human
Write a summary regarding three political summarys by Franklin Roosevelt, Huey Long and Minnie Hardin.
assistant
The essay discusses the three political essays by Franklin Roosevelt, Huey Long and Minnie Hardin. It argues that while Roosevelt's essay was good in theory, it was not very effective in practice. Huey Long's essay was also good in theory, but it was more effective in practice. Finally, Minnie Hardin's essay was good because it thrived by the economic situation at the time.
human
What could be a reference for this essay?
assistant
Reading the American Past
human
Provide an essay based on the summary above.
assistant
#The Political Landscape of America Essay
##Introduction
This work is an analytical essay which discusses the three essays 24-1, 24-3 and 24-5. These are political essays regarding political landscape of America in light of certain policies and practices favored by the incumbent president. In an analysis of these essays which are essentially critiques of the political systems, the author will paint their discourses in light of the sociopolitical environments in which they occurred.
In document 24-1, Franklin Roosevelt offered a thought dissenting from the mainstream idea that the government ought to offer solutions to the problems of the citizens. His school of thought was that instead of the people asking what the government had in store for them, they had better ask in what ways they should serve the government and effect change. Was it a good idea? For two reasons, in my view, the idea fit into the prevalent economic environment of the time.
To begin with, the country was recovering from the great depression and so it was important to awaken the citizens and challenge them to be able to work hard for the improvement of their country. Secondly, the fact that the country needed a jolt on the verge of the unwelcome political situation at the moment necessitated calling into action for people to help grow the economy of the country.
But in a way, it can also be argued that the promises offered by Roosevelt were pushed overboard by him. It could be true that he offered the promise of hope to the millions of Americans who wanted to see change in the face of oblivion in their country, but this offer of change came along with certain frustrations to the ordinary citizens.
The citizens started to cry foul of his economic policy which favored the wealthy at the expense of the masses, and which created huge socio-economic disparities in the economy of America. Corruption was also averse.
In document 24-3, the Huey Long describes the school of thought calling for the redistribution of wealth. The fact that the country at the time suffered deeply from the inequitable distribution of wealth informed his convictions. In an economy where there are very wide disparities in the ownership of wealth, those who find themselves on the lower socio-economic echelons bear the greatest brunt of this unethical social trend.
To this end, it can be understood that Huey Long’s frustrations with the status quo were authentic. Issues such as corruption took very deep roots in the in the country and painted a picture which was a far cry from the expectations of transparency and fairness in the governance of the country.
In document 24-5, the argument by the conservative Minnie Hardin was in effect good because it thrived by the economic situation at the time. It was offered at a time when the economy was flailing and people generally became impatient with the approach of Roosevelt to the economic recovery and growth.
The fact that Hardin criticized Roosevelt approaches giving reference to the people like Karl Marx and British professors may have been appropriate in discrediting the application of foreign ideologies in solving local problems, but it is important to welcome policies which are friendly to the forward development of the country no matter the origin.