Analysis of Modern US History - Research Paper Example

Modern US History James Stuart in his book titled ‘Native Americans in the 20th century sheds light on the reforms that took place after Franklin D. Roosevelt took charge at the White House in 1933. It was during this time that Collier served as a Senate investigator which gave him a good opportunity for exploring and observing the deplorable conditions that prevailed. When Roosevelt appointed Harold L. Ickes, a political liberal as his Secretary of the Interior, Ickes specified both to Roosevelt and the Senate that he wanted Collier to be his Commissioner of Indian Affairs. Collier worked hard and soon gained respect and admiration from Roosevelt and Ickes who were also open to incorporating new and unconventional ideas while making changes in their government policies. (pg.108) During the Depression Collier was given permission to change or modify government policies because of their steadfast faith in him. Collier initiated what is called the “Indian New Deal’ which was a revolutionary approach to Native American reforms. He was a staunch believer of cultural pluralism and understood the importance of ethnic values and community solidarity and therefore adopted an acculturated approach in order to assimilate the Native Americans into the mainstream society. James Stuart clearly describes how Collier attacked the ‘Indian problem’ and finally succeeded in assimilating the Native Americans into the dominant society. In his enlightening book he tells us how Collier met with a lot of opposition from American critics but he firmly believed in his goals and wanted to fulfill them at any cost. The earlier allotment program had been a major social and economic disaster and so he set out to reconstitute the tribes and enhance their traditional land base. In bringing about other reforms, Collier went a step further in convincing President Roosevelt to abolish the ‘Board of Indian Commissioners as he felt that it was a huge obstacle in the wake of reform. (Pg. 109) Collier wanted the Native Americans to play a more active role in decision making and sent them for specialized training for the management of their land and natural resources. He also insisted that the Federal Government should not in the name of assimilation suppress the culture and tradition of the Native Americans but on the other hand should help in preserving their nativity. Stuart’s book also states that with the full support of President Roosevelt, Collier was in a position to bring about other reforms involving relief measure to the Native Americans. The Congress passed the Pueblo Relief Act on May, 31st, 1933 granting additional payment to the Native Americans who had been inadequately paid by the Pueblo Lands Board. (Pg. 110) He also implemented the ‘New Deal’ legislation to give relief to the destitute Native Americans who suffered greatly during the Great Depression. (Pg. 110) Stuart’s book is a real eye opener as it helps us to understand the political situation post 1933 and the reforms that were brought out during the period after the Great Depression. Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian in their article titled ‘How Government Prolonged the Depression’ shed light on the reforms that were introduced by the Federal government in lieu of putting an end to the crisis of the Great Depression. In addressing the crisis the ‘New Deal’ was introduced and raised hopes that the economic downturn would change its course and work out in their favor. The article tells us that the primary aim of the ‘New Deal’ initiative was to encourage Americans to get back to work. However, According to Harold L. Cole and Lee E Ohanian, this did not happen for the mere fact that employment was not restored because on an average there was much less work. This situation had a great impact on the per capita consumption that remained about 25% below the trend level all through the New Deal initiative. Harold L. Cole and Lee E Ohanian, are of the opinion that the Great Depression continued to have an impact even long after the FDR came into office. Their article gives us many examples to prove their statement. They tell us that during the New Deal, the economic situation was quite favorable and productive in many respects. For example, after 1933, productivity increased to a great extent and prices of commodities became stable while liquidity was aplenty. In the face of such growth in productivity Nobel Laureate Robert Lucas and Leonard Rapping concluded that the economy should have been stabilized and normalized by 1935. However, this did not happen for many reasons. Though many of the New Deal policies benefited the existing economy, such as Social Security, financial stability and unemployment benefits, yet the basic economic principles were violated by others who brought about market policies such as suppressing healthy competition and raising prices above the normal level. The National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) was one of the most damaging policies because it put aside the antitrust acts of the nation and granted permission to industries to increase their prices provided they share their monopoly rents with the workers by increasing their wages much higher than their productivity growth. With an aim to snuff out ‘ excessive competition’ the NIRA spread its tentacles to over 500 industries ranging from steel, hosiery, auto’s and poultry production. The article by Harold L. Cole and Lee E Ohanian also describe how these codes of conduct brought about distortion in the economy by increasing the prices and wages, restricting output and eventually reducing the capacity of production. Though the increased wages did benefit the fortunate few who had jobs in NIRA companies, in the bigger picture it shrunk employment and productive initiatives because the costs in the form of high wages exceeded the growth in productivity. Their article is important as it sheds light on how certain reforms or policies can have a negative effect on a country’s economy Carlos Gibson in his article on ‘American Regionalism and the United Nations’ explains to us about the ‘Monroe Doctrine’ stating that it was at first a unilateral policy of the United States that was initiated to safeguard America from European encroachment such as Great Britain and France. The Monroe Doctrine upheld the values of freedom, democracy and peace that reflected the progress of humankind. However, as times changed the Monroe Doctrine held different meanings for different people. Both Great Britain and France were on a campaign to gain economic control over the poorer nations by lending them money with the knowledge that they would not be able to pay it back. Gibson explains how by the end of the 19th century American regionalism became institutionalized after the Pan American Union was formed by the American Congress. Ever since this happened, the very concept of American regionalism became distorted and paved the way for a unilateral enforcement policy by America which was at that time under the leadership of President Wilson. President F.D. Roosevelt, however, did not find this policy favorable and so introduced a policy called the ‘Good Neighbor Policy’ by which the United States would build a good and healthy relationship with other neighboring countries and states. This policy was well accepted and guided by Sumner Welles who took all efforts to initiate and establish regionalism in America that was based on equal partnership. This policy had positive outcomes and resulted in the United States and Latin America joining together in partnership within the Charter of the United Nations and maintaining and following the principles of regionalism, in spite of receiving opposition from different quarters. In global terms, regionalism is not only important but also indispensable for uniting the world especially when considering the increase of population and the progress of Science and technology around the world. The Good Neighbor Policy which was one of the foreign policies of America, was initiated by the President of the United States, Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose chief underlying principle was that America would be ‘a good neighbor and engage in reciprocal exchanges with Latin American countries.’ (Rabe, Stephen, G. 2006) In lieu of this policy, American would adopt attitudes of non- interference and nonintervention in all of Latin America’s domestic affairs. The implementation of this foreign policy resulted in the U.S Marines withdrawing from Nicaragua and Haiti in 1934, Mexico’s nationalization of foreign assets involving the oil industry in addition to the Platt Amendment annulment in 1938. Roosevelt also believed that the ‘Good Neighbor Policy’ would create and usher in a lot of economic opportunities through two- way trade agreements and thereby reassert America’s influence in Latin America. References Gibson Carlos 1965 American Regionalism and the United Nations. The Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1965 Cole, L. Harold and Ohanian, E. Lee 2009, How the Government Prolonged the Depression, The Wall Street Journal. 2009 www.online.wsj.com/article/SB123353276749137485.html James Stuart Olson, Stuart, James and Wilson Raymond, 1986 Native Americans in the Twentieth Century. University of Illinois Press, United States of America. 1986. Rabe, Stephen G." 2006, The Johnson Doctrine." Presidential Studies Quaterly 36.1(2006):45-58. Read More