder – approximately 50% of the nation’s wealth was in the hands of the upper 1% of the
population. Below the surface, then, of this powerful growth, many problems were lurking.
Problems related to urbanization, difficulties for workers, instability for farmers, and second-class
status for women and minorities brought forth cries for REFORM by a socially-conscious middle and
upper-middle class of professionals, social workers, educators, spiritual leaders, and journalists.
Many organizations emerged that centered on reform and the political leaders of the period began
to reflect the rising tide of PROGRESSIVISM. What emerged from all of this is the first great
manifestation of LIBERALISM in the 20th century.
(Note: pages 664-693 of KCB deals extensively with this period of reform – I would suggest paging
through the book for pictures and diagrams that accompany the text)
BIG PICTURE: 20TH CENTURY PROGRESSIVISM
Realize that this push for reform is the beginning of an ongoing struggle for change that is still
being played out in America. The word “liberalism” is often used to describe this struggle and that
is an appropriate use of the term. Here are a few points about liberalism:
♦ It is the true expression of American democracy going back to the traditions of Jefferson
and Jackson.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
3
♦ It represents an alliance between the public and the government to guard against and
correct the abuses of capitalism. Balancing the interests of the public and the large
corporations has always been one of the great challenges for our government.
♦ Reform movements always seek to do two things: one, to stop short term economic,
political, and social problems; and two, to bring about fundamental changes within the
existing economic, political, and social institutions of our country.
♦ While it is generally true that liberalism is played out through the Democratic Party in
America, realize that “liberal” ideas cut across party lines in varying degrees. For
convenience, however, we certainly see the liberal tradition at work in the following
administrations:
Roosevelt
Wilson
Taft
1900-1920
Franklin Roosevelt
1933-1945
PROGRESSIVE ERA
NEW DEAL
Harry Truman
1945-1953
FAIR DEAL
John Kennedy
1961-1963
NEW FRONTIER
Lyndon Johnson
1963-1969
GREAT SOCIETY
WHAT ARE THE COMMON THREADS?
Economic Reform: Reforms that seek to control corporate behavior and check the abuses
practiced by large corporations.
Political Reforms: Reforms that extend or protect the political rights of previously disenfranchised
groups, are intended to make public officials more accountable to the public, and attack corruption
and abuses of power by political officials.
Social Reforms: Reforms that seek to protect and promote the human and social rights of
deprived groups in society.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Realize that much of historical discussion is “political” and that historians are often accused of
being “to the left.” Republicans, for example, certainly do not see themselves as opponents of
reform, even though they represent the CONSERVATIVE impulse in our society. They would argue
that they believe in reform and democracy, but have other ways of setting out to achieve these
time-honored goals. ALSO, realize that MORE RADICAL HISTORIANS argue that “liberalism” is
really nothing more than an alliance between the government and the forces of capitalism that is
designed to keep power in the hands of a few (elites) and maintain control of power (both
economic and political) – therefore really only preserving the status quo. It depends very much, as
you can see, on your perspective. By the way, realize that these debates go on during every
election campaign and we saw this in the campaign of 2008 – what did McCain represent? What
did Clinton and Obama represent? What “language” did each side use in attacking the other? Why
did McCain, for example, harshly criticize President Bush for his handling of the Katrina situation –
even though McCain is a “conservative” and therefore supposedly against heavy federal
involvement? Why did Clinton tried to label Obama and “elitist?” And, isn’t THAT an interesting
situation?
WHAT EXACTLY DID THE PROGRESSIVES WANT?
As noted above, the Progressives sought reform in three areas. What follows is a short summary of
how these reforms were carried out at the STATE LEVEL and under the PRESIDENTS of this period.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
4
REFORMS AT THE LOCAL AND STATE LEVELS
Though it often gets most of the attention, reforms at the national level really came after such
reform attempts had been stirring at state and local levels for years. To many progressives,
political corruption was really a local problem and one of the end results of urbanization. The push
for the minimum wage, control on length of the workday, attempts to ban child labor, workmen’s
compensation laws, standardizing building codes aimed at greater safety, graduated income tax,
and more regulation of the railroads and insurance companies – these things were noticeable
during this period.
As Wisconsinites, we can be very proud that during this time Robert LaFollette, onetime
Congressman, Governor, and eventual Senator from our state, led the charge on reforms at the
state level. The “Wisconsin Idea” became synonymous with reforms, particularly in the political
realm. The direct primary system was adopted, for example, to allow voters to become involved in
the selection of candidates for office; laws limiting how much could be spent in campaigns were
passed, as well as laws to control the power of lobbyists. Wisconsin became the model of a
progressive state during the early years of the century (note the discussion of LaFollette on page
669 of KCB).
SIDEBAR: My grandfather (TM Rykken) was born in the 1897 and grew up during this period – he
was 21 in 1918. He reflected the impulses of the Progressive Movement in his work as a
missionary among Native people in Wisconsin near Green Bay. He supported Bob LaFollette in the
1924 Presidential election. I never had the opportunity to meet him because he died quite young.
I bring this up to you because it is important, if you have the opportunity, to interview grandparents
or other elders in your family because you may learn things that HELP EXPLAIN WHO YOU ARE!
That’s history, man!
THE MUCKRAKERS
Investigative reporters and journalists during the Progressive Era wrote about abuses that were
prevalent in America. Teddy labeled them the “muckrakers” – a pejorative term that stuck – on
page 667 there is a document excerpt that highlights this. He accused them of sensationalizing
the issues. Some of the most famous of the group were:
♦ Jacob Riis (How the Other Half Lives). Riis’s 1890 expose of urban poverty brought
attention to the plight of the poor.
♦ Upton Sinclair (The Jungle). Sinclair wrote his book in 1906 and exposed the plight of the
Chicago meatpackers. The Pure Food and Drug and Meat Inspection Acts were prompted
by Sinclair’s work.
♦ Ida Tarbell (History of the Standard Oil Company). Tarbell targeted the company’s abuses
so effectively that it was actually successfully prosecuted in 1911 – there’s a picture of
good old Ida on page 666. I wouldn’t want to mess with her!
♦ Frank Norris (The Octopus). This book exposed corrupt politicians who conspired with the
Southern Pacific Railroad to exploit farm workers in California.
REFORMS UNDER TEDDY ROOSVELT
Roosevelt promised a “Square Deal” for citizens and appeared to want to “take on” big business.
He saw the Presidency as an active player (steward) for the American people. His actions as an
arbitrator in the United Mine Workers strike (led by John Mitchell) in 1902 illustrates this
philosophy. He basically forced the workers to back off their full demands, but also made it clear to
the mine owners that he would “take over” the mines (with the Army) if necessary. Here is a
summary of other areas of reform that happened while Teddy was in office.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
5
♦ 1903: The Department of Commerce and Labor was created.
♦ 1903: The passage of the Elkins Act that strengthened the Interstate Commerce Act of
1887 which brought more governmental control of the railroads.
♦ 1903: The Bureau of Corporations was created to investigate anti-trust violations (trusts
were “monopolies” that needed to be “broken up”). There is a good political cartoon that
illustrates this on page 674.
♦ 1906: The Hepburn Act further empowered the Interstate Commerce Commission –
again this brought greater control of the railroads and established fair rules of
competition.
♦ 1906: The Pure Food and Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Act brought greater
governmental involvement in assuring the safety of consumer products.
♦ In the area of conservation and the environment, Roosevelt was a real leader. The
Newlands Reclamation Bill, for example, added 150 million acres of forest to the
national reserve. Roosevelt sought to balance the needs of industry and development
with the need to preserve the natural environment. Note the picture on page 676 of
Roosevelt and John Muir – and where was John Muir from? Yes! You are correct –
Portage, Wisconsin! The same home town as FJ Turner! Can you imagine!?
REFORMS UNDER TAFT
Roosevelt sort of “handed off” the Presidency to his hand-picked successor William Howard Taft –
there is a cartoon depicting that on page 682 – let’s face it, both these guys were great for the
political cartoonists of the day. Taft essentially should be viewed as a continuation of the basic
ideas of Roosevelt, although in some cases, an expanded version of those reforms.
♦ 1910: The Mann-Elkins Act strengthened the Interstate Commerce Commission (similar to
the Elkins and Hepburn Acts) by giving to it the power to regulate the new communications
industry.
♦ Continued Trust-Busting: Taft actually “busted” twice as many trusts in four years as
Roosevelt did in eight. Two major corporations were actually dissolved under Taft:
American Tobacco Company and the Standard Oil Company.
THE POLITICS OF REFORM: THE REPUBLICAN SPLIT OF 1912
The path of reform was interrupted and became entwined in a major split of the party heading into
the 1912 election. Essentially the party divided between the Conservative Wing and the
Progressive Wing, a split that was played out in the personalities of Roosevelt and Taft – note the
cartoon on page 686. The rhetoric of this campaign is really some of the best in our history –
absolutely hilarious due to who was involved. Four major issues divided the party in that year:
1. The Payne-Aldrich Tariff (1909) was a high protective tariff that was supported by the
conservatives but opposed by the progressives. Taft sided with the conservatives.
2. The Ballinger-Pinchot controversy (1910) grew out of western opposition to conservation
measures because they inhibited western development. Ballinger, Secretary of the Interior,
was identified with the westerners and conservatives who opposed conservation measures.
Pinchot represented the progressive (and eastern) wing that very much favored
conservation measures. Taft threw his support (all 330 pounds of it) behind the
conservatives.
3. The Speaker of the House controversy erupted over the role Joseph Cannon, House
Speaker, was playing. Cannon was extremely powerful and decidedly conservative. Again,
Taft chose to support the Canonites and lost the progressives in the process.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
6
4. Taft’s anti-trust suit against US Steel (1911) dated back to 1908, when US Steel purchased
the bankrupt Tennessee Coal and Iron Company. The combination seemed to be in
violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Roosevelt’s position had been that US Steel had
provided a public service to the nation by acquiring a company that, if it defaulted on its
loans, could have dire consequences for the economy. Roosevelt assured US Steel that the
Justice Department would not prosecute it, but under Taft that’s exactly what happened.
This was one of the things that caused the famous “Roosevelt-Taft split” – a break-up that
had major consequences for the Republican Party.
This election really turned into a fiasco for the Republicans! LaFollette (our guy) tried to assume
the progressive mantle and was trying to muscle Taft out of the picture. Teddy (former President
who retired MUCH too young!) decided that he wanted to “jump back in the ring.” Taft was able to
regain the nomination (even though he didn’t like politics much!) and Roosevelt bolted the party
forming the Bull Moose Party. The split in the party, of course, paved the way for the relatively
unknown Democratic reform governor of New Jersey, Dr. Woodrow Wilson. Eugene Debs was out
there running also and managed to receive over a million votes (he was a Socialist). Examine the
election results on page 689 and the election map on page 690 to get more details. Also, you may
want to look at the 1916 election map and see the changes – a REALLY interesting question is why
Wisconsin went for Hughes – perhaps later when you have more time!
PROGRESSIVE REFORMS UNDER WILSON
Before becoming President, Wilson was a reform governor in New Jersey. Recall the information
you already know about him because of our study of the war and the Versailles episode.
Domestically, he is remembered for wanting to tackle the “triple wall of privilege”: the tariff, the
trusts, and the banking industry. He generally supported big business and put his energies into
regulating competition. These measures were enacted while he was President:
♦ The Underwood Tariff (1913): This was the first significant reduction of the tariff in 50
years. He was an advocate of what we would call “free trade” today. He thought lower
tariffs would benefit consumers and force businesses to be more efficient due to foreign
competition.
♦ The Clayton Anti-Trust Act (1914): This law modified the Sherman Anti-Trust Act (1890) by
exempting unions from restraint of trade provisions, but only when pursuing legitimate
aims. This enabled the government to have some power over unions and included
provisions that prohibited unfair and illegal business practices. Note the political cartoon
on page 693.
♦ The Federal Trade Commission (1914) was created to regulate business by controlling
trusts and monopolies and investigate misconduct.
♦ The Federal Reserve Act (1913) addressed currency problems, especially the inability of
the federal government to regulate the money supply and to regulate banking. All
national banks became part of the Federal Reserve System. The nation was divided into
12 regional Federal Reserve Districts and the regional banks extended credit and
accepted deposits from member banks. The “Fed” as it came to be known, also regulated
credit by either raising or lowering interest rates. In a sense, the Federal Reserve System
was the logical extension of the National Bank – that oft-debated institution from early
American history.
♦ The Adamson Eight-Hour Act (1916) was passed to control working hours and also provide
compensation for overtime work. This had been a big labor demand for many years.
♦ The Keating-Owen Child Labor Act (1916) prohibited interstate trade involving
commodities produced by children under the age of 14. Eventually, however, this law was
deemed unconstitutional.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
7
PROGRESSIVES AND THE SUPREME COURT AND THE CONSTITUTION
The Progressives generally had mixed success when it came to the Supreme Court. Three key
cases from the period are:
♦ Lochner v. New York (1905): This invalidated a New York State laws that had limited night
work hours in bakeries. The court contended that the law was a violation of the work
contract between the employer and employee.
♦ Muller v. Oregon (1908): This upheld a law that limited work hours for women laundry
workers only. It did not apply to other workers. The “inherent weakness” of females
required their protection by the government. There is a nice piece on this in KCB on page
671.
♦ Adkins v. Children’s Hospital (1923) held that a maximum ten-hour work day for women
workers in Washington, D. C. was unconstitutional.
FOUR KEY AMENDMENTS
Between 1913 and 1920, the following amendments brought dramatic changes to American life
and culture. All of them reflect the Progressive impulses of the period:
♦ Amendment 16 (1913) empowered Congress to implement an income tax. Earlier in
history this tax had been deemed unconstitutional.
♦ Amendment 17 (1913) provided for direct election of US Senators (they had been chosen
by state legislatures to this point).
♦ Amendment 18 (1919) prohibited the “manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating
liquors” within the US. This was repealed by the 21st Amendment.
♦ Amendment 19 (1920) gave women the right to vote. This was the culmination of years of
struggle for the vote going back to 1848 and the Seneca Falls Convention. Good pictures in
KCB on pages 668, 670, and 712. Be proud of your spiritual ancestors, young women!
Also, maybe we should bring back some of the hats they wore!
SIDEBAR: A COUPLE OF FREE-RESPONSE STYLE QUESTIONS FROM THIS PERIOD:
1. Discuss the role the government played in reforming American social, economic, and
political life in the early 20th Century. In your response, include TWO of the following:
a. reforms at the federal level
b. reforms at the state level
c. reforms at the local/city level
RESPONSE: You want to keep in mind that reforms emanate from both the government and from
grassroots movements. However, the question asks you to address only government-related
reforms. This is a straightforward question in which you identify those reforms that you deem
significant and discuss what abuses they were intended to correct.
2. Evaluate the administrations of Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson in relation to their records as
progressive presidents.
REPONSE: Again, this is a straightforward question. It nonetheless requires a high-level thinking
skill: the ability to evaluate a president’s record on reform. Identify the reform measures taken by
each, evaluate the success of those reforms, and discuss whether there is a pattern of social,
economic, and political reforms initiated by those presidents.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
8
FINAL THOUGHTS ON PROGRESSIVISM
By the early 1920s the progressive movement had run its course. What we can say about the
movement is that it created an atmosphere in which fundamental attitudes about the role of
government in American life were changed. The debate over the role of government, of course,
remains central even in the early 21st Century and we hear many echoes yet today of those early
20th century debates. In KCB there is a WONDERFUL (and I mean WONDERFUL) analysis of the
Progressives on page 704. Wow.
(Note: The following summary of the domestic history of the 1920s comes from The United States
Information Agency. I’m including it here because it is a concise review of the period of the 1920s.
Chapter 32 of KCB covers the 1920s. Once again, I would suggest paging through and noting the
pictures, cartoons, and document excerpts that are in the book.)
POSTWAR UNREST
The transition from war to peace was, for many, tumultuous. A massive influenza epidemic, which
had spread rapidly throughout Europe in 1917, broke out in the United States in the spring of 1918.
Before it vanished a year later, as mysteriously as it had begun, it claimed the lives of more than
half-a-million Americans. The immediate economic boom right after the war led to high
expectations that were quickly sunk once the postwar economy returned to normal. In turn, labor
became dissatisfied with the rising costs of living, long hours and unsympathetic management. In
1919 alone, over 4 million workers went on strike. During that summer, moreover, race riots broke
out in both the North and South.
Yet the event that triggered the greatest national outcry and concern had occurred two years earlier
outside the United States: the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 in Russia. With morale low, Americans
became fearful that, just as a small faction had seized power in Russia, so could a similar group
take over the United States. This fear crystallized when, in April 1919, the postal service
intercepted nearly 40 bombs addressed to prominent citizens. Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer
set up a new office of general intelligence within the Justice Department, and appointed J. Edgar
Hoover as its head. Hoover began collecting files on known radicals, and raids on various
organizations led to deportations of scores of people. Although Palmer's dire warnings continued to
fuel what became known as the "Red Scare," the threats never materialized; and by the summer of
1920, the American people realized that the United States was safe from anarchy.
THE BOOMING 1920s
In the presidential election of 1920, the overwhelming victory of the Republican nominee, Warren
G. Harding, was final evidence of the general repudiation of Wilson's internationalism and idealism.
As journalist William Allen White explained, the American people were "tired of issues, sick at heart
of ideals, and weary of being noble." The 1920 election was also the first in which women
throughout the nation voted for a presidential candidate. In 1919 Congress had submitted to the
states the 19th Amendment, which was ratified in time to permit women to vote the following year.
In keeping with the prevailing prosperity (at least in the urban areas of the country), governmental
policy during the 1920s was eminently conservative. It was based upon the belief that if
government did what it could to foster private business, prosperity would eventually encompass
most of the rest of the population.
Accordingly, Republican policies were intended to create the most favorable conditions for U.S.
industry. The tariff acts of 1922 and 1930 brought tariff barriers to new heights, guaranteeing U.S.
manufacturers in one field after another a monopoly of the domestic market. The second of these
tariffs, the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930, embodied rates so high that more than 1,000 economists
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
9
petitioned President Herbert Hoover to veto it: subsequent events bore out their predictions of
costly retaliation by other nations. At the same time, the federal government started a program of
tax cuts, reflecting Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's belief that high income taxes prevented the
rich from investing in new industrial enterprises. Congress, in a series of laws passed between
1921 and 1929, responded favorably to his proposals that wartime taxes on income, excess profit
taxes and corporation taxes be repealed outright or drastically reduced.
"The chief business of the American people is business," declared Calvin Coolidge, the dour,
Vermont-born vice president who succeeded to the presidency in 1923 after Harding's death, and
was elected in his own right in 1924 (“Keep cool with Coolidge!”) Coolidge hewed to the
conservative economic policies of the Republican Party, but he was a much abler administrator
than the hapless Harding, whose administration was mired in charges of corruption in the months
before his death – the Teapot Dome Scandal. (Note the comical cartoon on page 760 in KCB
related to Coolidge and the Republican connection to business). Throughout the 1920s, private
business received substantial encouragement, including construction loans, profitable mail-carrying
contracts and other indirect subsidies. The Transportation Act of 1920, for example, had already
restored to private management the nation's railways, which had been under government control
during the war. The Merchant Marine, which had been owned and largely operated by the
government from 1917 to 1920, was sold to private operators.
Republican policies in agriculture, however, were meeting mounting criticism, for farmers shared
least in the prosperity of the 1920s. The period from 1900 to 1920 had been one of general farm
prosperity and rising farm prices, with the unprecedented wartime demand for U.S. farm products
providing a strong stimulus to production. Farmers had opened up poor lands long allowed to
remain idle or never before cultivated. As the value of U.S. farms increased, farmers began to buy
goods and machinery that they had never before been able to afford. But by the end of 1920, with
the abrupt end of wartime demand, the commercial agriculture of staple crops such as wheat and
corn fell into sharp decline. Many factors accounted for the depression in American agriculture, but
foremost was the loss of foreign markets. U.S. farmers could not easily sell in areas where the
United States was not buying goods because of its own import tariff. The doors of the world market
were slowly swinging shut. When the general depression struck in the 1930s, it merely shattered
agriculture's already fragile state (my Great-Uncles who farmed in North Dakota during this period
used to tell me about the “penny-auctions” during these years – actions that neighbors would take
to stave off foreclosures on friend’s property).
TENSIONS OVER IMMIGRATION
Restriction of foreign immigration during the 1920s marked a significant change in U.S. policy.
Immigration had soared in the late 19th century and peaked in the early 20th century. Between
1900 and 1915, for example, more than 13 million people came to the United States, with the
preponderance from Southern and Eastern Europe. Many of these people were Jewish or Catholic, a
fact that alarmed many older Americans who were predominately Anglo-Saxon and Protestant.
Some resented the newcomers because they competed for low-wage jobs, others because the new
immigrants maintained Old World customs, often lived in urban ethnic enclaves, and seemed to
resist assimilation into the larger American culture (does any of THAT sound familiar?).
As a result of this immigrant surge after World War I, nativist appeals intensified. A reorganized Ku
Klux Klan emerged calling for "100-percent Americanism." Unlike the Klan of Reconstruction, the
new Klan restricted its membership to native-born white Protestants, and campaigned against
Catholics, Jews and immigrants as well as African Americans. By redefining its enemies, the Klan
broadened its appeal to parts of the North and Midwest, and for a time, its membership swelled
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
10
(remember that we had Klan members in Jackson County during this time apparently – yikes!)
Anti-immigration sentiment was codified in a series of measures, culminating in the Immigration
Quota Law of 1924 and a 1929 act. These laws limited the annual number of immigrants to
150,000, to be distributed among peoples of various nationalities in proportion to the number of
their compatriots already in the United States in 1920. One result of these restrictions was to
reduce the appeal of nativist organizations; the Great Depression of the 1930s also caused a sharp
drop in immigration.
CLASH OF CULTURES
Some Americans expressed their discontent with the character of modern life in the 1920s by
focusing on family and religion, as an increasingly urban, secular society came into conflict with
older rural traditions. Fundamentalist preachers such as Billy Sunday, for example, a professional
baseball player turned evangelist, provided an outlet for many who yearned for a return to a
simpler past. Chapter 32 of KCB does an excellent job of spelling out the situation with “cultural
liberation” in the 1920s and how that was challenge traditional ways of thinking and living. We will
get into this topic in more depth after the exam when we look at the post-war culture of the 1950s.
Perhaps the most dramatic demonstration of this yearning was the fundamentalist crusade which
pitted biblical interpretation against the Darwinian science of biological evolution. In the 1920s,
bills to prohibit the teaching of evolution began appearing in Midwestern and Southern state
legislatures. Leading this crusade, improbably, was the aging William Jennings Bryan, who skillfully
reconciled his anti-evolutionary activism with his earlier radical economic proposals, saying that
evolution "by denying the need or possibility of spiritual regeneration, discourages all reforms."
The issue came to a climax in 1925 in Tennessee, when the American Civil Liberties Union
challenged the nation’s first anti-evolution law. A young high school teacher, John Scopes, went on
trial for teaching evolution in a biology class. In a case that drew intense publicity, Bryan,
representing the state, was subjected to a withering examination by defense attorney Clarence
Darrow. Scopes was convicted but released on a technicality, and Bryan died a few days after the
trial ended (the section that talks about this in KCB is called “Monkey Business in Tennessee,” a
phrase, I’m sure, that comes from the master himself – TA Bailey!).
Another example of a fundamental clash of cultures -- but one with far greater national
consequences -- was Prohibition. In 1919, after almost a century of agitation, the 18th Amendment
to the Constitution was enacted, prohibiting the manufacture, sale or transportation of alcoholic
beverages. Prohibition, although intended to eliminate the saloon and the drunkard from American
society, served to create thousands of illegal drinking places called "speakeasies," and a new and
increasingly profitable form of criminal activity -- the transportation of liquor, known as
"bootlegging." Prohibition, sometimes referred to as the "noble experiment," was repealed in 1933
with the 21st Amendment.
The common thread linking such disparate phenomenon as the resurgence of fundamentalist
religion and Prohibition was a reaction to the social and intellectual revolution of the time -variously referred to as the Jazz Age, the era of excess, the Roaring '20s. Many were shocked by the
changes in the manners, morals and fashion of American youth, especially on college campuses.
Among many intellectuals, H.L. Mencken, a journalist and critic who was unsparing in denouncing
sham and venality in American life, became a hero. Author F. Scott Fitzgerald captured the energy,
turmoil and disillusion of the decade in his short stories and novels such as The Great Gatsby.
Fitzgerald was part of a small but influential movement of writers and intellectuals dubbed the
"Lost Generation," who were shocked by the carnage of World War I and dissatisfied with what they
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
11
perceived to be the materialism and spiritual emptiness of life in the United States. Many of them -such as their most celebrated member, writer Ernest Hemingway -- traveled to Europe and lived as
emigrés in Paris.
African Americans also engaged this spirit of national self-examination. Between 1910 and 1930,
a huge black migration from the South to the North took place, peaking in 1915-1916. Most
settled in urban areas such as Detroit and Chicago, which held greater opportunities for jobs and
personal freedom than the rural South. In 1910 W.E.B. DuBois and other intellectuals founded the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which helped black
Americans gain a national voice that would grow in importance with the passing years.
At the same time, an African-American literary and artistic movement, termed the "Harlem
Renaissance," emerged. Like the "Lost Generation," these writers, such as Langston Hughes,
rejected middle-class values and conventional literary forms, even as they addressed the realities
of American life.
SIDEBAR: DUBOIS vs. WASHINGTON
In 20th century America, there have been three competing approaches to the “black experience”
and we can see them emerging during the early years of the century. One approach is called the
ACCOMMODATIONIST VIEW and is associated with Booker T. Washington. Washington believed
that economic power would eventually lead to political power – essentially that once blacks had
something whites wanted or could benefit from economically, they would be accepted. He also felt
this would be a GRADUAL PROCESS. The following quote by Washington illustrates this view:
“Nothing else so soon brings about right relations between the two races in the South as the
industrial progress of the negro. Friction between the races will pass away in proportion as the
black man, by reason of his skill, intelligence, and character, can produce something that the white
man respects in the commercial world. This is another reason why at Tuskegee we push industrial
training. We find that as every year we put into a Southern community colored men who can start a
brick-yard, a sawmill, a tin-shop, or a printing office, men who produce something that makes the
white man partly dependent upon the negro, instead of all the dependence being on the other side,
a change takes place in the relations of the races.”
A second and competing view has been called the INTEGRATIONIST VIEW and is associated with
William E.B. DuBois. DuBois believed political power must come first if blacks were to ever
progress. He criticized Washington for promoting and idea that would keep blacks in an inferior
status. Here is a quote from DuBois that illustrates his thinking:
“The Negro race, like all races, is going to be saved by its exceptional men. The problem of
education, then, among Negroes must first of all deal with the talented tenth; it is the problem of
developing the best of this race that they may guide the mass away from contamination and death
of the worst, in their own and other races . . . The foundations of knowledge in this race, as in
others, must be sunk deep in the college and university if we would build a solid, permanent
structure.”
A third view has been referred to as the SEPARATIST VIEW and is associated with Marcus Garvey.
Garvey believed that blacks must literally separate from white society (“back to Africa movement”)
because they would never find acceptance there.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
12
(Note: The following analysis is my take on the causes of the Great Depression of the 1930s.
Chapters 33-34 of KCB cover this period. Page through that portion of the text and examine
pictures, diagrams, maps, and document excerpts along with reading this – or after reading this. It
will help you get a better sense of the context.)
DOMESTIC HISTORY AND THE 1930s: WHAT CAUSED THE GREAT DEPRESSION?
We have reached a point in our study when we run up against an amazing moment in 20th Century
history. President Hoover had been in office for about six months when the nation’s prosperity
bubble burst. The American economic structure, the envy of the world, collapsed. No President in
American history had ever faced an economic crisis of this magnitude. Why did this happen?
We have defined history in this class as the interpretation of past events with an eye on the present
and a vision of the future. If we hold to that definition, it should be emphasized at the outset that
the Great Depression, as it came to be known, has been interpreted in a variety of ways. In many
respects we are still living with questions about this time period. There are no clear-cut or easy
explanations of why it occurred. What follows is a somewhat simplistic analysis of a very complex
question.
1. HOW DID THE DEPRESSION IMPACT THE NATION?
It is difficult for us to understand what people were going through during this time period. My
parents were born in 1924 and therefore spent their formative years in the midst of this event.
From them I have learned that the depression was a TRAUMATIC experience for millions and
millions of people. As historians we need to start with that realization – this was truly a lifechanging experience for people of that generation. Hoover is an interesting case because of that.
He went from being a respected – almost revered – public figure to being perceived as a villain,
almost overnight. Between the crash of 1929 and the election of Franklin Roosevelt in 1932, the
business activity of the nation fell by 50%, property income dropped by 31%, farm income was cut
in half, and 12-15 million people became unemployed. This left the nation paralyzed and
searching for leadership, direction, and action. Perhaps this gives you a better sense of why and
how FDR “met the moment.”
2. WHAT CAUSED THIS TO HAPPEN?
Picture the description I am giving you right now as a number of objects placed into a blender and
mixed together in such a way that it would be impossible to separate the ingredients again – in
other words, realize the complex combination of factors that came together to put the nation into
the economic deep freeze. For the sake of understanding what happened, however, we will treat
the various ingredients as SEPARATE entities. Here they are:
Cause #1: OVER-EXPANSION OF AGRICULTURE LEADING TO AN AGRICULTURAL DEPRESSION
During the war farmers had been encouraged to produce and produce big. When the demand
dropped off (dramatically) at the conclusion of the war, farmers continued over-producing, thereby
having surplus crops, causing the market prices to fall. A significant sector of our economy, the
farmers, lost purchasing power. That’s bad.
Cause #2: SICK INDUSTRIES
Capitalist economies go through major period of adjustment from time to time – a certain amount
of chaos is simply built in to a free market economy. In the 1920s various industries became
“sick” causing widespread unemployment. Two examples are helpful here. The coal industry, long
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
13
a stable one, was suddenly facing immense competition from petroleum and natural gas (i.e. for
home heating). This transition impacted millions of people. Another such example was the cotton
textile industry. Changing clothing styles and competition from new materials (such as rayon) were
changing this industry. Also, competition from cheap textiles being made in Japan, China, Latin
America, and India were challenging American cotton textile producers. Does this sound familiar?
Cause #3: TECHNOLOGICAL UNEMPLOYMENT
Ah yes, the industrial-age problem of man being replaced by machine. This was really starting to
be noticeable during the 1920s, although the process had started much earlier. When coupled
with the heretofore mentioned problems, this EXACERBATED the economic downturn – more
unemployment, you see.
Cause #4: OVER-PRODUCTION IN INDUSTRY AND/OR UNDER-CONSUMPTION BY THE PUBLIC
Which came first? The chicken or the egg? This is the operative question here. Overproduction
obviously leads to under-consumption (or is it the other way around?). Again, capitalist economies
must maintain a balance between these two forces and in the 1920s this got all out of whack. But,
let’s explore that a bit further . . . .
Cause #5: OVER-EXTENSION OF CREDIT (aka Installment Buying)
You’ve heard this before, but the 1920s was an era when “time-buying” became an accepted
practice in America. Certainly our economy, yet today, is dependent on people partaking in this
time-honored practice. The problem with time-buying and extending credit beyond “reasonable
bounds” is that people easily get in over their head. Not only that, but such an extension of credit
creates an “artificial” sense among producers that they can continue production at present or
greater levels.
Cause #6: TARIFF BARRIERS
OK, this one is one of those “hindsight is 20/20” situations. Does it make sense to you that we
went into a period of trade protectionism during the 1920s? Does it seem logical that we would do
this in a period of ISOLATIONIST REACTION after World War 1? In other words, did PROTECTIONISM
match the mood of the country? It certainly did and, of course, the problem with that is that other
nations RETALIATED against US tariff increases and ultimately GLOBAL TRADE dramatically
CONTRACTED (aka shrank). Something like a thousand (yes, 1000!) economists encouraged
President Hoover NOT to sign the Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930, but he did it anyway. Life is hard.
Cause #7: OVER-SPECULATION IN LAND AND STOCKS
Well, a whole lot of people got swept up during the 1920s with this situation. Between 1927 and
1929 Americans invested heavily in the GREAT BULL MARKET. MARGIN BUYING was the common
practice of the day – that is, purchasing stocks for as little as 10% of their actual value with the
CERTAINTY (aka gamble!) that prices would go up thereby allowing one to sell and MAKE BIG
BUCKS. Due to this practice, millions of people went in over their head and when stock values
began to plummet, people wanted out AND FAST! This led to panic selling and I guess we’ve all
heard about BLACK TUESDAY – that’s the day the roof fell in!
Was the CRASH of the Market, therefore, a CAUSE of the Depression? Or, is it better understood as
a SYMPTOM of an economy that was teetering on the brink of disaster? I would say the latter.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
14
STUDY THE DIAGRAM HERE AS YOU REFLECT ON WHAT YOU HAVE JUST READ . . . . .
OVER-EXTENSION OF CREDIT
OVER-PRODUCTION
AG DEPRESSION
SICK
INDUSTRIES
UNDER-CONSUMPTION
TECHNOLOGICAL
UNEMPLOYMENT
OVER-SPECULATION IN THE
MARKET
TARIFF BARRIERS
The question remained: How should the government respond to the depression? This question, of
course, dominated the political dialogue of this period. Hoover is often viewed as a man that
simply was unwilling to take the necessary measures to combat the economic collapse. In many
respects, this is a fair characterization. The election of 1932 brought Franklin Delano Roosevelt
into the picture and his approach was eventually called the New Deal. What follows is a concise
summary of the New Deal. This is the version that is provided by the United States Information
Agency. I would suggest that as you read this you have pages 781 and 784 of KCB open and in
front of you. It will help you keep some of the agencies straight.
BUT, BEFORE WE GET TO THAT, LET’S GIVE HOOVER HIS DUE . . .
Herbert Hoover was as qualified and intelligent a man that has even aspired to the Oval Office. He
was a “celebrity” prior to being President due to his work with Food Relief during World War I. The
election map on page 766 gives you an indication of just how popular he really was in 1928. On
pages 772-773 of KCB you will find a commentary on Hoover’s approach to the economic collapse.
I think the authors provide a balanced view of him. Nevertheless, he is the President that “takes
the blame” for the Great Depression. I’ll leave it to you whether you think that is fair or not.
ROOSEVELT AND THE NEW DEAL
In 1933 the new president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, brought an air of confidence and optimism that
quickly rallied the people to the banner of his program, known as the New Deal. "The only thing we
have to fear is fear itself," the president declared in his inaugural address to the nation. In one
sense, the New Deal merely introduced social and economic reforms familiar to many Europeans
for more than a generation. Moreover, the New Deal represented the culmination of a long-range
trend toward abandonment of "laissez-faire" capitalism, going back to the regulation of the
railroads in the 1880s, and the flood of state and national reform legislation introduced in the
Progressive era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. What was truly novel about the New
Deal, however, was the speed with which it accomplished what previously had taken generations.
Many of its reforms were hastily drawn and weakly administered; some actually contradicted
others. Moreover, it never succeeded in restoring prosperity. Yet its actions provided tangible help
for millions of Americans, laid the basis for a powerful new political coalition, and brought to the
individual citizen a sharp revival of interest in government.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
15
RYKKEN SIDEBAR: MAN, OH MAN! DOES THIS ANALYSIS OF THE
DEPRESSION PERIOD HELP YOU BETTER UNDERSTAND THE
ECONOMICS OF THE PRESENT PERIOD? THESE DEBATES ARE STILL
RESONATING TODAY!
THE FIRST NEW DEAL
Banking and Finance. When Roosevelt took the presidential oath, the banking and credit system of
the nation was in a state of paralysis. With astonishing rapidity the nation's banks were first closed
-- and then reopened only if they were solvent. The administration adopted a policy of moderate
currency inflation to start an upward movement in commodity prices and to afford some relief to
debtors. New governmental agencies brought generous credit facilities to industry and agriculture.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insured savings-bank deposits up to $5,000.
Federal regulations were imposed upon the sale of securities on the stock exchange.
SIDEBAR: KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS: John Maynard Keynes was a noted British economist during
this period who argued that in times of economic depression, governments could spend their way
to prosperity by adopting policies that would do two things: first, encourage individual citizens and
businesses to spend and invest in the economy; and second, encourage government spending on a
deficit basis – the purposely increase public debt. The “Keynesian” concept of “priming the pump”
meant that the economic wheels would start moving again. In a sense, Roosevelt adopted this
thinking, although he certainly was no economist. Also, most historians believe that Roosevelt
essentially never fully accepted this notion and that the US economy did not really recover until we
became fully involved in World War 2. Wartime spending in effect was truly Keynesian.
Unemployment.
Unemployment. Roosevelt faced unprecedented mass unemployment. By the time he took office,
as many as 13 million Americans -- more than a quarter of the labor force -- were out of work.
Bread lines were a common sight in most cities. Hundreds of thousands roamed the country in
search of food, work, and shelter. "Brother, can you spare a dime?" was the refrain of a popular
song. An early step for the unemployed came in the form of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), a
program that brought relief to young men between 18 and 25 years of age. CCC enrollees worked
in camps administered by the army. About two million took part during the decade. They
participated in a variety of conservation projects: planting trees to combat soil erosion and
maintain national forests; eliminating stream pollution; creating fish, game, and bird sanctuaries;
and conserving coal, petroleum, shale, gas, sodium, and helium deposits. There is a good picture
on page 783 depicting young guys at a CCC camp. I interviewed an old guy many years ago that
had worked in a CCC Camp in the 1930s and he absolutely REVERED Roosevelt.
A Public Works Administration (PWA) provided employment for skilled construction workers on a
wide variety of mostly medium- to large-sized projects. Among the most memorable of its many
accomplishments were the Bonneville and Grand Coulee Dams in the Pacific Northwest, a new
Chicago sewer system, the Triborough Bridge in New York City, and two aircraft carriers (Yorktown
and Enterprise) for the U.S. Navy.
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), both a work relief program and an exercise in public
planning, developed the impoverished Tennessee River valley area through a series of dams built
for flood control and hydroelectric power generation. Its provision of cheap electricity for the area
stimulated some economic progress, but won it the enmity of private electric companies. New
Dealers hailed it as an example of "grass roots democracy."
The Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA), in operation from 1933 to 1935, distributed
direct relief to hundreds of thousands of people, usually in the form of direct payments.
Sometimes, it assumed the salaries of schoolteachers and other local public service workers. It
also developed numerous small-scale public works projects, as did the Civil Works Administration
(CWA) from late 1933 into the spring of 1934. Criticized as "make work," the jobs funded ranged
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
16
from ditch digging to highway repairs to teaching. Roosevelt and his key officials worried about
costs but continued to favor unemployment programs based on work relief rather than welfare.
Agriculture. In the spring of 1933, the agricultural sector of the economy was in a state of collapse
(remember Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath?) It thereby provided a laboratory for the New Dealers'
belief that greater regulation would solve many of the country's problems. In 1933, Congress
passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) to provide economic relief to farmers. The AAA
proposed to raise crop prices by paying farmers a subsidy to compensate for voluntary cutbacks in
production. Funds for the payments would be generated by a tax levied on industries that
processed crops. By the time the act had become law, however, the growing season was well under
way, and the AAA paid farmers to plow under their abundant crops. Crop reduction and further
subsidies through the Commodity Credit Corporation, which purchased commodities to be kept in
storage, drove output down and farm prices up.
Between 1932 and 1935, farm income increased by more than 50 percent, but only partly because
of federal programs. During the same years that farmers were being encouraged to take land out
of production -- displacing tenants and sharecroppers -- a severe drought hit the Plains states.
Violent wind and dust storms during the 1930s created what became known as the "Dust Bowl."
Crops were destroyed and farms ruined. By 1940, 2.5 million people had moved out of the Plains
states, the largest migration in American history. Of those, 200,000 moved to California. The
migrants were not only farmers, but also professionals, retailers, and others whose livelihoods were
connected to the health of the farm communities. Many ended up competing for seasonal jobs
picking crops at extremely low wages.
The government provided aid in the form of the Soil Conservation Service, established in 1935.
Farm practices that damaged the soil had intensified the impact of the drought. The service taught
farmers measures to reduce erosion. In addition, almost 30,000 kilometers of trees were planted
to break the force of winds.
Although the AAA had been mostly successful, it was abandoned in 1936, when its tax on food
processors was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Congress quickly passed a farm-relief
act, which authorized the government to make payments to farmers who took land out of
production for the purpose of soil conservation. In 1938, with a pro-New Deal majority on the
Supreme Court, Congress reinstated the AAA. By 1940 nearly six million farmers were receiving
federal subsidies. New Deal programs also provided loans on surplus crops, insurance for wheat,
and a system of planned storage to ensure a stable food supply. Economic stability for the farmer
was substantially achieved, albeit at great expense and with extraordinary government oversight.
Industry and Labor. The National Recovery Administration (NRA), established in 1933 with the
National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), attempted to end cut-throat competition by setting codes
of fair competitive practice to generate more jobs and thus more buying. Although welcomed
initially, the NRA was soon criticized for over-regulation and was unable to achieve industrial
recovery. It was declared unconstitutional in 1935.
The NIRA had guaranteed to labor the right of collective bargaining through labor unions
representing individual workers, but the NRA had failed to overcome strong business opposition to
independent unionism. After its demise in 1935, Congress passed the National Labor Relations
Act, which restated that guarantee and prohibited employers from unfairly interfering with union
activities. It also created the National Labor Relations Board to supervise collective bargaining,
administer elections, and ensure workers the right to choose the organization that should represent
them in dealing with employers. The great progress made in labor organization brought working
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
17
people a growing sense of common interests, and labor's power increased not only in industry but
also in politics. Roosevelt's Democratic Party benefited enormously from these developments. A
couple of pictures on page 795 are worth your time on this whole labor story.
THE SECOND NEW DEAL
In its early years, the New Deal sponsored a remarkable series of legislative initiatives and
achieved significant increases in production and prices -- but it did not bring an end to the
Depression. As the sense of immediate crisis eased, new demands emerged. Businessmen
mourned the end of "laissez-faire" and chafed under the regulations of the NIRA. Vocal attacks also
mounted from the political left and right as dreamers, schemers, and politicians alike emerged
with economic panaceas that drew wide audiences. Dr. Francis E. Townsend advocated generous
old-age pensions. Father Charles Coughlin, the "radio priest," called for inflationary policies and
blamed international bankers in speeches increasingly peppered with anti-Semitic imagery. Most
formidably, Senator Huey P. Long of Louisiana, an eloquent and ruthless spokesman for the
displaced, advocated a radical redistribution of wealth. (If he had not been assassinated in
September 1935, Long very likely would have launched a presidential challenge to Franklin
Roosevelt in 1936.) In the face of these pressures, President Roosevelt backed a new set of
economic and social measures. Prominent among them were measures to fight poverty, create
more work for the unemployed, and provide a social safety net.
The Works Progress Administration (WPA), the principal relief agency of the so-called second New
Deal, was the biggest public works agency yet. It pursued small-scale projects throughout the
country, constructing buildings, roads, airports, and schools. Actors, painters, musicians, and
writers were employed through the Federal Theater Project, the Federal Art Project, and the Federal
Writers Project. The National Youth Administration gave part-time employment to students,
established training programs, and provided aid to unemployed youth. The WPA only included
about three million jobless at a time; when it was abandoned in 1943, it had helped a total of nine
million people.
The New Deal's cornerstone, according to Roosevelt, was the Social Security Act of 1935. Social
Security created a system of state-administered welfare payments for the poor, unemployed, and
disabled based on matching state and federal contributions. It also established a national system
of retirement benefits drawing on a "trust fund" created by employer and employee contributions.
Many other industrialized nations had already enacted such programs, but calls for such an
initiative in the United States had gone unheeded. Social Security today is the largest domestic
program administered by the U.S. government. To these, Roosevelt added the National Labor
Relations Act, the "Wealth Tax Act" that increased taxes on the wealthy, the Public Utility Holding
Company Act to break up large electrical utility conglomerates, and a Banking Act that greatly
expanded the power of the Federal Reserve Board over the large private banks. Also notable was
the establishment of the Rural Electrification Administration, which extended electricity into
farming areas throughout the country.
A NEW COALITION
In the 1936 election, Roosevelt won a decisive victory over his Republican opponent, Alf Landon of
Kansas. He was personally popular, and the economy seemed near recovery. He took 60 percent of
the vote and carried all but two states. A broad new coalition aligned with the Democratic Party
emerged, consisting of labor, most farmers, most urban ethnic groups, African Americans, and the
traditionally Democratic South. The Republican Party received the support of business as well as
middle-class members of small towns and suburbs. This political alliance, with some variation and
shifting, remained intact for several decades.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
18
Roosevelt's second term was a time of consolidation. The president made two serious political
missteps: an ill-advised, unsuccessful attempt to enlarge the Supreme Court and a failed effort to
"purge" increasingly recalcitrant (read, “stubborn”) Southern conservatives from the Democratic
Party. (There is a good cartoon on page 799 illustrating Roosevelt’s Supreme Court scheme).
When he cut high government spending, moreover, the economy collapsed. These events led to the
rise of a conservative coalition in Congress that was unreceptive to new initiatives. From 1932 to
1938 there was widespread public debate on the meaning of New Deal policies to the nation's
political and economic life. Americans clearly wanted the government to take greater responsibility
for the welfare of ordinary people, however uneasy they might be about big government in general.
The New Deal established the foundations of the modern welfare state in the United States.
Roosevelt, perhaps the most imposing of the 20th-century presidents, had established a new
standard of mass leadership.
A COUPLE OF LOOSE ENDS
How about minority groups and women and the New Deal? Many blacks came to revere FDR. His
election in 1932 signaled the end of black support for the Republican Party (back to the days of
Lincoln). Realistically, it’s hard to make the case that FDR was especially concerned about black
Americans. Unemployment for blacks during the 1930s was worse than the national average.
Black farmers, for example, were really at the bottom of the social ladder during this period. Some
gains were made, however, and blacks did find employment through programs like the PWA and
WPA. Eleanor Roosevelt was very tuned into the plight of black Americans and deserves great
credit for raising issues that simply had not been addressed before this time. Note the picture of
Eleanor and Mary McLeod Bethune on page 786 of KCB.
Native Americans during this period saw some progress, although the record is mixed. The Indian
Reorganization Act of 1934, also known as the Howard-Wheeler Act, was sometimes called the
Indian New Deal. It laid out new rights for Native Americans, reversed some of the earlier
privatization of their common holdings, and encouraged self-government and land management by
tribes. The act slowed the assignment of tribal lands to individual members, and reduced the
assignment of extra holdings to nonmembers. For the following twenty years, the U.S. government
invested in infrastructure, health care, and education on the reservations, and over two million
acres of land were returned to various tribes. The Indian Reorganization Act also provided for
termination and relocation of certain tribes. This eventually resulted in the legal dismantling of 61
tribal nations.
The New Deal record related to women is equally mixed. Women received lower wages than men
and were often laid off first. They did, however, benefit from employment opportunities,
particularly in government positions. It was during this time that the first woman to ever hold a
Cabinet position – Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor – was appointed.
HOW DO HISTORIANS VIEW THE NEW DEAL?
Many historians view FDR as one of the few truly great Presidents in our history. He receives high
marks for the substantial transformation that occurred under the New Deal such as minimum
wage laws, maximum hours law, extensive energy programs like the TVA, expanded rights for
workers and unions, and assistance programs like Social Security. Others, however, are not quite
so enthused. A common criticism of FDR is that he, in fact, was conserving a system that left the
same class of people in power – people like him. The New Left’s interpretation of him is that he
did not go far enough in addressing the great inequalities of American society. Still others, in this
case conservative historians, tend to blame him for setting a precedent for enormous government
spending and the creation of what critics call “the welfare state.” Ronald Reagan, for example,
voted for FDR in 1932 at age 22, but rose politically in the 60s and 70s as a great opponent of New
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
19
Deal liberalism. His election in 1980 can be viewed as the point at which New Deal liberalism was
stopped. In a sense we have been debating this ever since. There is an excellent discussion of the
New Deal as viewed by historians on page 805 in KCB.
FINALE: How about a couple of free-response type questions about this period?
1. Support or refute this statement: “A key feature of the New Deal was that it gave too much
authority to the federal government and specifically the executive branch.”
RESPONSE: For many conservatives and proponents of laissez-faire capitalism, the New Deal is
seen as an overexpansion of the federal government in regulating the economy and business. You
can support this claim by discussing legislation promoted by FDR that overstepped his authority –
for example, by establishing New Deal programs that were in competition with private businesses
or adopted various aspects of a socialist economy such as the Tennessee Valley Authority. To
support the idea that FDR used his authority properly, you can point out that he took extraordinary
steps because the economic collapse was so extensive. As a contrast, discuss the policies of the
conservative Hoover – laissez-faire economics, volunteerism, and localism – that were insufficient
to lift the nation out of its economic woes.
2. To what extent is it correct that the New Deal was a conservative effort to maintain the
social, economic, and political status quo?
RESPONSE: Few would initially associate the New Deal with conservatism, instead viewing it as a
major manifestation of liberalism. However, critics on the left believe that the New Deal was not
particularly liberal. You can support this position by pointing out that the New Deal did not go far in
addressing the socio-economic problems confronting women and minorities and that the goal of
the New Deal was to actually preserve capitalism. To this end, the New Deal did not fundamentally
change class, gender, and race relations in the US. To support that the New Deal was profoundly
liberal, discuss how some legislation displayed an unprecedented expansion of government power
and authority in establishing social programs for the aged, the unemployed, and those ordinarily
marginalized such as black and Native Americans. Further, you can write on ways the New Deal
leveled the playing field for labor and business, not to mention engaging in deficit spending to fund
programs.
A COUPLE FINAL COMMENTS ON FDR AT
THIS POINT . . .
Recall that he was elected 4 times – the
only President in our history that could
make such a claim – 1932, 1936, 1940,
and 1944. He won Wisconsin each time
he ran also. There is little doubt that he
was a master politician and charismatic
presence on the American scene through
two dramatic events. His legacy is still felt
in American politics in 2009. Consider, for
example, how Obama has been compared
to FDR – we call this the “shadow” of FDR.
PS Rykken/ Domestic History 1898-1945
20