The Liberal Tradition in America - Essay Example

Unit: Louis Hartz has continued to manipulate the manner in which Americans think about its history and the nation. Radicals and conservatives together totally hold to or openly appeal to Hartz analysis to carry the claim that defense of property rights and devotion to individualism has defined American culture. Hartz’s thesis was simple and elegant. He confused his readers on how he presented his thesis. He approached his thesis using single factor analysis with two dimensions, first "the absence of feudalism and the presence of the liberal idea”, according to Louis Hartz. The Liberal Tradition in America (p. 20). America did not have a "genuine revolutionary tradition" and a "tradition of reaction” and had only “a kind of self-completing mechanism, which insures the universality of the liberal idea”. In order for American to hold this broad liberal tradition, Hartz said that, we must look for comparisons between America and Europe so that we can see the absence of conservatism and socialism and the presence of "moral unanimity" forced by "this fixed, dogmatic liberalism of a liberal way of life." Louis Hartz. The Liberal Tradition in America (pp. 5-6). In addition, presence of red scares is shown by the “deep and unwritten tyrannical compulsion" of American liberalism "transforms eccentricity into sin”, according to Louis Hartz. The Liberal Tradition in America (pp. 9-12). In conclusion, "the master assumption of American political thought" is "the reality of atomistic social freedom. It is instinctive in the American mind." Hartz the Liberal Tradition in America (p. 62).He also said that Americans’ had mutual commitment to "Lockian" liberalism. These enable them to keep away from upheavals at a price of enforcing agreement. Louis used “Locke” to mean self-interested, behaviors of liberal capitalism and profit-maximizing values. This opposed the revolutionary democratic dedication of Marxian socialist and Jacobins. Moreover, it was against the traditional morals of church elites and aristocrats of the ancient regime in Europe. Regrettably, Hartz never stop to explain what he knew about feudalism or liberalism or what he meant by Locke, therefore, the meaning of his words remain unclear, and his claims are uncertain. However, he focused on issues that played a vital role in religion, democracy, race, gender, and ethnicity in American history. (Hartz 1948) A social theory that talks about a particular economic system or political system as a fair system is a consensus theory. It contracts with conflict theory, which says that any social change is achieved through conflict. Hartz is as a consensus theorist, for a simple reason: First, Hartz came up with the most daring and a theory complete argument for a consensus in any political tradition. In his book The Liberal Tradition in America, first, Harzt compares Europe and United States to justify much of harmony portrait of America. He is preoccupied with socialism through his work. He said that the French and American had very different revolutions .in France, there was a hugely complex social system, divided by internal separations caused by growing middle class challenging the lost of agrarian , feudal system. Kings were using bureaucrats to control the authority of nobles; therefore, monarchs became unfriendly to "the very system of society of which they were the traditional apex”, according to Harzt book The Liberal Tradition in America. In addition, in England like in France, there were independent artisans who were undermined by the spread of merchant capitalism. This lessened nobility in England because British aristocracy had the ability to take the wealthy bourgeoisie. However, America lacked a feudal heritage, as in the case of France and Britain. There was no aristocracy between the merchants, and nobody objected creation of permanent laborers. As a result, the American scene did not have the hostility marked by French and English. Relationship between consensus theory and “end of ideology” school is both the theories try to explain what was different in American society and indeed the civilization in it. They both used the major elements to distinguish the progressive they come with, they emphasized on the importance of economic interests as opposed to idealistic interests as motive of men in history and secondly, they way in which American history would be taken for in terms of disagreements. Bernard Crick in his essay (“The Strange Quest for an American Conservatism”) saw that it is genius and norm of American political thought to be universal in use and unique. However, in days of revolution, Americans appeared to be more liberal to Europe countries yet to America, it is something they never asked for; they even did not want it. To Bernard, his views of politics were valuable and simple; he rejected Europe and the issue of European liberalism replacing class with doctrine. He found American future promising in terms of economic development compared to Europe. Therefore, as Harzt is he was for socialism that enhanced economic development in America. (Gingrich &Newt 1995) In his examples of American conservatives, Tom Paine became a miserable foreigner, to Philadelphia and more to Paris, it was a satire that an English radical, stole his bones and bring back to England his home. Jefferson’s strike with the first inaugural address, that wrote the national manifest fate anger to a European liberal. According, to America this was the truth. The last comments of Jefferson, "to close circle of our felicities, a wise and frugal government, which shall put them down otherwise open to control their own pursuits of the industry and improvement", In Part, I of the book, which was also the first chapter, had the title Feudalism and the American Experience. This common person Jefferson is now a big business man of McKinley and Hoover. Joseph Boland called Hartz a “conservative” in the sense that it is conservatism is skillful to accommodate the needs of the cold war liberalism as known in American ideology. Hartz checks the supremacy of tradition in American life, and the primary tradition kept is “atomistic social freedom. He then characterized the society as completely, joined by traditions and each institution sustained through that. (Hartz 1991) Carey contrasts Hartz with the Progressive and “republican” schools as he notes that the most notable alter in the American republic for over forty years is as the result of decrease in the way which people are allowed to make decisions regarding the public matters, and this has affected the character of society in which they live. He notes that each culture has different conservatism and uses dissimilar principle. Carey was a defender of republic; he refused to participate in fraud of voting in a corrupt democracy. He was for a tradition that needs the sort of institutions and character that oppose. He argued for understanding and pledge to the America tradition that give institutions that support character for ordered liberty. He showed that the Constitution is actually an empty verbiage, which can change to meet the wants of ideological progress. Carey noted that the modern American politics has found a rising objection of philosophy. Carey found a constitutional morality been replaced by the philosophy of Locke and Mill. The tradition of America was re-defined to give predominance to personal rights. After World War II in the United States, the conservatives came into the world of power. The republicans use the authority of government to establish their own supremacy. The conservatives used the control of the federal budget to make new power and ask new allies to join them and service the constituency group. The fissures got from selections by the traditionalists, Kirk c Weaver, the classical liberals, Hayek, Friedman, and libertarians (Rothbard) in Schneider include the economic philosophy, which came through and attempts of collectivist central and classical liberalism. It leads to economic failures; therefore, they opted for social market economy. Harzt continue to influence the traditions of Americans through his thesis, the Locke, American people support the issue of loyalty to individualism. There is conservative applied since American people has turn towards democracy leaving behind liberalism and republicanism. The modern American conservation has important events, occurrences, and developments, which has affected the conservatism of United States. There was a decline in democracy associated with republican, but with democracy, it brought economic conservatives and social conservatives, which led to lower taxes, moral issues, and weaker labor unions. (Hartz 1948) The Neoconservatives are frauds, hypocrites, unintelligent and liars much powerful than Paleoconservatives. They declare to stand by the Constitution, but they do not follow it. They also support patriot act that is against the American citizen’s constitutional privileges. They also support big government and just talk of supporting small federal government to get votes. Neoconservatives support tax cuts and claim to support spending while they do not support it, they claim to support cutting of welfare programs, yet they do not do it and they help corporate welfare. They want to keep federal wars. A very aggressive foreign policy like preemptive war is what they support. Neoconservatives are not against giving out foreign aid, which is the taxpayer’s money. They want to be in all organizations and international treaties. Lastly, they claim to resist illegal immigration, but that is not true. The Paleo conservatives are conservatives honest and intelligent. They look at the Constitution as the law of the land; therefore, they oppose patriot act. They even want to abolish federal government. They want tax cuts and cut of spending. They want dismantle welfare totally. Paleoconservatives are anti-corporatism. They support of abolishing Federal Reserve for constitutional monetary system. Neoconservatives are non-interventionists they support withdrawal from an international organization and oppose illegal migration. (Hartz 1991) Social conservatives, support pro-life in abortion argument, prohibition of drugs, prostitution and bioconservation, they oppose transhumanism, child adoption, civil marriage and eugenics. Religious conservatism simply applies teachings of politics and religion. We see that neoconservatives and paleoconservatives oppose abortion and gay marriage, but neoconservatives also support states rights, but they want the federal government interfere. They both oppose illegal drugs, but paleoconservatives support most war against drugs. Lastly, they support the death penalty, gun rights, and environmental policy. Leo Strauss was a scientific who challenged what people knew as the requirement of science. He opposed the study of philosophical politics. He did not support social conservatism because he found them to have gone against the natural law. Leo Strauss was a champion of moral absolutes, natural rights, and moral standards. Therefore, he had a conflict with what Paleoconservative and Neoconservative support. The neoconservative has totally accepted the Harzt thesis because they support a self-confident foreign policy aimed at improving democracy abroad. It is a form of activist rule at home but if focuses on worldwide affairs. (Lineberry & Robert 1983) The Religious Right in post-War conservatism is since Evangelicals and politicized. There was a battle to prohibit and stop the teaching in schools. Then religious rights emerged, and there was Supreme Court ruling on school prayer and abortion, Christian values, and rights were rewritten. (Hulliung & Mark 2010) I agree with, Philip Abbott, who argues, “we still come back to Louis Hartz after all these years”. Louis Hartz’s in the book The Liberal Tradition in America wrote main interpretative content in American political applied in all generations. It is seen that by 1960s, the power of Hartz to control came under attack by 1990s his interpretative framework has been announced as outdated. They were two critics with the work of Harzt; first, the interpretation he gave overlooked the diversity of American political thought. Secondly, his analysis overstated the size of consensus in America. Although, the critics are based completely on the early days of American political development, I think that the Hartz’s main concepts are strong analytical tools that have persist give the most credible analysis of today’s American political development. Work cited Gingrich, Newt. To renew America. New York: HarperCollins, 1995. Print. Hartz, Louis. Economic policy and democratic thought: Pennsylvania, 1776-1860; Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1948. Print. Hartz, Louis, and Paul Roazen. The necessity of choice: nineteenth-century political thought. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 1990. Print. Hartz, Louis. The liberal tradition in America. Unabridged. Ed. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1991. Print. Hulliung, Mark. The American liberal tradition reconsidered: the contested legacy of Louis Hartz. Lawrence, Kan.: University Press of Kansas, 2010. Print. Lineberry, Robert L. Government in America: people, politics, and policy. 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1983. Print. Read More