The aftermath of the Nixon Administration left many things in doubt, however, the growing conservatism of the nation was not one of them. As much as the Vietnam War forced America to re-evaluate its military role in the world, as much as student protests and the Hippie Movement brought forward a strong counter-culture awareness that belied the cookie-cutter/Leave It To Beaver simplicity of the 1950s, and as much as the rise of the Middle East and of Japan, South Korea, and China as emerging powers called into question the economic influence of the United States, the country itself was clearly on a trajectory of greater and greater social conservatism - in time, this social tendency would become reflected politically and economically.
Discuss the administrations of Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, and Clinton in terms of their political response to the social and economic demands of the conservative electorate that was largely identified by Nixon back in the 1950s and then cultivated by the Nixon administration from 1968-1974. What were the major issues and proposed solutions that emerged from the American people in response to both domestic and foreign concerns. How did each of these presidents attempt to respond and perhaps lead this push by The People.
Clearly identify the major social, political, and economic concerns that characterize this time period of growing conservatism in America. Contrast it with the recent very liberal period groing back to FDR.
DUE DATE: Monday, April 29, 2013 by midnight
Word Count: 1,000 words minimum
40 comments:
The mid to late 1900’s were wrought with the after-effects of the Nixon Administration, leaving an array of events up for grabs. The supervisions of Ford, Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Clinton predicated their own response to the social and economic demands that the conventional electorate exemplified through Nixon himself in the 1950’s as well as the Nixon administration from 1968-1974. Growing conservatism was visibly embodied by means of numerous concerns; first, the Vietnam Conflict shifted the role of Americans in terms of political and military power; second, the Hippie Movement demonstrated the heightened concern for a call to a more unassuming time period second, the Vietnam War shifted the role of Americans in terms of political and military power; and third, much of Japan, South Korea, and the Middle East had begun to analyze the true impact that the United States had on the overall state of the economy. Due to these chief social, political, and economic classifications of the time, the American people definitely were in for a wild run of domestic and foreign affairs that ultimately resulted in the push by The People for a greater socially conformist society.
First, the Vietnam Conflict altered the role of Americans in terms of political and military influence. The management of President Gerald Ford significantly impacted the trials of this period. His statement that he saw himself as, “a moderate in domestic affairs, a conservative in fiscal affairs, and a dyed-in-the-wool internationalist in foreign affairs." was entirely indicative of what his presidential actions in response the American public would be. One of his primary goals was to curb inflation; still fearing so even after the Great Depression, Ford prohibited numerous non-military adoption bills that otherwise would have proved devastating to the fiscal deficit. This also helped business function more freely. Not only that, but his zeal when it came to maintaining the powerful stance the United States was desperately holding onto after the collapse of Cambodia and South Vietnam was admirable. However, there had been a surplus of conflicting viewpoints both by the public and Ford himself. Especially considering that the U.S. government viewed involvement in the war as a way to prevent a supposed communist takeover of South Vietnam as part of their wider strategy of containment. So, in 1973, the Paris Peace Accords were signed, confirming the cease fire between North and South Vietnam, forcing the final release of any and all American war prisoners. And limitations were placed on nuclear weapons. Ford’s course of action shortly after the events in Vietnam were difficult to dissect due to the mixed messages that the public was sending, some approved while others were highly opposed. In the end, the overall consensus became one of disapproval, thus Ford’s decision was appropriate.
Second, the Hippie Movement established the heightened concern for a call to a more self-effacing time period. The administration of President Jimmy Carter was very much representative of the social and economic needs of this new electorate disposition. For instance, his campaigning of human rights, even though at first received rather coldly by the Soviet Union, the Camp David Agreement of 1978 aided the country in bringing a strong sense of goodwill between Egypt and Israel. He also sought to improve the environmental state through his dealings with the energy shortage and civil service reform of trucking and airline industries especially. The Hippie’s emulated the idea of the “Leave It To Beaver” era, and despite the slow transition to a more “Brady Bunch” way of life, (as divorce rates sky rocketed) (PARENTHESIS-used throughout) Carter attempted to respond with modest foreign and domestic intentions. Likewise, in 1986 President Reagan instituted an overhaul of the income tax code, eradicating plenty of deductions, excusing millions of people with lower incomes, the Nation was finally able to appreciate one of the longest recorded periods of peacetime prosperity, spared from a recession or a depression. Reagan also sought to attain “peace through strength” by seeking to improve the relations with the Soviet Union and increasing defense spending by up to thirty-five percent (later naval escorts in the Persian Gulf aided the containment of free-flowing oil as well). His solutions to the demands of many Americans ushered in a relatively calm age, even if it was short-lived.
Third, much of Japan, South Korea, and the Middle East had begun to examine the real bearing that the United States had on the global state of the economy. President George H.W. Bush was the first to make an impression. He faced an intensely changing world, seeing as the Cold War had just recently ended, the Communist empire had broken up, and the Berlin Wall finally fell. Bush had begun to send American troops into Panama to overthrow the corrupt regime of General Manuel Noriega, who was dangerously close to hurting the security of the canal, not to mention the Americans within it, illustrating the impact that the United States continued to have on a worldwide scale (despite it sometimes being seen as mere interference as opposed to true help). But above all, the greatest testament to this was when the Iraqi President Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and threatened to move into Saudi Arabia. Congress sent thousands of American troops to Kuwait and was later joined by even more from the allied nations. Ultimately after weeks of air and missile assault, the 100-hour land battle dubbed Desert Storm directed Iraq's million-man army. Nevertheless, the discontent from back home had been left unresolved and the American public was growing restless because of the faltering economy, high deficit spending, and increased rioting within cities; hence the loss of the reelection. Similarly, President Bill Clinton made his mark on the war-torn country on an even greater international level. For example, he became a global proponent for an expanded NATO, in addition to a more open international trade and even a worldwide campaign against drug trafficking. The introduction of the “dot-com” economy sustained their growth by means of larger business and companies utilizing the internet, becoming the monopoly it is today. And lastly, China, Japan, and the rest of the Middle East were becoming increasingly independent, but also somewhat dependent on America, since we set our sights on strengthening our national friendships. The reactions of Clinton to the public were moderately domineering as he took control and commenced stricter national firearm laws and regulations, while instituting a more expansive impression on global communications.
Due to these various social, economic, and political reasons, the growing conservatism in America influenced heavily by the cries of the American people was heard to a congressional extent as the actions taken by each president was an attempt to gratify the wishes of the country. In stark contrast to the recent liberal period of Franklin D. Roosevelt, in spite of roughly the same amount of turmoil within the government and the general populous, there was a pointedly dissimilar approach. Ronald Reagan was particularly prominent in this sense because both he and Roosevelt supported the “common man” stance, and differed in that Roosevelt saw big business as the enemy of the common man while Reagan portrayed big government as the rival. This was one of political dominance, yes, but even more so of truly forming resilient bonds with other nations in order to better America and inevitably, the world. As global powers rose and swift actions were taken, the blossoming flowers of a new age of had finally begun to emanate a peaceful scent (PROSOPOPEIA). And just as the moon shines as a beacon in the night, so too will America for the rest of the globe in times to come (METAPHOR).
Olivia Brophy - Per. 3 & 4
The era between 1974 and 2000 in the United States saw a major transformation take hold of its populations – from a liberal electorate to a more conservative one. Like all Presidents who have encountered similar changes, Ford, Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Clinton all were forced to work with this growing conservatism. First, the nation was forced into accepting its role as a superpower, as evident by the increased U.S. involvement in foreign affairs; Second, the conservative constituency craved a less dangerous world as the beginning of the end of the Cold War approached; Third, the nation was confronted with managing and fixing a global economy with an electorate that was concerned first and foremost with its own economic affairs. Thus, various political, social and economic issues of the last quarter of the 20th century largely reflected the changes that the United States.
The first major involvement of the United States in foreign affairs was in regards to Israel and Egypt under Jimmy Carter. By inviting and acting as a negotiator between the two nations, Carter fully represented the United States’ position as a world leader. Under George W. Bush, the United States used its top notch military to fight against the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in order to keep a large amount of the world’s oil supplies and the Persian Gulf region out of the hands of the tyrannical Saddam Hussein. Although the nation did stand to protect its own interests by protecting the region and by extension the oil, due to the fact that the United States during this time, and up to today, is heavily dependent on foreign oil, the United States led its allies in a cause that benefitted a large majority of the world, rather than just itself and one or two allies, as happened in the past. Under the Clinton administration the new status of the United States could be seen as well through foreign affairs. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Balkans saw much turmoil, especially in the form of Serbian “ethnic cleansing” in 1999. Although the U.S.-led-NATO coalition was initially unsuccessful, eventually some progress was made. The United States leading a multinational group such as NATO is a clear indicator of its status as a “superpower”. Additionally, Clinton, like Carter, involved the nation in Middle Eastern peace keeping attempts when he started the ball rolling on an agreement between Israel and Palestine. However, these attempts weren’t as successful as the earlier one crafted under Carter, due to the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. These actions all are excellent indicators of the “new world order” in which the United States was on top, and additionally support the assertion that the conservative populous of the United States desired a less dangerous world.
pt. 2
As the end of the four decades long Cold War came into sight, the citizens of the United States were craving a safer environment. In addition to the events mentioned in the previous paragraph, many events of the presidencies between 1974 and 2000 brought this desire to light. Under Carter, advances were made in this field when the president met with Soviet premier Brezhnev and negotiated the SALT II agreements. Despite both leaders signing the arms limiting agreement, some of the concessions made to the Soviets led to the bill’s death in Congress. The Carter administration also successfully rekindled relations with Communist China, also this advancement met a hindrance in the form of problems between the United States and Iran. The Reagan administration unintentionally helped to bring into existence a more peaceful world by renewing the arms race with the U.S.S.R. The increase in tension between the countries eventually brought about improved relations with the Soviet Union and Premier Gorbachev. George H.W. Bush worked to realize the American people’s dream of a less dangerous world by steadily working towards the absolute end of the Cold War. This was done by ensuring that Gorbachev remained in office, making sure that he followed through with his perestroika and glasnost reform movements and reducing the number of arms held by both countries. Under Clinton, U.S. gun control laws were strengthened in order to make America a safer environment following events such as the Oklahoma City bombings and the Columbine High School shootings.
By becoming involved in foreign affairs and working towards a less dangerous world, the United States was required to address the needs of an interconnected American and world economy. President Ford touched off this chain of actions by attempting to address the economic problems due to the Oil Embargo, as well as other causes, through his Whip Inflation Now (WIN) campaign, which ultimately proved ineffective. Due to the position of the United States as a “superpower” its economic health played a large part in the health of the world economy. Because Ford’s WIN campaign failed to successfully address the economic issues of the time, his successor, Jimmy Carter, was forced to attempt to combat the problems of the economy in a different way. He sought a remedy to the inflation of the U.S. economy in the form of alternative energy. However, this tentative solution likewise failed, mostly because of the Three Mile Island Incident, which scared the American public away from nuclear power. Just as Ford had tried to stabilize the increasingly interconnected global economy by mending the economy of the United States. Under Reagan, the same issue of the economy was addressed in the form of supply side economics, or “Reaganomics”. Although initially unsuccessful, this placebo eventually produced mixed results, especially attributed to the growing divisions among the rich and poor in the United States. As Ford and Carter before him had done, Reagan tried to mend the problems facing the American economy in order to balance the world economy, which the United States continued to be increasingly involved and invested in. In the Clinton administration, the main economic focus was on deficit reduction. The Democrats were able to successfully get a bill to do this through Congress, which combined with an already successful economy to rocket the economy under Clinton to unforeseen heights. This exponential growth and strengthening of the economy of the United States was critical in strengthening and expanding the world economy into the one that we deal with today.
1974 to 2001, the nation underwent massive transformations of the nation and of the population and their political inclinations and mood. The voting base shifted from the liberal policies of FDR to a more conservative mood. Nixon capitalized on this, and Reagan was the epitome of the conservative movement: instituting lower taxes and trying to appeal to the cries of “small government.” Ford, Carter, Reagan and George H.W. Bush all capitalized on this and tried to ride the wave of popular support of the small government plan. First, the nation’s action in Vietnam resulted in distaste for the government’s involvement in the peoples life, and later in the century the nation underwent it’s full realization of itself as the lone superpower as the USSR collapsed, and the US was forced to increase military spending in order to operate in a more domestic capacity; second, the conservative movement forced the government to change shape as it sought to appeal to the peoples idea of low taxes, and anti-government sentiments; and third, the result of the reduced taxes, and heightened military spending resulted in a mountain of debt as the federal deficit rose, resulting in cuts to some of FDR’s social plans. Therefore, because of the militaristic, political and economic concerns of this period the nation encountered significant growth and redefinition of the role of the government.
The Vietnam war, still ongoing in Ford’s term instilled a distinct disgust of the disillusion populus who resented the shipment of human lives to the “jungle” to be packed in body bags like a sick version of Sinclair’s novel. This distaste for war instilled a mindset of anti government sentiments, and created a more conservative voting base. However, it did not result in cuts to military spending, as the US continually pumped more and more change into the military-industrial system in order to counter the malicious Soviets. This spending, and the tax cuts of Reagan would eventually lead to a huge hill of debt that would seemingly burry the once pristine US economy. The other result of the Vietnam war was the distrust of the US’ military power, as the troops were being beat by under-equipped and under-trained farmers. This would lead to the Gulf War and the flexing of the US’ military muscle. The US would see a shift in the role of its military in the 80’s and 90’s as Cater encountered the problem of terrorists who captured US personnel in Iran. This would lead to the failed rescue attempt, which would end in disaster and eventually led to the restructuring of special forces and their roles, and the transformation of the armed forces into a more domestic force which would be needed to counter the guerrilla forces that now faced the troops. The hostages would eventually be sent back to the US just in time for Reagan’s inaugural speech, which only added to his popularity- in reality it was Carter who had labored day and night to free the hostages. Reagan during his presidency dropped funding to social welfare programs and sent the surplus from those programs to the defense budget, and further added to the already massive military expenses. The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in a shift of the armed forces who no longer faced the menacing threat of possible nuclear war. This resulted in a changed threat and reordering of the military as the nation realized its current role as the sole superpower, and the responsibility that comes with this package. George H.W. Bush continued military spending, and involved the US in a controversial war in the middle east. The Gulf War was a move by the US through UN to push Iraq out of Kuwait. This move contained significant US incentives as Kuwait was one of the US primary oil suppliers, and Kuwait, with its location, was able to control the flow of oil in and out of the the Gulf Sea. This war tested the ruthless efficiency of the armed forces as they completely dismantled the third largest army in the world in a matter of days. The speed and efficiency of the US war machine was reminiscent of German blitzkrieg. The US effectively outflanked the entire Iraqi army and destroyed the Iraqi armor and infantry. This conflict saw the use of post-Vietnam troops, and the successful campaign helped to restore the nation’s confidence. However, the early wrap up of the war lost the election for Bush. The conservative movement and the period from mid 1970’s to early 2000’s resulted in the escalation of military spending and the sharpening of the US rapier which could dodge the blows of the enemies broad sword and strike home by outmaneuvering larger forces; the modern military machine was born.
From the mid 70’s to early 2000’s the nation encountered huge shifts in the culture of American society as rock and roll, consumerism, and the rampant outbreak of outrageous fashions and styles. The result of the dramatic youth was a conservative swing of voters who sought to remove government from the lives of their kids and their lives. This resulted in cries for lower taxes and cuts to social welfare plans that voters parents had so vigorously supported. Nixon was the first to capitalize on the conservatism, however, it was Reagan who epitomizes the political mood of the nation. Reagan cut spendings to public housing, EPA, Medicaid and other welfare programs and took up his laissez-faire in an aptly named package: Reaganomics. Reagan capitalized on his popularity by also significantly increasing the military spending, and by pushing for a return to the gold standard. George H.W. Bush continued the policies of Reagan, however, Bush returned funding to some social welfare programs. The movement of the people to cut programs and taxes had worked, and significantly contrasted the liberals of the previous destination who had wholeheartedly supported the New Deal and Great Society programs of FDR and LBJ respectively. This movement shows the power of the people, and this shift of the government to the people shows the ultimate success of the Democratic experiment that had so plagued the minds of Washington and the other forefathers.
The movement of the people against the welfare plans of the previous presidents presented the current men in the oval office with an opportunity to divert the funds, and that they did. The shifts of huge sums of money from welfare plans, coupled with the tax cuts led to massive deficits starting with Reagan. These programs continued with Bush who, although he followed Reagan’s example, claimed Reagan’s economic plan was “vudu economics.” The cuts to the welfare plans cut unnecessary programs which had been a necessity nearly nigh on a decade ago, however, the economy had stabilized and was slowly but not surprisingly rising. These programs included some cuts to public housing, the ERA, and Medicaid. However, Reagan wisely protected Social Security and Medicare. The military spending which constituted Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush’s terms put the nation under a mountain of debt; no longer could the government dish out surpluses to untested programs. This rise in debt further put the nation in reliance, and a nation which at the start of the century had been one of the largest exporters was one of the largest importers. The economic changes which constituted the last quarter of a century have created the economy we live in now, and the conservative movement still has far reaching effects into the politics of today.
The nation from the mid 1970’s to late 2000’s have undergone massive migrations of politics, economics and military which now shape the world we live in. The efforts of Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush have created a large conservative voting base and has contrasted the earlier liberals of LBJ and FDR. Reagan capitalized on the mood of the nation and epitomizes the conservative reformer. His presidency was nearly flawless, but is partially marred by the Iran-Contra Affair. The change in the military and the effect of Vietnam spending, the call of the people for lower taxes, and the shift of the government to smaller government and laissez-faire policies have significantly changed today, and each president in this time period sought to ride the waves of conservatism to shores of greater popularity.
-Christian Filbrun
Beckett Lee
Periods 3 & 4
The Post-Nixon era marked the birth of a new American dream, of a new era of peace and security in the world through conservative values and, most importantly, safety in every aspect of life. After the uncertainty and chaos of the early Cold War years and the counterculture movement, the American people made efforts to childproof their lives against the liberal values that had created the aforementioned turmoil. First, a new social attitude towards the government emerged and was fostered by Reagan’s “government is the problem” beliefs and policies which combined to produce a greater desire for individual autonomy; second, the increasingly conservative economy gave the power back to the people with economic plans based on “Reaganomics” and similar beliefs; third, the American military became the embodiment of the American desire for security by becoming a global police force to protect America both at home and abroad. Each of these elements of the conservative movement were products and causes of the American demand for safety and autonomy, producing a self-catalyzing crusade for sanctuary.
The conservative campaign for protection from the dangers of the world revitalized the American desire to protect itself from tyranny and government encroachment. Contrary to the continuing immersion of the federal government and society started by Theodore Roosevelt and expanded by FDR, the new conservatives wanted to return to some semblance of Jeffersonian ideals. While many of the social programs were immutable, like Social Security and Medicare, the conservatives were able to release some of the hold that the government had on the people. For example, President Reagan was able to reduce the tax rates so that the government would be less of a burden to the population. President Ford’s administration witnessed the Milliken v. Bradly case where the federal government did not force suburban schools to accept inner-city, typically black, students, seemingly paradoxical to the actions undertaken during “The Little Rock Nine” incident during the more liberal era. The increasing news coverage of political subjects during this era allowed every family who owned a TV in America to witness the grimy underbelly of democratic politics. The families and students of the astronauts aboard the Challenger space shuttle watched in horror as it exploded, killing everyone on board. Californians could see the faces of the casualties of Columbine and the foreign conflicts, many of whom they had never known. The media filled the heads of the American people with the dangers of the world and provoked a sense of mass hysteria as, night after night, the daily news showed the death and destruction abroad, the crimes of humanity taking place domestically, the faces of the victims of every horror worthy of a camera. It seemed that no place was safe as the death toll of daily life flashed before the eyes of the terrified audiences. The overdose of media, made available by the technology of this era, forced the American people to seek refuge in the conservative values which would provide the security that had once existed in the perfect world of the 1950s, or so they thought.
The spirit of economic autonomy could be felt as well, as the Americans embraced the economic philosophy of, “If you want the job done right, do it yourself.” The presidents of this era were all too happy to oblige the people’s desire as long as the votes continued to support the conservatives. The military spending of this time period continued the historical trend of, “The best economic policy is war.” The presidents were all too happy to accommodate and sent the military spending budgets to the highest levels they had ever reached. President Reagan, in addition to inflating military spending, implemented supply-side economics to allow the people to control the free market with less federal oversight. His “government is the problem” beliefs directly conflicted with the “big business is the problem” policies of the liberal era, especially during the presidency of FDR. The first President Bush faced the results of the conservative focus when the public backlash to his inability to stave off new taxes, despite campaign promises, hit with full force. The public enjoyed the reducing role that the government was taking in their lives and the slight road bump created by Bush’s new taxes showed how fundamental the conservative trend was.
By far the greatest effect of the neo-conservative era, the radical changes in the focus of the U.S. armed forces during this time would affect America and the world at large. For almost the entire duration of U.S. history, the American military was kept at the lowest levels necessary to uphold the Monroe Doctrine and maintain the security of the nation. The vast ocean-moats on either side of the U.S. made this a feasible military policy in the eras of short range aircraft and month-long voyages where the U.S. could become Fortress Americana before the enemy could even arrive. The nuclear era ended this long-standing defense and forced the neo-conservatives, who were facing possible destruction in a matter of minutes, to defy the precedent of a small military and focus an enormous portion of the government’s attention on the national defense. In addition to the enormous economic benefits, the U.S. was able to establish a powerful global defense network which would have baffled even Theodore Roosevelt. The ability of the American Navy to watch the world with its massive carriers, the Army to steamroll any upstart threats, the Marines to cut the jugular of American foes, the Air Force to obliterate whole swaths of a nation, and the Coast Guard to intercept anything that may have slipped the titanic nets made America a global police force, with occasional help from the globe’s police force, the U.N. The U.N. itself derived almost all of its power from the U.S. anyway, so the synonymous nature of the two furthered global fears of a U.S. hegemony. The end of the Cold War and the subsequent elimination of the U.S.S.R. granted the U.S. the hegemony it currently holds today. With 4.6% of the GDP being spent on the military and the most advanced weaponry available, it is easy to see how the U.S. is the largest military force on the planet. To add perspective: The U.S. has 8,000+ tanks, 15,000+ aircraft, 10 aircraft carriers, 290+ combat vessels, 6,500+ helicopters, and 3,000,000 service members. The closest competitor, Russia, has less than half of each of these figures, except for manpower where they trail by nearly 1,000,000 service members. These figures clearly indicate the radical military change produced by the neo-conservative movement that produced them. The supreme domination of the U.S. in its quest for security, in the sheer size of its military, in its desire for economic autonomy, and in its increasingly Jeffersonian social values, was produced by the neo-conservative movement of the late 20th century and early 21st century. Whether the movement will continue into the remainder of the 21st century is yet to be seen.
The period between 1974 and 2000 in the United States saw a major change take hold of its politics, from a government with more liberal (Democratic) power to a more conservative (Republican) one. Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton were all forced to work with a growing republican base, like most presidents who have encountered and dealt with similar problems, like wars. Various social, economic and political problems arose in the last few years of the 20th century, and they reflected the growing changes happening in the United States of America: first, the conservative movement yearned for a more peaceful and less dangerous world as the finale to the Cold War came upon the cast; second, America found the problem of managing and fixing not only their own economy but the global economy with the people putting the economy before anything else; and thirdly, America was pushed to center stage and became a rising star among the superpowers, which is what caused the amplified participation of America in foreign affairs.
As the conclusion of the 46 year long Cold War came into vision, the people of the United States were longing a nonviolent setting. Many happenings of the presidencies between the end of the war and to the 21st century conveyed this yearning to light. With Carter most of the improvements were made in this turf when the president met with the Soviet primary Brezhnev and discussed the SALT II arrangements. Even though both countries leaders signed the limiting of weapons/arms agreement, the problem arose by some of the acknowledgements about the defeat in the war about the Soviets and because of that the bill did not pass in congress. The Carter government also managed to effectively rekindle associations with Communist China, also this progression met an interference in the form of difficulties between the United States and Iran. The Reagan management inadvertently helped to bring into reality a more peaceful world by reintroducing the arms race with the Russia. The decrease of leeway in the rope between the countries ultimately brought about better associations with the Soviet Union and President Gorbachev. President Bush (the first one) had come to understand the people’s cry for a safer world, he had done this by working towards the complete end of the Cold War against Russia. He accomplished this by making sure that President Gorbachev stayed in the presidential office, making sure he held up his side of the bargain by reducing the amount of weapons in his country with America doing the same. With Clinton in office, the gun laws became more and stricter due to the tragedies of events like the Columbine shootings.
Becoming part of the foreign affairs of the world and working towards world peace, the United States needed to deal with the connected American economy and the larger scale world economy. President Ford started the actions, during his time in office, by trying to give attention to the growing economic problems due to oil, one of many problems, through his WIN (Whip Inflation Now) campaign, which unsurprisingly failed. Due to the situation of America as a “superpower” its economic well-being played a large part in the condition of the world economy. Since Ford’s WIN movement was futile to fruitfully address the economic problems of the time, his beneficiary, President Carter, was required to attempt to fight the problems of the economy in a different way. Carter sought to fix the growing U.S.A. economy in the method of alternate energy. Though this solution also failed, mostly due to the problems that were happening with the nuclear power plants, and this scared the people away from using nuclear power. When Reagan became president he came from a campaign that was highlighted by his “Reaganomics”. Even though at first his plan was unsuccessful, his plan after a while created an assortment of results, especially with the growing gap between the rich and famous and the poor and downtrodden in the United States. Reagan tried to fix the problems that were coming from the American economy to in turn help balance the world economy, which America continued to be involved and capitalized in. The main focus, economically, was deficit decrease in the Clinton administration. The liberals were able to push a bill to do this through Congress, which shared with an already good economy to hurtle the economy upward. This development and solidification of the economy of the United States was serious in reinforcing and growing the world economy into the one that we have today.
The first major participation of the United States in foreign affairs were in regards to Israel and Egypt problem was under the administration of President Carter. Becoming the negotiator between the two nations, Carter represented America’s position as a superpower and a world leader. Under Bush, the United States used it’s military to fight against the Iraq “war” in Kuwait in order to keep a rather large amount of oil away from Iraq, who had wanted that oil to pay their own war debts. Though the nation did have a stance to defend its own welfares by defending the country and with that the oil, due to the detail that the United States throughout this time is deeply dependent on foreign oil, the America directed its allies in a cause that promoted a huge bulk of the world. With the Clinton organization, the “new” position of the United States could be seen well through the foreign affairs that they dealt with. The NATO alliance was actually a failure at first, but eventually some leeway was given and some progress was made, with the United States leading NATO it became obvious that America had become what some countries envy, a superpower. Also Clinton involved America in peace keeping attempts in the Middle East, like Carter, which is when he began the agreement between Palestine and Israel. But, these attempts ended in failure due to the earlier one made under Carter, and the assassination of the Israeli Prime Minister. All these actions that happened are indicators of these new relationships between countries in which America had come out on top, and they also serve to provide support to the claim that the people had become more conservative during this period and they desired and demanded a more peaceful and less hazardous world.
From 1974, the beginning of Gerald Ford’s administration, to the end of Bill Clinton’s second term in 2001, the American public as well as the electorate grew increasingly conservative, especially during the years of Ronald Reagan’s presidency. The late leaderships that the nation had endured, particularly that of Lyndon Baines Johnson and Richard Nixon, had left a bitter imprint on the minds of many of the American people. First, the escalating Cold War between the United States and Soviet Russia as well as the ever impending threat of nuclear confrontation between the two superpowers drove many conservative-era presidents to redefine their policies of containment or defense; second, the festering national distrust of political leaders (that had taken root from Nixon’s term to the end of Carter’s) set up their presidential successors to attempt to point the country in a new direction; third, after the Vietnam conflict, the development of the US economy in order to regain stability became set as a priority for these presidents. Therefore, because of the social, political, and economic concerns that characterized the time period, not only did the American people themselves take an active role in trying to supply solutions, but political figures – especially the president – tried to utilize this domestic mobilization in order to assume a leading role in shaping the course of the newly dawned era, one that contrasted largely with that of the influential, tradition-shattering presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
(cont.)
(cont.)
The social concerns of the conservative-era presidents largely centered on foreign matters, particularly the pressing issue of the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union. With growing anxiety on the American homefront due to escalating “red” paranoia, presidents had to take some sort of stance on communism in order to effectively manage national fears and bolster the US nation’s place on the world stage. As one of the only two nations still left standing in the aftermath of WWII, the US had raced to the position of superpower, as had Soviet Russia. With the common foe in Germany defeated, the US and Soviet Russia zeroed in on their opposing doctrines of democracy and communism, as well as their ambitions to somehow shape world order under their policies, and as a result, weapons development and proxy wars intensified between the two countries. These taut relations took its toll on the American people, unsettling the peace of mind of both the young and the old, as the probability of nuclear confrontation on US soil increased. Presidents of the conservative era up to George H.W. Bush assumed diverse roles in response to domestic American strain. From the continuation of détente under President Gerald Ford, to the reheating of the Cold War with the failure of détente under President James Carter (as Soviet advisors backed Cuban troops to support revolutionary factions, arms-control negotiations with Moscow stalled), to dramatic call for superior military strength and an “every-front” victory against communism from President Ronald Reagan, chief executive responses to red aggression evolved from hopefully conciliatory to an America-must-come-out-on-top outlook as homefront desires for the end of the Cold War grew more fervent. Adding to the conservative national mood was the outcome of the Vietnam conflict during Ford’s presidency in 1975. The United States had fought the North Vietnamese to a standstill before withdrawing its troops in 1973, and without direct American aid (although the US had continued to supply munitions to the South Vietnamese), the North easily
(cont.)
(cont.)
overtook the South. Ford had pleaded with Congress for an increased weapons supply for Vietnam (a measure that was rejected), but his admittance of South Vietnamese refugees gave greater diversity to US society. The aftermath of the confrontation did much to harm American military confidence, economic muscle, and global leadership in the eyes of foreigners. Domestic concerns regarding civil rights also characterized the growing conservatism in America. Feminists, blacks, and Native Americans alike contested issues such as the legalization of abortion, desegregation, and status as separate semisovereign peoples. Come President Carter’s term, “human rights” was the concern that guided foreign policy, but with the election of Reagan in 1980, a conservative movement emerged called the “New Right,” which partly developed in response to the countercultural protests of the 1960s and focused on cultural concerns like prayer in schools, abortion, homosexuality, and tougher criminal penalties. As president, Reagan and his leading evangelical Christians did the most to stimulate and harness the national inclination towards conservatism. Compared with the social concerns of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s presidential years, it seems that the domestic concerns of FDR’s first term (especially regarding the women’s movement, Native American rights, and the labor movement) saw more change through advances and reforms than did those of the conservative period (FDR and his wife Eleanor personally endorsed women assuming a larger part in politics and education, stopped the loss of Native American lands and revived tribes’ interest in their identity and culture with the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, and reasserted labor’s right to engage in self-organization and bargain collectively through representatives of their own choice with the Wagner Act of 1935.) In terms of international concerns, FDR’s initial main priority when Britain and France went to war with Germany was to maintain US neutrality, and in declining to use the country’s industrial strength to aid its democratic allies, he failed to recognize how it could have utilized its immense power to shape international events, compared with later presidencies that increasingly involved America in foreign affairs because of its acquired power status, only to lose much of the name they made for themselves when US intervention in Vietnam failed to produce the desired results.
(cont.)
Cammie Gelbuda
Korling
Period 1 & 4
The Presidencies of Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W Bush and Bill Clinton were all influenced by the American peoples growing conservatism that was first shown during President Nixon’s term of 1968. First, the American people, especially the younger generation, had big concerns about the military power and political views from the Vietnam conflict; second, the young to middle age Americans went through the Hippie Movement where they were concerned about having a more modest reaction to foreign and domestic affairs and third, these Presidents had to deal with Americas economy both inside and outside our borders.
When Gerald Ford took office in 1974, the American peoples views in terms of political and military influence had changed because of the Vietnam Conflict. Gerald Ford saw himself as “a moderate person in domestic affairs, a conservative person in fiscal affairs and a dyed-in the wool internationalist in foreign affairs.” One of President Ford’s goals was to slow down inflation. He also helped the United States remain a superpower even after losing the Vietnam conflict.
Part 2
During Jimmy Carter’s Presidency there was a new awareness for human rights. As a committed Christian, President Carter showed an overriding concern for “human rights” as the guiding principle of his foreign policy. President Carter won his election with only fifty-one percent of the vote, but especially important were the votes of African Americans. He received ninety-seven percent of their votes. President Carter also had a spectacular foreign policy achievement in 1978 when he helped Israel and Egypt develop a peace treaty. President Carter had to deal with the energy crisis and worked hard to improve the environment. President Carter took a very modest approach to both domestic and foreign affairs.
In 1986 President Ronald Reagan took office in a time of peace. He strengthened the economy by changing a lot of rules in the income tax code. For example, he excluded millions of people with lower incomes from paying taxes. President Reagan also became more popular by increasing military spending. He also appealed to the younger population by what has been called “Reaganomics”. Reaganomics cut government spending to the Environment Protection Agency, Medicare, welfare programs and public housing. Under President Regan the United States had a long run of prosperity. He increased defense spending and many Americans enjoyed this time of wealth and peace. Ronald Reagan also did a lot to address the nations push towards conservatism. Homosexuality, abortions and school prayers were some of the issues that President Reagan put his attention too.
Part 3
When George H.W Bush took office in 1989 the United States used its military power to fight the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. To protect the worlds oil supply and to control Saddam Hussein, President Bush threw America’s great military power at this war. The United States sent thousands and thousands of American troops to Kuwait. After President Bush had spent many weeks bombing Kuwait with air and missile attacks he sent in the land troops. This short one hundred hour war, called “Desert Storm” once again showed America’s great strength. This benefited not just the United States but also a lot of the world. This showed that America continued to have a big impact in keeping peace throughout the world.
During the Clinton administration the Presidents main focus was a reduction of the deficit. The deficit reduction along with an already growing economy strengthened the United States. In 1993, President Clinton had shrunk the federal deficit to its lowest level in more than 10 years. Soon there was even a federal budget surplus. President Clinton also passed the “Brandy Bill” which was a gun control law. This along with an anti-crime bill that included a ban on several types assault weapons was important to help hold the line against violence in America.
Because of the social, economic and political concerns of the younger population, the Presidency’s of Gerald Ford (1974), Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W Bush, and Bill Clinton (2001) were forced to rethink their policies, both foreign and domestic. The new conservative feelings of the young voting public demanded a country and world that was more peaceful and less threatening. These new conservative voters wanted a smaller government hand in our everyday lives. Less taxes, less welfare, in other words less government, period. From 1974 through 2001 both the entire nation and these five Presidents underwent a transformation that resulted in a lot of growth for America and a big role chan
(cont.)
By the administration of Ronald Reagan, the American public had grown tired of the conflicts of the previous decade that had surrounded their presidential leaders. From vice president Spiro T. Agnew’s resignation in the face of criminal charges relating to corruption during his term as governor, to Richard Nixon’s destruction in the infamous Water scandal, to Gerald Ford’s full presidential pardon, and even to James Carter blaming the American people for the nation’s problems, by the late 1970s, a fresh wave of conservatism had begun to take hold in the nation. While Nixon’ tried to respond to the concerns of the people, especially pertaining to the controversial Vietnam conflict, his years in office also represented the ambition of personal agendas and the expansion of executive power in order to achieve those means. With the conflicting policies of “Vietnamization” and “Cambodianization,” coupled with the air force’s secret, previously unknown bombing of Cambodia, people began to question the character and integrity of their American government. President Carter’s term also proved to be somewhat of a disappointment to some. With the failure of the US-Soviet SALT II treaty (intended to limit the levels of lethal strategic weapons) due to the hostage crisis of the US embassy in Teheran, the failure of the rescue mission, and Carter’s relatively weak, retaliatory sanctions against both the Iranians and the Soviet Union (Soviet Russia had invaded Afghanistan, threatening the Persian Gulf’s oil jugular), Carter’s presidency became largely defined as “inept.” All of this political uncertainty and turmoil swirling about provided the perfect stage for Ronald Reagan in the presidential campaign of 1980, who capitalized on this surge of conservatism by not only taking a page from Carter’s book and campaigning as a “Washington outsider” (one untainted by the corruption of Washington politics), but also by stressing the positive aspects of America when his campaign rival, Carter, focused on the downsides of the US society. In order to lead the conservative push by the people, Reagan sought a reversal of the political evolution of the preceding half century by choosing a conservative cabinet of “the best and the rightest.” His “Government is the problem” statement found a receptive audience in the early 1980s, as after four decades of advancing New Deal and Great Society programs, citizens became increasingly unhappy over paying bills for the further extension of government “benefits.” In response to the federal budget’s shift from defense to entitlement programs (like social security and welfare), Reagan advocated a more robust military buildup. Religion pervaded 1980s American politics as well, spurring Reagan to appoint many conservative judges to the courts in order to make it his principal instrument in the “cultural wars” demanded by the religious right. In short, he was a president who fit the mood of the time period. Reagan’s successor, George HW Bush, not only took lessons learned from past presidencies,
(cont.)
(cont.)
but with the end of the Cold War, he inherited an additional responsibility to dictate a new foreign policy for a new stage of history. As the president in office when US-Soviet hostilities desisted, it was up to HW Bush to set the course for the direction of the 20th century foreign policy, which, after Operation Desert Storm, appeared to center on Middle Eastern political stability as well as human rights, a concept that had been first championed two presidencies ago by Carter. Bill Clinton’s presidency also tried to bolster the nation in a new direction, with his attempt to reform the political campaigning system (one among several goals that failed).The effect of his terms, however, partly renewed a portion of American distrust of political leaders with the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, in which the president – while under oath – denied having an affair with a White House intern, a fiasco that eventually led to his impeachment in the House, but fell short in convincing senatorial minds. In contrast to the political concerns of the conservative era, the people under FDR worried about him trying to snag more presidential power than his office was entitled to. His outrageous “court-packing” schemes made some worry about the more expansive reach of the presidential office, especially when he shattered the two term tradition set by George Washington. Whereas America under FDR had efficiency but less presidential limit, America under the conservative-era presidents had proper presidential limits but supposedly less efficiency. Most people during FDR felt they could trust him (since he had implemented the New Deal and brought nominal relief and hope to the people with his “try something” policy), while in the growing mood of conservatism, many presidents had proven themselves lacking in the eyes of many citizens.
(cont.)
(cont.)
The US economy was a critical aspect in the terms of all of the conservative-era presidents. The Vietnam conflict, ended under the administration of Nixon, had left the entire country in financial disarray, especially during the presidencies of Ford, Carter, and Reagan. From trying to bolster the unstable economy to attempting to utilize it as a way to channel their presidential reform objectives, the role of the US economy developed along with the progression of America’s leaders. A weak economy pervaded the term of President Gerald Ford. Unemployment rates increased, as did fuel prices, thanks to the oil embargo organized by Arab nations against the United States (which ultimately resulted in the price rise of almost everything else). Inflation also remained an ominous factor during Ford’s presidency, and all over the country, people were encouraged to wears “Whip Inflation Now” (“WIN”) buttons. This sliding economy was eventually passed on to Ford’s successor, James Carter, as Ford had done little of significant effect to combat these deteriorating conditions. The stagflation that had taken root during Nixon’s term worsened with the country’s slow economic growth and the inflation left from Ford’s presidency (Carter had tried to balance the federal budget to satisfy conservative demands, but had had no more success than his presidential predecessors), but the most commanding concern of the time was by far the question over energy. The high cost of OPEC petroleum drove the American nation to seek alternate forms of energy, and President Carter himself contributed to the response towards the country’s energy woes by increasing funding for research into alternative sources of power as well as creating a new cabinet-level government agency (the Department of Energy) to oversee these efforts. It was in this particular field that the American people tried to offer up some solutions of their own, one of which included the prospect of nuclear power as a substitute for their energy. (This proposed solution lost much of its appeal, however, with the Three Mile Island incident, in which the failure of a nuclear
(cont.)
(cont.)
power plant ended up releasing radioactive materials into the atmosphere.) On the other hand, the administration of Ronald Reagan marked a turn in the way that conservative-era presidents had been approaching the economic issues of the time period. From Nixon to Ford to Carter, the US economy hadn’t improved much by the time Reagan took office, but in response to the pressure caused by the low economy state, Reagan attempted a new method with his “supply-side economics,” which began by helping corporations first, in the hope that the benefits and prosperity gained would “trickle down” to the lower masses. He also advocated large scale deregulation of banking, industry, and the environment, as well as a tax cut for all Americans. However, although he sought to eliminate the federal deficit by decreasing the federal government’s size, the result was the opposite, since his tax cuts, increased military spending, and the failure of his “New Federalism” ultimately led to the government borrowing money when government spending increased and government revenues decreased. As a result, many Americans blamed the deficit on Reagan, which partly prompted Congress to call for a tax increase in order to balance Reagan’s principles. As for Clinton, he also tried to blaze a new trail in economics by favoring free trade and the gradual reducing of tariff barriers over time, a policy evident in the North American Free Trade Agreement that eliminated trade barriers between the US, Mexico, and Canada. (This legislation was criticized by American labor unions, which feared that companies would move their factories elsewhere in order to reduce costs.)
The legacy of Reagan and the new right will leave an indelible mark on American history. After Richard Nixon was ousted out of the White House, a new wave of conservatism swept the nation for the remainder of the 20th century. During this time America faced many problems and the American government provided conservative solutions to these problems. America during this time sought conservative solutions for our problems and this can be seen in the Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton Administration’s policies. These presidents’ ideologies have shaped the modern political landscape and the Americans view on big government.
After Nixon left the White House in disgrace, his vice president Gerald Ford filled his place and salvaged the office of the president. While in office Ford was faced crippling inflation that was detriment on the nation’s economy. The solution Ford presented to the nation was a tax decrease and budget cuts as way to stimulate economic growth. Unlike LBJ’s domestic policy Ford sought to make budget cuts to accommodate the tax decreases, this shrank the size of the government. This became the starting point of supply side economics that will come to dominate the Reagan Administration’s economic policy. Despite Ford’s little contribution to conservative legislation and policy, he was able to salvage the conservative voting block that brought Nixon into office. Ford brought assurance back to the presidency but also the Republican Party because of his honesty and integrity. Even though he lost reelection, this will be an anomaly in long chain of Republican presidents.
Jimmy Carter despite his own party affiliation catered to the growing conservative electorate in America. Carter was faced with an economy amidst stagflation, which is when an economy has high inflation and slow economic growth. Carter sought to remedy some these problems by deregulating major industries in America like the airline industries. This outraged many ideologues in his party, who thought Carter was leaving behind the progressive ideas from the time of LBJ and FDR. This shows that the American electorate was growing more conservative as the president must appeal to the majority of the nation in order to win reelection. Carter also showed his conservative side when he lowered capital gains tax for the highest income bracket. This is another conservative move by Carter that further proves that nation is more conservative because he has to appeal to the majority of the nation. Carters failed presidency will allow for Reagan to slip into the White House unleash the true power of conservatism in America.
The legacy of Reagan and the new right will leave an indelible mark on American history. After Richard Nixon was ousted out of the White House, a new wave of conservatism swept the nation for the remainder of the 20th century. During this time America faced many problems and the American government provided conservative solutions to these problems. America during this time sought conservative solutions for our problems and this can be seen in the Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton Administration’s policies. These presidents’ ideologies have shaped the modern political landscape and the Americans view on big government.
After Nixon left the White House in disgrace, his vice president Gerald Ford filled his place and salvaged the office of the president. While in office Ford was faced crippling inflation that was detriment on the nation’s economy. The solution Ford presented to the nation was a tax decrease and budget cuts as way to stimulate economic growth. Unlike LBJ’s domestic policy Ford sought to make budget cuts to accommodate the tax decreases, this shrank the size of the government. This became the starting point of supply side economics that will come to dominate the Reagan Administration’s economic policy. Despite Ford’s little contribution to conservative legislation and policy, he was able to salvage the conservative voting block that brought Nixon into office. Ford brought assurance back to the presidency but also the Republican Party because of his honesty and integrity. Even though he lost reelection, this will be an anomaly in long chain of Republican presidents.
Jimmy Carter despite his own party affiliation catered to the growing conservative electorate in America. Carter was faced with an economy amidst stagflation, which is when an economy has high inflation and slow economic growth. Carter sought to remedy some these problems by deregulating major industries in America like the airline industries. This outraged many ideologues in his party, who thought Carter was leaving behind the progressive ideas from the time of LBJ and FDR. This shows that the American electorate was growing more conservative as the president must appeal to the majority of the nation in order to win reelection. Carter also showed his conservative side when he lowered capital gains tax for the highest income bracket. This is another conservative move by Carter that further proves that nation is more conservative because he has to appeal to the majority of the nation. Carters failed presidency will allow for Reagan to slip into the White House unleash the true power of conservatism in America.
The legacy of Reagan and the new right will leave an indelible mark on American history. After Richard Nixon was ousted out of the White House, a new wave of conservatism swept the nation for the remainder of the 20th century. During this time America faced many problems and the American government provided conservative solutions to these problems. America during this time sought conservative solutions for our problems and this can be seen in the Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton Administration’s policies. These presidents’ ideologies have shaped the modern political landscape and the Americans view on big government.
After Nixon left the White House in disgrace, his vice president Gerald Ford filled his place and salvaged the office of the president. While in office Ford was faced crippling inflation that was detriment on the nation’s economy. The solution Ford presented to the nation was a tax decrease and budget cuts as way to stimulate economic growth. Unlike LBJ’s domestic policy Ford sought to make budget cuts to accommodate the tax decreases, this shrank the size of the government. This became the starting point of supply side economics that will come to dominate the Reagan Administration’s economic policy. Despite Ford’s little contribution to conservative legislation and policy, he was able to salvage the conservative voting block that brought Nixon into office. Ford brought assurance back to the presidency but also the Republican Party because of his honesty and integrity. Even though he lost reelection, this will be an anomaly in long chain of Republican presidents.
Jimmy Carter despite his own party affiliation catered to the growing conservative electorate in America. Carter was faced with an economy amidst stagflation, which is when an economy has high inflation and slow economic growth. Carter sought to remedy some these problems by deregulating major industries in America like the airline industries. This outraged many ideologues in his party, who thought Carter was leaving behind the progressive ideas from the time of LBJ and FDR. This shows that the American electorate was growing more conservative as the president must appeal to the majority of the nation in order to win reelection. Carter also showed his conservative side when he lowered capital gains tax for the highest income bracket. This is another conservative move by Carter that further proves that nation is more conservative because he has to appeal to the majority of the nation. Carters failed presidency will allow for Reagan to slip into the White House unleash the true power of conservatism in America.
Amanda Jerd
Periods 3 and 6
The time period from 1968-1974 came after a period of shocking distrust in the government by the American people. Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, and Clinton each solved social, political, and economic issues in their own way. Socially, the new conservatism of America was defined by Americans and executed by the Legislative Branch; politically, national events as well as foreign affairs around the world shaped the future of America as a superpower; and economically, the different policies effected by each president directly influenced not only the American people and their thoughts about the government but also the respect of America by foreign countries. Therefore, the social, political, and economic choices made by the presidents during this time period manipulated the future of America and its inhabitants.
Steven Fraser
Period 6
1974 to 2001, the nation underwent massive transformations of the nation and of the population and their political inclinations and mood. The voting base shifted from the liberal policies of FDR to a more conservative mood. Nixon capitalized on this, and Reagan was the epitome of the conservative movement: instituting lower taxes and trying to appeal to the cries of “small government.” Ford, Carter, Reagan and George H.W. Bush all capitalized on this and tried to ride the wave of popular support of the small government plan. First, the nation’s action in Vietnam resulted in distaste for the government’s involvement in the peoples life, and later in the century the nation underwent it’s full realization of itself as the lone superpower as the USSR collapsed, and the US was forced to increase military spending in order to operate in a more domestic capacity; second, the conservative movement forced the government to change shape as it sought to appeal to the peoples idea of low taxes, and anti-government sentiments; and third, the result of the reduced taxes, and heightened military spending resulted in a mountain of debt as the federal deficit rose, resulting in cuts to some of FDR’s social plans. Therefore, because of the militaristic, political and economic concerns of this period the nation encountered significant growth and redefinition of the role of the government.The Vietnam war, still ongoing in Ford’s term instilled a distinct disgust of the disillusion populus who resented the shipment of human lives to the “jungle” to be packed in body bags like a sick version of Sinclair’s novel. This distaste for war instilled a mindset of anti government sentiments, and created a more conservative voting base. However, it did not result in cuts to military spending, as the US continually pumped more and more change into the military-industrial system in order to counter the malicious Soviets. This spending, and the tax cuts of Reagan would eventually lead to a huge hill of debt that would seemingly burry the once pristine US economy. The other result of the Vietnam war was the distrust of the US’ military power, as the troops were being beat by under-equipped and under-trained farmers. This would lead to the Gulf War and the flexing of the US’ military muscle. The US would see a shift in the role of its military in the 80’s and 90’s as Cater encountered the problem of terrorists who captured US personnel in Iran. This would lead to the failed rescue attempt, which would end in disaster and eventually led to the restructuring of special forces and their roles, and the transformation of the armed forces into a more domestic force which would be needed to counter the guerrilla forces that now faced the troops.
The hostages would eventually be sent back to the US just in time for Reagan’s inaugural speech, which only added to his popularity- in reality it was Carter who had labored day and night to free the hostages. Reagan during his presidency dropped funding to social welfare programs and sent the surplus from those programs to the defense budget, and further added to the already massive military expenses. The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in a shift of the armed forces who no longer faced the menacing threat of possible nuclear war. This resulted in a changed threat and reordering of the military as the nation realized its current role as the sole superpower, and the responsibility that comes with this package. George H.W. Bush continued military spending, and involved the US in a controversial war in the middle east. The Gulf War was a move by the US through UN to push Iraq out of Kuwait. This move contained significant US incentives as Kuwait was one of the US primary oil suppliers, and Kuwait, with its location, was able to control the flow of oil in and out of the the Gulf Sea. This war tested the ruthless efficiency of the armed forces as they completely dismantled the third largest army in the world in a matter of days. The speed and efficiency of the US war machine was reminiscent of German blitzkrieg. The US effectively outflanked the entire Iraqi army and destroyed the Iraqi armor and infantry. This conflict saw the use of post-Vietnam troops, and the successful campaign helped to restore the nation’s confidence. However, the early wrap up of the war lost the election for Bush. The conservative movement and the period from mid 1970’s to early 2000’s resulted in the escalation of military spending and the sharpening of the US rapier which could dodge the blows of the enemies broad sword and strike home by outmaneuvering larger forces; the modern military machine was born.From the mid 70’s to early 2000’s the nation encountered huge shifts in the culture of American society as rock and roll, consumerism, and the rampant outbreak of outrageous fashions and styles. The result of the dramatic youth was a conservative swing of voters who sought to remove government from the lives of their kids and their lives. This resulted in cries for lower taxes and cuts to social welfare plans that voters parents had so vigorously supported. Nixon was the first to capitalize on the conservatism, however, it was Reagan who epitomizes the political mood of the nation. Reagan cut spendings to public housing, EPA, Medicaid and other welfare programs and took up his laissez-faire in an aptly named package: Reaganomics. Reagan capitalized on his popularity by also significantly increasing the military spending, and by pushing for a return to the gold standard. George H.W. Bush continued the policies of Reagan, however, Bush returned funding to some social welfare programs. The movement of the people to cut programs and taxes had worked, and significantly contrasted the liberals of the previous destination who had wholeheartedly supported the New Deal and Great Society programs of FDR and LBJ respectively. This movement shows the power of the people, and this shift of the government to the people shows the ultimate success of the Democratic experiment that had so plagued the minds of Washington and the other forefathers.
The movement of the people against the welfare plans of the previous presidents presented the current men in the oval office with an opportunity to divert the funds, and that they did. The shifts of huge sums of money from welfare plans, coupled with the tax cuts led to massive deficits starting with Reagan. These programs continued with Bush who, although he followed Reagan’s example, claimed Reagan’s economic plan was “vudu economics.” The cuts to the welfare plans cut unnecessary programs which had been a necessity nearly nigh on a decade ago, however, the economy had stabilized and was slowly but not surprisingly rising. These programs included some cuts to public housing, the ERA, and Medicaid. However, Reagan wisely protected Social Security and Medicare. The military spending which constituted Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush’s terms put the nation under a mountain of debt; no longer could the government dish out surpluses to untested programs. This rise in debt further put the nation in reliance, and a nation which at the start of the century had been one of the largest exporters was one of the largest importers. The economic changes which constituted the last quarter of a century have created the economy we live in now, and the conservative movement still has far reaching effects into the politics of today.The nation from the mid 1970’s to late 2000’s have undergone massive migrations of politics, economics and military which now shape the world we live in. The efforts of Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush have created a large conservative voting base and has contrasted the earlier liberals of LBJ and FDR. Reagan capitalized on the mood of the nation and epitomizes the conservative reformer. His presidency was nearly flawless, but is partially marred by the Iran-Contra Affair. The change in the military and the effect of Vietnam spending, the call of the people for lower taxes, and the shift of the government to smaller government and laissez-faire policies have significantly changed today, and each president in this time period sought to ride the waves of conservatism to shores of greater popularity.
Bella Crosson
Period 1 & 4
In the time period between 1947 and 2000, major changes were taking place in the United States, most specifically in the political region – with the country’s government now turning away from a more liberal power and turning towards a more conservative outlook. The presidents at this time – Ford, Carter Reagan, Bush, and Clinton, were now forced to work with the Republican view of government, planning their attacks and strategies in running the country based off of the previous examples. First, with the end of the Cold War almost upon them, the people of the United States were striving towards a more peaceful way of life; second, they must rethink the issue of maintaining a stable economy themselves while at the same time alleviating the world’s; and third, these presidents must stand up with their country as she rises to become the world’s superpower. Therefore, in these three ways, these presidents were challenged in a way that they could either leave a lasting impression by their success, or forever ruin their name with their failures.
As the end of the forty-six year long Cold War became close enough to almost taste, the citizens of the United States were salivating for a non-violent close. In the meeting of President Carter with the Soviet Primary Brezhnev, they discussed the developments with the Salt II arrangements. Unfortunately, even after the signing of the limitations on the weaponry, problems arose because of the bill not passing in Congress. However, the government under President Carter was effectively able to reestablish a new type of partnership with China under its Communist rule, but this also stretched the tension between the United States and Iran. Next, under Ronal Reagan and his administration, the country was able to spread peace by the way of the arms race with Russia. This in turn bettered the companionship between President Reagan and President Gorbachev of Russia. Bush Sr. also worked side by side with President Gorbachev, ensuring the Russian’s role as president would be long lasting, but not without making sure that the bargain would be honored and the weapons in both countries would be effectively reduced. Clinton, however, did not maintain solid relationships, but instead focused on the American side of things. One in particular was the gun laws. Under Clinton, many new laws focused on protecting the everyday people living in the country were put into place thanks to the shocking effects of the Columbine shootings.
The United States and her people were now faced with the challenge of juggling two different things at once – the world economy while still stabilizing their own, and still maintaining a worldwide sense of peace. Beginning with President Ford, the efforts to give the needed attention to these growing national economy issues – one including the oil problem utterly failed. His Whip Inflation Now campaign was the expected disaster that did not accomplish anything. Due to the fact that the United States was the major world power at this time, the success of its economy greatly affected the rest of the world. Ford’s successor, Carter, was required to take a new direction in solving the economy crises, especially after Ford’s futile attempts which ended up nowhere. Jimmy Carter sought to repair the ever growing economy of the United States in his method of obtaining an alternate energy source. Although this too was an unfortunate failure, this was mostly due to the fact of the public’s general fear of nuclear power, particularly because of the issues arising in the power plants. When Reagan was elected, his campaign highlight was “Reaganomics”, so many were losing faith in ability to lead the country. However, his next plan was neither a failure nor a success, more like a marriage of the two. With the growing gap between the prosperous and prominent and the poor and plagued came the new issues of need for a steadying middle class. Reagan strived to restore the economy to its former glory, but all the while continuing to be involved in foreign affairs. In the Clinton administration, the main focus was the deficit decrease. These new liberals were at last able to effectively push a bill to Congress accomplishing this, and strive toward the goal of supporting the economy above and beyond the expectations.
Under the Carter administration, the first few political additions made by the United States in foreign affairs were in regards to both Egypt and Israel. Acting as the peace keeper between the two countries, America showed herself to be a worthy leader and superpower by the grace and the patience she shows directing these two nations. Also, under Bush Sr. the military forces of America were used in the Iraq conflicts in Kuwait trying to keep certain oil reserves in the United States’ possession, while the people in Iraq desired the oil to pay off war debts. Unfortunately, even to this day the United States is dependent on foreign oil, so at this time the United States decided against more conflict and redirected their attentions on other foreign issues that the solution would better a bigger chunk of the world.
The new position being taken by the United States, under President Bill Clinton’s administration, was plainly demonstrated through the handlings of alien affairs. A failure at the start, the NATO alliance was soon gave some flexibility and steps were taken in the right direction, for some new progress was made. Promoting America to the head of the NATO organization was a no brainer for many, although many countries were envious of the growing power of this great country. Not unlike Carter, Clinton involved the country, under himself, in helping along the relations between Israel and Palestine (which to this day is a very shaky relationship). However, this did not end well, for the assassination of the Israeli Prime Minister cause a great ruckus. These all indicate not only the leadership qualities of the United States of America, but also the desperation of many other countries in the world for the United States’ guidance in the great decisions. This also correlates with the growing idea of the need to a peaceful world without the addition of conflict.
Edith Chavez
Periods 1&6
From the year 1974 to the year 200, the United States saw voters shift from being liberal to becoming increasingly conservative. The presidents of this era had to tailor their image into this reality just as presidents in the past had made themselves right for the age. The days of isolationism were long gone for the country and the US showed its acceptance by increasing its involvement in foreign affairs; the populace was in want of a safer war as the end of the Cold War approached; and lastly, the country was now expected to keep a grip on the global economy despite its people caring more about their own national economy. These were the reflections of the issues from the last few decades of the 1900s.
The first major intervention of the US in the world was under Jimmy Carter. He acted as a negotiator between Israel and Egypt to bring peace to both countries, showing off the countries position as world leader. George HW Bush used the power of the United States Military to fight the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in an effort to make sure that the tyrant, Saddam Hussein, of Iraq wouldn’t get his hands on a large portion of the world’s oil supply. [PARENTHESIS] As selfish as the US’s motivation was (the US was and still is high dependent on oil) it not only benefitted the US, several of its allies also profited from Hussein not profiting. [POLYPTOTON] Clinton’s administration continued to show off the status of the nation through foreign affairs. The Balkans got thrown into chaos in the form of Serbian “ethnic cleansing” in 1999, the Soviet Union having feel apart nearly a decade before in 1991. NATO was unsuccessful but only at first as it started to get some movement. The United States was in charge of leading it and this was another way the country rubbed its power in the faces of others. [PERSONIFICATION] Clinton also got involved in the Middle East trying to get some sort of an agreement going between Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately it didn’t exactly work out since the Israeli Prime Minister, Yitz Rabin, got himself assassinated. The country may have been the most powerful but unfortunately when it came to making peace it did not have total control. This was also unfortunate for the US conservative populace which was expecting a new order in the world that’d be filled with peace.
The extreme want of safety in the world came as no surprise being that the Cold War had lasted several decades during which there was the constant threat of the destruction of the world if things heated up. Carter made some advancement in ending the Cold War through negotiating SALT II agreements with Breshnev though he wasn’t as successful as Nixon was with SALT. Both leaders signed it nut Congress didn’t pass it due to some of things it allowed Russia. The Carter Administration did however do as Nixon did to some extent and was successful in gaining favorable relations with the Chinese. Despite them being communist, they were not the same sort of communists as the Soviet Union. The Reagan Administration worked to end the Cold War by increasing military and diplomatic spending- though this wasn’t the best idea considering how low he made taxes go- but he didn’t manage to end the war. It was Gearge HW Bush and his administration that finally saw the USSR fall and its former satellite countries overthrow communism. What had really doomed the Soviet Union was Gorbachev with his Perestroika and Glasnost Reform Movements. All Bush Sr. had to do was make sure the Soviet leader remained in power and that he would stick with these two forms as they were far more capitalistic than communistic. Clinton was forced to increase gun control after the Oklahoma bombings and the Columbine shootings.
The government was trying to go out into the world and put its power to use, however, the people wanted the government to be there for them and to help out the national economy. [SETENTIAL ADVERB] But by this point the US economy would influence the world economy due to its massive consumerism combined with its international status as the world power. President Ford was the first to start with this as he was faced with the challenge of solving the economic problems brought on by the Oil Embargo and did so through his Whip Inflation New (WIN) campaign, but it proved to be ineffective. [PARENTHESIS] Jimmy Carter was left to face the challenges Ford was unable to conquer and as shown by the mistakes of Ford, Carter would have to take a different path. The president felt that alternative energy would be a wise way to fix things but the Three Mile Island Incident seemed like an ominous warning about the dangers of nuclear power to the American people and so this try failed too. Ronald Reagan tried to fix up the country with his “Reagonomics” as known as supply side economics though this started a crazy amount of spending and he also decided to cut back taxes resulting in a 2 trillion dollar addition to the total debt by the end of his two terms. It widened the divisions between social classes as well. But Reagan was similar to the other two in that he was trying to fix the world’s economy by first fixing the world’s most powerful economy: the United States. When Clinton stepped into office, he focused more on passing legislation to reduce the debt and this actually helped with strengthening the economy and expanding it not just in the US but internationally as well.
The nation had grown to be quite large due to westward expansionism the century before and the saw itself strengthened by the wars following the frontier closing. The populace however, was more concerned about how things had gone in the past to choose candidates that would give them what they wanted and fix what they didn’t like. Failures of the liberal party before this era pushed voters to become increasingly conservative and despite the many failures of the conservatives they choose, there also many successes, enough to make the people continue their shift.
Nick Palmares
per. 4
in the mid 1900's, Reagan was the epitome of the conservative movement: instituting lower taxes and trying to appeal to the cries of “small government.” Ford, Carter, Reagan and George H.W. Bush all capitalized on this and tried to ride the wave of popular support of the small government plan. First, the nation’s action in Vietnam resulted in distaste for the government’s involvement in the peoples life, and later in the century the nation underwent it’s full realization of itself as the lone superpower as the USSR collapsed, and the US was forced to increase military spending in order to operate in a more domestic capacity; second, the conservative movement forced the government to change shape as it sought to appeal to the peoples idea of low taxes, and anti-government sentiments; and third, the result of the reduced taxes, and heightened military spending resulted in a mountain of debt as the federal deficit rose, resulting in cuts to some of FDR’s social plans. Therefore, because of the militaristic, political and economic concerns of this period the nation encountered significant growth and redefinition of the role of the government.The Vietnam war, still ongoing in Ford’s term instilled a distinct disgust of the disillusion populus who resented the shipment of human lives to the “jungle” to be packed in body bags like a sick version of Sinclair’s novel. This distaste for war instilled a mindset of anti government sentiments, and created a more conservative voting base. However, it did not result in cuts to military spending, as the US continually pumped more and more change into the military-industrial system in order to counter the malicious Soviets. This spending, and the tax cuts of Reagan would eventually lead to a huge hill of debt that would seemingly burry the once pristine US economy. The other result of the Vietnam war was the distrust of the US’ military power, as the troops were being beat by under-equipped and under-trained farmers. This would lead to the Gulf War and the flexing of the US’ military muscle
The US would see a shift in the role of its military in the 80’s and 90’s as Cater encountered the problem of terrorists who captured US personnel in Iran. This would lead to the failed rescue attempt, which would end in disaster and eventually led to the restructuring of special forces and their roles, and the transformation of the armed forces into a more domestic force which would be needed to counter the guerrilla forces that now faced the troops.The hostages would eventually be sent back to the US just in time for Reagan’s inaugural speech, which only added to his popularity- in reality it was Carter who had labored day and night to free the hostages. Reagan during his presidency dropped funding to social welfare programs and sent the surplus from those programs to the defense budget, and further added to the already massive military expenses. The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in a shift of the armed forces who no longer faced the menacing threat of possible nuclear war. This resulted in a changed threat and reordering of the military as the nation realized its current role as the sole superpower, and the responsibility that comes with this package. George H.W. Bush continued military spending, and involved the US in a controversial war in the middle east. The Gulf War was a move by the US through UN to push Iraq out of Kuwait. This move contained significant US incentives as Kuwait was one of the US primary oil suppliers, and Kuwait, with its location, was able to control the flow of oil in and out of the the Gulf Sea. This war tested the ruthless efficiency of the armed forces as they completely dismantled the third largest army in the world in a matter of days. The speed and efficiency of the US war machine was reminiscent of German blitzkrieg. The US effectively outflanked the entire Iraqi army and destroyed the Iraqi armor and infantry. This conflict saw the use of post-Vietnam troops, and the successful campaign helped to restore the nation’s confidence. However, the early wrap up of the war lost the election for Bush. The conservative movement and the period from mid 1970’s to early 2000’s resulted in the escalation of military spending and the sharpening of the US rapier which could dodge the blows of the enemies broad sword and strike home by outmaneuvering larger forces; the modern military machine was born.From the mid 70’s to early 2000’s the nation encountered huge shifts in the culture of American society as rock and roll, consumerism, and the rampant outbreak of outrageous fashions and styles. The result of the dramatic youth was a conservative swing of voters who sought to remove government from the lives of their kids and their lives. This resulted in cries for lower taxes and cuts to social welfare plans that voters parents had so vigorously supported. Nixon was the first to capitalize on the conservatism, however, it was Reagan who epitomizes the political mood of the nation. Reagan cut spendings to public housing, EPA, Medicaid and other welfare programs and took up his laissez-faire in an aptly named package: Reaganomics. Reagan capitalized on his popularity by also significantly increasing the military spending, and by pushing for a return to the gold standard. George H.W. Bush continued the policies of Reagan, however, Bush returned funding to some social welfare programs. The movement of the people to cut programs and taxes had worked, and significantly contrasted the liberals of the previous destination who had wholeheartedly supported the New Deal and Great Society programs of FDR and LBJ respectively. This movement shows the power of the people, and this shift of the government to the people shows the ultimate success of the Democratic experiment that had so plagued the minds
of Washington and the other forefathers.The movement of the people against the welfare plans of the previous presidents presented the current men in the oval office with an opportunity to divert the funds, and that they did. The shifts of huge sums of money from welfare plans, coupled with the tax cuts led to massive deficits starting with Reagan. These programs continued with Bush who, although he followed Reagan’s example, claimed Reagan’s economic plan was “vudu economics.” The cuts to the welfare plans cut unnecessary programs which had been a necessity nearly nigh on a decade ago, however, the economy had stabilized and was slowly but not surprisingly rising. These programs included some cuts to public housing, the ERA, and Medicaid. However, Reagan wisely protected Social Security and Medicare. The military spending which constituted Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush’s terms put the nation under a mountain of debt; no longer could the government dish out surpluses to untested programs. This rise in debt further put the nation in reliance, and a nation which at the start of the century had been one of the largest exporters was one of the largest importers. The economic changes which constituted the last quarter of a century have created the economy we live in now, and the conservative movement still has far reaching effects into the politics of today.The nation from the mid 1970’s to late 2000’s have undergone massive migrations of politics, economics and military which now shape the world we live in. The efforts of Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush have created a large conservative voting base and has contrasted the earlier liberals of LBJ and FDR. Reagan capitalized on the mood of the nation and epitomizes the conservative reformer. His presidency was nearly flawless, but is partially marred by the Iran-Contra Affair. The change in the military and the effect of Vietnam spending, the call of the people for lower taxes, and the shift of the government to smaller government and laissez-faire policies have significantly changed today.
Post a Comment