Decrypting Politics

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

Being two of the most respected and qualified academicians on public policy, Charles Murray, and Robert B. Reich have never been short of making controversial and contradicting statements which arguably serves only their interest of getting an audience. Public policy as it is has been subjected to lots of changes throughout the history leading to different reactions and opinions from different individuals. “What it means to be a Libertarian-A Personal Interpretation” written by Charles Murray, explicitly describes how the society should view the government by claiming it can help in achieving overall happiness and allowing members of the society to have a right to individual freedom when coping with the changes brought by public policy. On the other hand, Robert B. Reich’s “Aftershock the next Economy and America’s Future” talks about overcoming our problems by keeping a tier of classes. This paper discusses the contradicting views of these two writers.

The history of American conservatism reveals the diversity of the ideologies and values that comprise the modern public philosophy. This history also reveals the fragility of the conservative coalition. Conservatives agree primarily on the concepts that they oppose, rather than on principles that they share. Professor James Ceaser argues that “much of the unity that exists among conservatives stems from their shared antipathy to liberalism. It serves as the common heart that beats in the breast of the conservative movement’s diverse and often fractious components.” Ceaser provides a useful analogy for the conservative movement. The “common heart” of conservatism is an antagonism towards liberalism that supplies the blood to the movement’s four heads: Traditionalism, Classical Libertarianism, Neoconservatism, and the Religious Right. Caesar asserts that, in politics, there is no shame “to relying in the adhesive nature supplied by a common

The liberal ideas of FDR’s New Deal were coming to an end. The failing economy, poor political leaders, and drastic social issues that took place in the 1970s left Americans searching for salvation. Over the next decade, the United States will later find that salvation in conservativism.

In the wake of the Market Revolution, transportation and industrial production hit an economic boom. Not only were goods cheaper to produce through mechanical processing, but they were also marketable for much longer distances. This stimulated the economy and also brought forth a general consensus known as “republicanism”. “Republicans thought that a free society and government depended on a citizenry with the strength, independence, and virtue to perpetuate liberty.” (Watson 255). It was thought that liberty would be created in abundance if the average citizen was to do his part in living a self – sufficient life style – free from governmental assistance or influence – and demonstrate strength in financial and political perseverance. And, last but not least, they were expected to display morally inclined discretion. Only when these three necessities were fulfilled would American liberty truly endure. On that note, social changes that threatened independence, usually by weakening the financial standing of farmers, irked politically active Americans. As liberty was threatened under corrupt governmental institutions, Americans recalled the very motivation behind the

After reading “The Conservative Ascendancy: How the Republican Right Rose to Power in Modern America”, written by Donald Critchlow, I learned how the modern conservative movement swept through the country. Critchlow talks about the changing of attitude in America and how it affected the conservative movement. He covers the Reagan era which was considered the golden age of modern conservatism, along with several other important events. Along with the revival of the churches and the New Deal. For this response I will discuss Critchlow’s argument and how he supported it. Along with Critchlow’s view on neo-conservatives and whether they damaged or helped the conservative movements. The final thing I will talk about is who Critchlow mentioned in

First and foremost, it is common knowledge that spirituality champions for good morals, equity, respect for human dignity, ethics and equality among all members of the human race. It is the above virtues that facilitate harmony and peaceful coexistence of human beings in all our day to day interactions. Reinhold, from his studies conducted in one of Detroit’s big automobile factories, noted numerous conflicts between Christian ideals and the realities that were in the industry. Surprisingly enough, Edward Earle conducted a research on twelve of America’s major corporations and urged all Americans to emulate them, a totally different thought from what

The respected political scientist James Q. Wilson summarized this political reality in a single sentence: "Telling people who want clean air, a safe environment, fewer drug dealers, a decent retirement, and protection against catastrophic medical bills that the government ought not to do these things is wishful or suicidal politics." Along with Wilson, Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, recently noted that the "government social safety net for the truly indigent is one of the greatest achievements of our society....We have to declare peace on the safety net.”-(National Summit Video) Providing such services and securing that safety net does not mean accepting the technocratic mindset of the liberal welfare state. It means replacing that mindset with a conservative approach that puts government on the side of civil society and private enterprise in order to achieve a more just and thriving

“Within the GOP, for instance, are social conservatives easier to maintain “traditional“cultural forms, ad fiscal conservatives who want to install laissez-faire economic policies” (“Why U.S conservatives should embrace socialist, European-style economic,” Bruenig). ObamaCare was anticipated to decrease people’s workday, this was presented to be the core conflict. The Congressional budget office wanted to reduce hours by 2%, which would equal 2.5 million full time jobs. “From a traditionalist perspective, you can see how this might be good news. It

The conservative movement has played a crucial role in American politics in the post war era. Ronald Story and Bruce Laurie indentify various elements of the American conservatism. These elements include challenging authoritarian governments and modernist culture, upholding tradition, Christian religion and the rule of law, defending western civilization, and supporting republicanism. American conservatism has been characterized by competing ideologies and tension throughout history. The Americans who are politically liberal and economically conservative favor free trade, minimal state intervention, low taxes, and a small government. On the other hand, conservatives hold the view that American traditional values are normally undermined by

The 1950s in America are often described as a time of complacency. By contrast, the 1960s and 1970s were a time of great change. But the economy of the 70s was not stable because of the Oil crisis and presidents did not seem to find a solution to get the economy work again. For the right, the federal government had been spending too much money on the social programs. Conservatism believes that the best way to run a society is to maintain social and political framework and that the government should be as limited as possible,

Taxes have always been a contentious issue of debate in the United States; furthermore it is exacerbated by the specific philosophy of individuals, states, and regions. Too be clearer, nobody enjoys paying taxes, however it is the cost we pay for having civilization. Nevertheless, selfishness creeps in to many individuals who feel no particular benefit. Taxes have a real way of polarizing many people from different socio-economic backgrounds, because a tax is inexorably linked to a person’s belief-system. For instance, in the context of social welfare policy liberals are inclined to feel that the tax-burden should be heaped on individuals who have benefited the most from “the system”. On the other hand, we have conservatives who feel they did not receive any support, and all that is necessary is hard work and perseverance to succeed. I am not suggesting either one is correct; it is only a simple illustration to show the relation between pocketbook and personal belief. I hope studying the tax structures of New Jersey and Alabama will give me insight they both reconcile their political beliefs with their individual tax structures.

In his article “How Politics Breaks Our Brains, And How We Can Put Them Back Together,” Brian Resnick claims that by nature, most Americans have a biased opinion. They automatically view political issues from a red perspective or a blue perspective. Resnick says that the brain includes multiple regions. Each region of the human brain performs a different task. For that reason, everyone thinks and acts a little bit differently. To test this theory, researchers at New York University wanted to conduct an experiment to compare the differences between conservative and liberal minded people. Resnick volunteered himself for the experiment. To conduct the experiment, head scientist Van Bravel and his team used a computer to combine similar looking

Abstract. This essay attempts to explore the various features of Liberalism that are explained by the world politics and the ones obscured by it. It looks into how elements like Free trade, Internationalism, Theory of Democratic Peace, Security Co-Binding have shaped global politics and how the idea of liberal and illiberal fights been obscured in the realm of global politics. The essay is concluded with a gist of how post-cold war liberalism has shaped the west and is responsible in engaging the world in a liberal order.

Conservatives believe citizens should think more about what they could and should do for themselves instead of thinking about what the government could do for them (Dunn, iii-iv). The fear is that the central government would end up controlling more and that there would be social and moral decay (Dunn, iii-iv).