One, founded upon the indigenous Yankee-Protestant political traditions, and upon middle-class life, assumed and demanded the constant, disinterested activity of the citizen in public affairs, argued that political life ought to be run, to a greater degree than it was, in accordance with general principles and abstract laws apart from the superior to personal needs, and expressed a common feeling that government should be in good part an effort to moralize the lives of individuals while economic life should be intimately related to the stimulation and development of individual character.
The Age of Reform is a candid approach to the reforms from to The New Deal did not intercede between the public and big business because the public wanted economic restoration, not regulation. For example, the Progressive loathed machine politics, but the New Dealer were willing to co-opt them to ameliorate the Depression's effects.
I say critical, but not hostile, for I am criticizing largely from within The tradition of Progressive reform is the one upon which I was reared and upon which my political sentiments were formed, as it is, indeed, the tradition of most intellectuals in America.
In many ways the struggles of the Progressive era were influenced by the conflict between the two codes elaborated on one side by the highly moral leaders of Protestant social reform and on the other by the bosses, political professionals, and immigrant masses.
To my mind, that is productive work, more productive than almost all archivally-driven monographs, although now that I mention them, what else is there to synthesize?
My criticisms of the Populist-Progressive tradition, in so far as they are at all tinctured by conservatism, are no doubt in part a response to this mood. On the other hand, if I knew the history of my people, as Lenin clearly knew his, why.
Submit Thank You for Your Contribution!
I knew nothing about American history except that the civil rights movement had tried and failed to redeem the promise of. Hofstadter's foray into the social sciences raised eyebrows at the time. Rather than just provide a copious number of details of each reform movement, Hofstadter instead analyzes the ideas of the average participant, not the legislative or political philosophies.
American traditions of political revolt had been based upon movements against monopolies and special privileges in both the economic and the political spheres, against social distinctions and the restriction of credit, against limits upon the avenues of personal advancement.
Turner, Beard, Parrington, systematically analyzes and criticizes the intellectual foundations and historical validity of Charles Beard's historiography ; the book "signalled a growing support for neoconservatism" by Hofstadter. Some of the social strata and many of the social types that had seen great merit in the more limited reforms of the Progressive era found themselves in a bewildering new situation and, especially after the passing of the most critical depression years, grew increasingly offended by the novelties with which they were surrounded.
Vintage Books, In the last semester of my senior year, I took a course in American history for the first time since high school because my comrades gently insisted on it—they figured it would lighten me up a little, make me less earnest about becoming a Bolshevik through fanatic study of Russian history and literature.
Progressivism also longed for the agrarian myth, but it was based even more in the anxieties of the old "Mugwump" elite in the rise of what they viewed as a crass, selfish, not service-minded set of new money industrialists.
Eric Goldman, in his history of American reform, Rendezvous with Destiny, criticizes Progressive intellectuals for propagating a moral relativism that, by making all moral judgments the products of particular locales and particular historical situations, eventually undermined confidence in the significance of moral judgments as such.
Hofstadter did research after the book on Social Darwinism, but he was mostly a synthesizer, a scholar who used the findings of others in new ways, making them newly useful.The Age of Reform – Richard Hofstadter.
Project description What is Hofstadters thesis in the book? Write a paragraph on this. TO Beatrice. L. C. catalog card number: The Age of Reform [Richard Hofstadter] on dfaduke.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Winner of the Pulitzer Prize in Non-Fiction. This book is a landmark in American political thought.
Preeminent Richard Hofstadter examines the passion for progress and reform that colored the entire period from to with startling and stimulating results/5(23). InRichard Hofstadter published The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R., his account of the Gilded Age and its two main movements, Populism and Progressivism.
Hofstadter believed that Populism, Progressivism, and even the New Deal were all the same movement based on the same thing, reform.
Richard Hofstadter. The Age of Reform; From Bryan to F.D.R.
(New York: Vintage Books, ) In the last semester of my senior year, I took a course in American history for the first time since high school because my comrades gently insisted on it—they figured it would lighten me up a little, make. The Age of Reform was framed around the theory of"status politics," which came from an essay by German sociologist Max Weber, published in the United States by.
Richard Hofstadter () was a prolific writer and commentator on the Gilded Age and Progressive Eras, a founding member of the "Consensus School" of American history, and a scathing critic of the conservatism of his day.5/5(5).Download