prominence in the United States

prominence in the United States

Explain the reasons why a new conservatism rose to prominence in the United States between 1960 and 1989.

FIRST ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS:
This is a document analysis use a minimum of 3 out of 6 documents to answer the
prompt.
Prompt
Explain the reasons why a new conservatism rose to prominence in the United States
between 1960 and 1989.
The documents for the prompt above:
Document 1
Source: Barry Goldwater, a Republican senator from Arizona, The Conscience of a
Conservative, 1960.
Franklin Roosevelt’s rapid conversion from Constitutionalism to the doctrine of unlimited
government is an oft-told story. . . . I am here concerned . . . by the unmistakable tendency
of the Republican Party to adopt the same course. The result is that today neither of our two
parties maintains a meaningful commitment to the principle of States’ Rights. Thus, the
cornerstone of the Republic, our chief bulwark against the encroachment of individual
freedom by Big Government, is fast disappearing under the piling sands of absolutism. . . .
The root evil is that the government is engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate
business. As long as the federal government acknowledges responsibility in a given social
or economic field, its spending in that field cannot be substantially reduced.
Document 2
Source: Milton Friedman, economist, Capitalism and Freedom, 1962.
A housing program intended to improve the housing conditions of the poor, to reduce
juvenile delinquency, and to contribute to the removal of urban slums, has worsened the
housing conditions of the poor, contributed to juvenile delinquency, and spread urban blight.
. . .
The greater part of the new ventures undertaken by government in the past few decades
have failed to achieve their objectives. The United States has continued to progress; its
citizens have become better fed, better clothed, better housed, and better transported; class

and social distinctions have narrowed; minority groups have become less disadvantaged. . .
. All this has been the product of the initiative and drive of individuals co-operating through
the free market.
Document 3
Source: Letter to Nelson Rockefeller, Republican governor of New York, February 6, 1971.
This letter is written to you by a law abiding citizen who feels she is discriminated against in
favor of dope addicts and welfare cheats. I am a widow who lives alone, works every day,
pays taxes and lives by the rules. I get very little from my taxes when I can no longer walk on
the streets and when I am afraid in my own home. . . . Sorry this letter is not typed. My
typewriter was stolen.
Document 4
Source: Jerry Falwell, television evangelist and founder of the Moral Majority, Listen,
America!, 1980.
We must reverse the trend America finds herself in today. Young people between the ages
of twenty-five and forty have been born and reared in a different world than Americans of
years past. The television set has been their primary baby-sitter. From the television set they
have learned situation ethics and immorality—they have learned a loss of respect for human
life. They have learned to disrespect the family as God has established it. They have been
educated in a public-school system that is permeated with secular humanism. They have
been taught that the Bible is just another book of literature. They have been taught that
there are no absolutes in our world today. They have been introduced to the drug culture.
They have been reared by the family and the public school in a society that is greatly void of
discipline and character-building. These same young people have been reared under the
influence of a government that has taught them socialism and welfarism. They have been
taught to believe that the world owes them a living whether they work or not.
Document 5
Source: 1980 Republican Party Platform.
Overseas, our goal is . . . to preserve a world at peace by keeping America strong. This
philosophy once occupied a hallowed place in American diplomacy, but it was casually . . .
dismissed at the outset by the Carter Administration—and the results have been shattering.
Never before in modern history has the United States endured as many humiliations, insults,
and defeats as it has during the past four years: our ambassadors murdered, our embassies
burned, our warnings ignored, our diplomacy scorned, our diplomats kidnapped. The Carter
Administration has shown that it neither understands totalitarianism nor appreciates the
way tyrants take advantage of weakness. The brutal invasion of Afghanistan promises to be

only the forerunner of much more serious threats to the West—and to world peace—should
the Carter Administration somehow cling to power.
Document 6
Source: Teddi Holt, a homemaker, a member of Georgia Stop ERA, and the national
president of Mothers On the March, 1984.
I am pleased that God blessed me with the privilege of being a woman. I have never been
envious of the role of men but have had respect for both sexes. There’s no doubt that there
has been discrimination against women, but that is past history, just as discrimination
against blacks is past history in the US. . . .
Just what were we women to be liberated from? These women [feminists] were calling for
liberation from the things women like me love most—our husbands, our children, our homes.
My cry became: “God, liberate us from the Liberators!” . . .
We believe that the mothers of this and other nations must stand up for the protection of
our homes and our children. In no way are we extremists, unless we be guilty of extreme
devotion to our husbands, our children, and our homes. It is our sincere belief that if we do
not unite against the threats to the home, if we retire to the convenience and security of our
houses and do not speak out, then it will not be long until we, the “keeper at home” (Titus
2.5) will not have a home to keep!
SECOND ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS:
This is also a document analysis read below for prompt/ excerpt.
Excerpt for prompt:
“By the end of the Clinton administration it was clear that U.S. foreign policy had no
overarching framework as it did during the Cold War. Rather, each of the two immediate
post-Cold War presidents, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton, was unsure how to address
the emergence of ethnic conflicts and civil wars and the humanitarian and human rights
crises that accompany them. The result was the emergence of policies that were
inconsistent and often opaque. . . .
“From the start of the Cold War, American presidents based U.S. foreign policy on fighting
that war with the hope of ‘winning.’ . . . The Cold War provided a framework and clear
guidelines for foreign and military policy. In the post-Cold War period, U.S. foreign policy has
been guided largely by the need to respond to the most pressing crisis or conflict.”
Joyce P. Kaufman, political scientist, A Concise History of U.S. Foreign Policy, published in
2006

Prompt
Using the excerpt above, answer the three following questions in ONE paragraph.
○ Briefly describe ONE argument made in the excerpt.
○ Briefly explain ONE cause of the historical development discussed in the
excerpt.
○ Briefly explain ONE limitation of Kaufman’s argument made in the excerpt.

Answer preview for Explain the reasons why a new conservatism rose to prominence in the United States between 1960 and 1989.

MLA

444 Words