The Neoconservatism Movement - Out of the Ashes of Failed Liberalism
Neoconservatism is a relatively recent term, no more than thirty or forty years old. In fact, many of its members never truly accepted the term at all. And while its name may be relatively easy to pinpoint, its roots refuse to be tied to any one person, event, or movement. Rather, neoconservatism stems from a number of social and political factors.
One of the largest sociopolitical factors in the development of neoconservatism revolves around the 1960s liberal movement. Himmelstein states in his book, To the Right, that a number of "factors contributed to a general crisis of confidence in American institutions and created a political opening for . . . the Right, which presented itself in the late 1970s as a ‘revitalization movement’" (6). It seems that Himmelstein is describing a progression parallel to the liberal movement of the 1960s, on a smaller scale and with an alternative ideology hindered by fewer limitations. Accordingly, Francis states, in Beautiful Losers, that "the emergence in the 1970s of the political and intellectual movement known as "neoconservatism" is generally regarded as a response to the failures of conventional liberalism to deal effectively with the challenges of that decade [i.e. 1960s]" (95). So, are we to believe that neoconservatism stems exclusively from disenchanted 1960s liberals? Irving Kristol, a noted fore-founder of the movement, attaches an even more specific label, describing neoconservatism as "the erosion of liberal faith among a relatively small . . . group of scholars and intellectuals, and the movement of this group toward a more conservative point of view," without completely conforming to the traditional Repub...
... middle of paper ...
...Cited
Dorrien, Gary. The Neoconservative Mind: Politics, Culture, and the War of Ideology. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993.
Ehrman, John. The Rise of Neoconservatism: Intellectuals and Foreign Affairs 1945- 1994. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.
Francis, Samuel. Beautiful Losers: Essays on the Failure of American Conservatism. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1993.
Himmelstein, Jerome L. To the Right: The Transformation of American Conservatism. Berkely: University of California Press, 1990.
Kaiser, Charles. 1968 in America: Music, Politics, Chaos, Counterculture, and the Shaping of a Generation. New York: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1988.
Kristol, Irving. Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea. New York: The Free Press, 1995.
White, Theodore H. The Making of the President—1968. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc., 1969.
Sidney M. Milkis, Michael Nelson. The American Presidency Origins & Development, 1776-2011. Washington DC: CQ Press, 2008.
In the late1960’s American politics were shifting at a National level with liberalism being less supported as its politics were perceived as flawed, both by people on the left who thought that liberalism was not as effective as more radical political enterprises and by conservatives who believed that liberal politics were ostensibly crippling the American economy.
Looking at the United States in 1965, it would seem that the future of the liberal consensus was well entrenched. The anti-war movement was in full swing, civil rights were moving forward, and Johnson's Great Society was working to alleviate the plight of the poor in America. Yet, by 1968 the liberal consensus had fallen apart, which led to the triumph of conservatism with the election of President Reagan in 1980. The question must be posed, how in the course of 15 years did liberal consensus fall apart and conservatism rise to the forefront? What were the decisive factors that caused the fracturing of what seemed to be such a powerful political force? In looking at the period from 1968 to the triumph of Reagan in 1980, America was shaken to the core by the Watergate scandal, the stalling of economic growth, gas shortages, and the Vietnam War. In an era that included the amount of turbulence that the 1970's did, it is not difficult to imagine that conservatism come to power. In this paper I will analyze how the liberal consensus went from one of its high points in 1965 to one of its lows in 1968. From there I will show how conservatism rose to power by the 1980 elections. In doing so, I will look at how factors within the American economy, civil rights issues, and political workings of the United States contributed to the fracturing of the liberal consensus and the rise of conservatism.
...Hofstadter, Richard. The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It. Knopf, New York: Vintage Books, 1989. Print.
Hofstadter, Richard. The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It. New York: Vintage, 1989.
Schwarz, Frederic D. "The Demagogue’s Downfall." American Heritage Nov.-Dec. 2004: volume 55, issue 6. Web.
Torrey, E. Fuller, M.D. (2011). Homeless Mentally Ill Fact, Figures, and Anecdotes. Retrieved from http://mentalillnesspolicy.org/consequences/homeless-mentally-ill.html
Starting during the 1970s, factions of American conservatives slowly came together to form a new and more radical dissenting conservative movement, the New Right. The New Right was just as radical as its liberal opposite, with agendas to increase government involvement beyond the established conservative view of government’s role. Although New Right politicians made admirable advances to dissemble New Deal economic policies, the movement as a whole counters conservativism and the ideologies that America was founded on. Although the New Right adopts conservative economic ideologies, its social agenda weakened the conservative movement by focusing public attention to social and cultural issues that have no place within the established Old Right platform.
Kraig, R.A. (2000). The 1912 Election and the Rhetorical Foundations of the Liberal State. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, Volume 3, Number 3, Fall 2000, pp. 363-395
After reviewing the literature, this author pinpointed several environmental, individual, and agent factors, which make up the epidemiologic triad, contribute to the topic of mental health in the homeless.
...tory of the American Radical Tradition, ed. Timothy Patrick McCarthy and John McMillian (New York: The New Press, 2011), 569.
Although homelessness and mental illness are two separate experiences, they have similar starts. Those that suffer from infantile misfortune are probable to becoming homeless by the time they are adults and could have physical or mental health difficulties (Montgomery et al. S265). Having a history of abuse, being a woman, and long periods of homelessness are big factors in the development of a mental illness (Helfrich et al. 116). The victimization state of mind experienced by many homeless is detrimental in why they cannot cope with their current situation. This also means that they could focus too much on one thing and become hysterical or paranoid. Witnessing a traumatic event is increased by homelessness and is more likely to cause mental disorders (qtd. in Helfrich et al. 116). Illnesses like PTSD are linked directly to the victim seeing a traumatic scene (Helfrich et al...
The time between 1960 and 1989 was marked by immense changes in American life. Inflation and unemployment rates were on the rise, liberal social movements were taking place across the country calling for women’s and civil rights and a distrust of the government’s ability to maintain the nation was brewing. Through all of these changes, Americans hoped for stability and a return to traditional, religious values to right society. While some may argue that the rise of a new conservatism between 1960 and 1989 came about as a result of economic instability, in reality, the desire for a government that was reliable and strong on both foreign and domestic issues and for a stable society centered
Smoking cigarettes is a detrimental practice not only to the smoker, but also to everyone around the smoker. According to an article from the American Lung Association, “Health Effects” (n.d.), “Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S., causing over 438,000 deaths per year”. The umbrella term for tobacco use includes the use of cigarettes, cigars, e-cigs and chewing tobacco. While tobacco causes adverse health consequences, it also has been a unifying factor for change in public health. While the tobacco industries targets specific populations, public health specifically targets smokers, possible smokers, and the public to influence cessation, policies and education.
Today, through out the country, and even right here in Ames, Iowa, there is an enormous problem of cigarette smoke putting people?s lives in danger. By passing a ban to make smoking illegal in public places, the lives of people who have been made to suffer from second-hand smoke will be improved, and people who currently smoke will be discouraged from continuing to do so. This will help to improve the lives of all Ames citizens.