1. How did consumerism and the idea of the “American way of life” affect people’s understanding of American values, including the meaning of freedom, including the meaning of freedom, in the 1920s?
2. Which groups did not share in the prosperity of the 1920s and why?
3. How did business practices and policies lead to a decline in union membership in the 1920s?
4. President Calvin Coolidge said that “the chief business of the American people is business.” How did the federal government’s policies and practices in the 1920s reflect this understanding of the importance of business interests?
5. Who supported restricting immigration in the 1920s and why? Why were they more successful in gaining federal legislation to limit immigration in these years?
6. Did U.S. society in the 1920s reflect the concept of cultural pluralism as explained by Horace Kallen? Why or why not?
7. Identify the causes of the Great Depression.
8. What principles guided President Hoover’s response to the Great Depression, and how did this restrict his ability to help the American people?
9. What issues were of particular concern to religious fundamentalists in these years and why?
10. In what ways did the ideas about (and the reality of) proper roles for women change in these years?
History 221 Winter 2016 
Horace Kallen termed the phrase cultural pluralism to describe “A society that gloried in ethnic diversity rather than attempting to suppress it (794).” He claimed that any true American would realize that ethnic differences made the nation stronger and better. This statement during the aftermath of the Great War seems to deny evidence of the time. World War One policy had enacted several laws and practices meant to “Americanize” people and lessen diversity. The public denouncement of things un-American would take several decades to come out of U.S. society. However, the 1920s reflect a society in the process of changing its ideas on diversity. The Supreme Court overruled past measures, “ethnic” Americans invented themselves, and new ideas about civilization began to emerge.
Political changes took place as the Supreme Court found many past laws unconstitutional during this period. These laws, such as the requirement to attend a public school and the requirement to teach in only English, used institutions as a means to socialize young people (795). These rulings claimed that constitutional rights belonged to all people no matter their language. They also ruled that the state had no right to insert itself into private affairs (796). Often, the Court rules in the way it sees the general population leaning. In this case, it was true as people began to view America more as a place that would welcome all people. It would take several years for this idea to cement itself into American thinking, however, this was a start.
Socially, immigrants themselves created the term ethnic Americans as a way to combat Americanization in their communities. Although they saw pieces of their culture becoming Americanized through art, literature, and leisure activities, the ethnic cultures also claimed homeland traditions as being equally important (795). They argued that the freedom of expression and of the individual entitled them to follow these traditions and rebuke those who would take their traditions away. The term ethnic Americans meant they were American and they were a part of the American culture. However, it also meant that they used their freedoms to remember where they were from and what was important to them. The survival of the term today is a significant piece of evidence that society accepted this idea.
Finally, scientists were beginning to change their views on primitive and civilized people. Where before, it was considered scientifically possible to rate a race and determine where it was on the scale of primitive to civilized, new findings refuted that (794). It was determined that this was scientifically impossible. Although it would be many years before this would influence public policy, it had great meaning. Where before natural society required certain types of people to stay in the lower classes to protect society from the ills they may possess there was now no science to use as evidence. Eventually, the practice would fall from use.
It is hard to imagine that a society with immigration restriction, the Ku Klux Klan, anti-Semitism, and anti-Catholicism could embrace ethnic diversity. Indeed the 1920s did not fully embrace diversity. However, the 1920s marked the turning of the tide and the beginning of change.
LikeLike
Foner Blog Question: 2/22 #4
4. The relationship between the Federal Government and the nation’s Businesses illustrates a dramatic shift from the progressivism of at the dawn of the twentieth century, to the profit-is-king mindset of the 1920’s. Perhaps the greatest reflection of government policy towards business was in fact the profound lack thereof. The ruling Republican Party of the decade made it its business to stay out of businesses’ business. When Coolidge said that “The…business of the American People is business” he was referring to the fact that the priorities of his and other administrations during the twenties were geared towards promoting and allowing the often rapacious practices of profit hungry firms.
The favoritism of the central government towards business took shape on several fronts. Internationally, the government promoted a foreign policy that was conducive to free and open investment by American businesses. The likes of “Fordlandia” indicate this trend, a trend of U.S. increased U.S. involvement in and support of the World Economy, a trend of what was judged as beneficial profit for the United States and its businessmen. At home, the government was also willing to give the business heavy weights of the day free reign. The labor movement, which had been a force before World War One, faded in to obscurity at the hands of the court systems and politicians. The progressivism that had also been in vogue before the war met a similar decline. The american, political conscience faded and, as indicated in Lynds’ Middletown, entertainment and outlets of disposable income came to dominate amercian minds in place of political and social ills. Even the corruption of Harding’s Republican administration failed to sway the support of the populace from a party that was, as the Wall Street Journal put it, “so completely fused to business.” Further support for the business sector came from the Supreme Court with former President Taft at its head. The Highest Court in the land made “liberty of contact” its highest priority; overturning Muller v. Oregon; thereby protecting businesses from the bother of protecting employees to a certain extent. Local Courts and Authorities supported the fears of Businessmen towards the likes of Communism and Anarchism in actions such as arrests during the Red Scare and the executions of Sacco and Vanzetti.
In each of these cases it is clear that the interests of American Businesses was made the interest of the American Government as well. This aligning of interests meant that the Republican administrations of the decade gave business a wide berth, and only intervened if it was beneficial for said businesses, as in the case of the aforementioned Supreme Court decisions. Indeed, the business of the American People, or at the very least their government, was, in the twenties, business.
The implications of this government favoritism for business went beyond this one decade. There were definite losers in the game that was being played. Perhaps the most prominent losers were the Farmers. The Agrarian populace began to bleed in the twenties, rural areas losing some three million residents in the twenties. Additionally, Forty percent of the nation remained impoverished despite the prosperity flaunted by burgeoning wealthy and Middle Classes. The wonders of consumerism, including Cars, Radios, and the like, failed to reach much the populace. Corruption on Wall Street ran amok in the era preceding the Great Depression and when revealed during the depression led to the jailing of businessmen and bankers and the formation of various regulatory commissions.
The twenties represented a time when, in the absence of many government regulations or programs, businesses were allowed to prey on what and whom they wished in the putrid pursuit of profit, and were even supported in their efforts to do so.
LikeLike
Excellent!
LikeLike
The 1920s were a time of shifting values and ideal. It stands a sort of watershed moment for the United States, sandwiched between the traumatic conflicts of the first World War of the last decade and the severity of the Great Depression of the 1930s. Here we see the changing opinions on several fronts, fronts ranging from views on sexuality and equality, to a shift from the Progressivist beliefs of figures like Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt. However, probably the biggest contention about change came from the religious sphere of American culture.
Religion and its constituents have long considered themselves to be a sort of guiding light for America. This no truer than in the 1920s, a decade engrossed in debate concerning birth control and the distribution of alcohol. In an attempt to try and stave off the decline of traditional values, fundamentalists, particularly hailing from Protestant sects, worked against the tide to return America to a state of what they believed to be classic Christian belief.
This concern showed itself in several facets of a changing America. Easily the most controversial, indeed, nearly combative instances was when Populist sweetheart and devout Presbyterian William Jennings Bryan squared off against staunch agnostic Clarence Darrow of Leopold and Loeb fame in the now pivotal Scopes Trial. The Scopes Trial involved the then unlawful evolutionist teachings of high school teacher John Scopes, and, although the court ruled against Scopes, became a massive bone of contention for fundamentalism and its opponents.
Religious fundamentalism also operated strongly in other spheres, as well. It had a major hand in opposing alcohol distribution and were huge proponents of Prohibition. In fact, public decrying of alcohol became a common theme in fundamentalist sermons. Their concern for and public shaming of such vices paid off, as well. Consumption of alcohol and public drunkenness decreased during these periods.
These sermons and large gatherings became forums to dispute other topics of controversial nature, as well. The rising popularity of Darwinism was a frequent theme of defamation in the Protestant world. These themes and topics were not merely rants targeted at argumentative differences between the religious and the unreligious, however. These sermons were designed and presented by flamboyant and charismatic leaders and orators. One such larger-than-life personality was Billy Sunday, a wildly popular speaker said to taught and spoken before around 100 million people over the course of his life. Clearly, religious fundamentalism was holding its own.
Through victories and shortcomings, and in an era of changing ideologies in United States history, the religious fundamentalists of the nation opposed quite strongly the swiftly moving tide of American values, and managed to not only survive, but thrive. Although it faced opponents on all sides, from alcohol and sexuality, to attacks on religious doctrines and texts, religious fundamentals remained popular in the political forum and the religious sphere in the earlier decades of the 20th century. Even today, adherents to such religions like Protestantism and Methodism remain strongly contributing and positively committed members of society.
LikeLike
Excellent Sam!
LikeLike
5. Most Americans during this time supported limiting immigration during this time period. Racism abounded in this era, as the question “Who is an American?” spread throughout the mouths of citizens. Organizations like the Ku Klux Klan supported to stop of immigration in order to get the country back to the original stock. Many businessmen also supported legislation to halt immigration, because of the threat of foreign radicalism that could hurt their business. They figured that having trustworthy workers outweighed the cheap labor that they got from immigrants.
Racism played a big role in the immigration issue, as native white citizens thought they were much better than their European and Asian counterparts. However, the Red Scare also intensified these feelings towards immigration, especially with the Sacco and Vanzetti case. While no one is absolutely certain today if the accused were truly guilty, the idea of these foreigners plotting against US citizens and openly attacking some was a scary thought for many ordinary Americans. This case further solidified American sentiments towards immigrants and their purpose in the US.
Legislation regarding immigration during this time definitely favored the American view. Temporary measures were taken by the government to restrict immigration from Europe to 357,000 people per year, and then later lowered that number to 150,000 per year. There had already been restrictions on Chinese immigrants before this whole discussion came about, it is just that this time the restrictions involved Europe as well. The government said that their reasoning for this policy revolved around the desire to keep America American and have the most ideal population possible. This is the racist sentiment that was circulating around the country during the 1920s, and the government just further solidified that idea that white American people were the best for society, the workplace, and the government. Also, to further protect these claims, the government used pseudo-scientific claims that assured of the superiority and inferiority of certain races. This reminds me of the idea of social Darwinism and survival of the fittest. It seems to me that these ideas percolated throughout the people more than we realized, and that instead of it just applying to workers and the business world, it could also be applied to races and people of different ethnicities.
Furthermore, the idea of “White” and what that meant in society started to gain traction in both society and government policy. This social construction of race allowed for those in charge to really determine what race someone is, based on their behavior and relatability to the common white man. This was seen with the case of Bhagat Singh Thind, and Indian who claimed he was truly white because of his Aryan descent. His assertion was denied, and thus this social construct of whiteness was born, further solidifying the government’s ability to control things based on race.
It is clear to see that race played a monumental factor in the immigration restrictions of the 1920s, and continued to play a role until well into the 20th century.
LikeLike
8. In the midst of the Great Depression President Herbert Hoover responded in a way that restricted his ability to help the American people. He first held feelings of anti-government aid. In 1931, Hoover quotes former president Grover Cleveland who said, “The Government should not support the people….Federal aid…weakens the sturdiness of our national character.” In his lack of aid, the American economy continued to fall deeper into depression and feelings of anger began to enter the hearts of many Americans.
Hoover further hurt the economy and the American people by approving only a $2 billion federal aid. He wouldn’t go any higher with federal aid. “He adamantly opposed offering direct relief to the unemployed – it would do them a ‘disservice,’ he told Congress.” Without enough aid from the government the American condition worsened which limited Hoover’s ability to help the people.
President Hoover also acted under advice from the secretary of the treasury Andrew Mellon, who told him that “economic downturns were a normal part of capitalism”. In a capitalistic society the idea of Social Darwinism reigns king. This would further lead to Hoovers’ inability to aid American society because it would restrict the amount of aid that the federal government would give to the economy.
Many felt that Hoover was “out of touch with reality.” The economy was in a continual downward circle, yet Hoover was unwilling to aid a troubled society because of his personal feelings of capitalism and limited government aid. Many people had to turn to the streets to sell products for minimum profits. Later, Hoover would write, “Many persons left their jobs for the more profitable one of selling apples.” The economy was suffering, and Hoover was restricting his own ability to help the people.
LikeLiked by 1 person
1.) The 1920’s was an interesting era because for the first time, people started moving away from traditional American values of thrift and self-denial to participate in entertainment and consumerism. Among the consequences of consumerism was the shifting perspective of work as a way to afford luxuries rather than personal pride, new definitions of freedom and being American, and the rise of buying on credit to afford new consumerist lifestyles.
To be able to afford and buy what one wanted became the new definition of freedom; the freedom to consume. French writer Andre Siegfried, who visited America multiple times, made the observation that Americans held their standard of living in the highest regard. This confidence might have grown from America’s success in WWI and subsequent spotlight as the strongest industrialized nation that was still functioning after the war. Booming industrial success and a rising middle class allowed more people than ever to join the ranks of consumers, especially since people were earning more wages and industries were making more cheap products. New, more widely available labor and time-saving devices like vacuum cleaners and washing machines enacted a new kind of freedom for women as well by freeing them from dedicating all their time to household chores.
Consumerism, America’s new way of life, rose hand-in-hand with a deep sense of “being American.” This new patriotism and conservatism caused a deep sense of conformity among Americans. One British writer, D.H. Lawrence, said he’d never been in a country where the citizens were so afraid of each other. The need to be accepted prompted a need to buy and consume to fit in with new fads and allowed a positive feedback cycle to occur. This “free mob” culture made a mockery of America’s past definitions of freedom, allowing no room for dissent or unions. However, while this era did see censorship and the prohibition of certain literary materials, this was more of an aftereffect of the intense limiting of free speech during WWI. In fact, the 1920’s actually saw the beginnings of civil liberties with the Supreme Court starting to uphold decisions or making statements protecting free speech, like voiding a Minnesota law that censored the press.
One of the biggest problems with America’s new consumerist frenzy was the increasing popularity of going into debt to buy what one wanted. America’s new ideal of instant gratification and self-indulgence prompted many Americans to make unwise consumer choices. Another value change occurred as Americans became more absorbed with self-interest rather than national interest. Americans shifted from being citizens to being consumers, focusing on their own concerns rather than the country as a whole. This was such a complete transformation from America’s wartime state in which everything was done for the greater good of the country and democracy. America’s prosperity after the war and relief that such a widespread conflict was over prompted Americans to try to enjoy their lives as much as possible with new consumerist lifestyles. This era of big business and public support of big business through consumerism allowed for huge disparities of wealth and set the stage for the Great Depression.
LikeLike
Question 7:
There were different circumstances that caused the Great Depression, one of the biggest was the stock market crash. Even before 1929 there were signs of economic trouble, like banks failing, land not being developed, mortgages being foreclosed, and the fact that distribution of income across the nation was very unequal. Because of the stock market crash 26,000 businesses failed and any that were able to make it through the crash had to let employees go making the unemployment rate sky rocket. Those individuals who kept their jobs had to deal with less hours and smaller wages making it harder to support their families and keep houses.
After the war the U.S. began producing more products for Europe to help them get back on their feet. From this mass production, we had a bloated stock market which made the stock market crash so much worse and drastic. Another cause can be from the fact that Europe no longer needed our products because productions were beginning again, and since Germany defaulted on the payments to repair the damages done during the war, that resulted in Britain and France not paying America, creating a halt in income.
LikeLike
3. How did business practices and policies lead to a decline in union membership in the 1920s?
Employers in the 1920’s embraced what is known as the American Plan. This plan was based on what’s called “the open shop.” “The open shop” is a workplace free of both government regulation and unions. Employers argued that prosperity depended on the giving of businesses complete “freedom of action.” Business owners employed strike breakers, private detectives and blacklisters to prevent or defeat strikes. This obviously lead to a decline in union membership as the detectives and strike breakers did their job effectively. Unions were argued to be un-productive. They would hurt the economy as opposed to helping it. As the United States people came to this realization, slowly union membership did decline in the 1920’s. The policies and practices mentioned above contributed to this membership decline.
– Derek Carmack
LikeLike
2. Which groups did not share in the prosperity of the 1920s and why?
As Calvin Coolidge said: “The chief business of the American people is business.” With business expansion as the theme of America, those advantaged to higher positions in business and corporations were better accommodated by the prosperity of the country in this time. However, while advancements in automobile industry, assembly lines, oil companies, film, etc, boomed, the same did not flourish within the industrial worker, farmer, and cheap labor communities. Inflation caused an increase of wages, wages that were not dispersed at an equal proportion. Corporation wages doubled the increase of wages in cheap labor. A small percent of successful Americans became wealthy within business, but had all the affluence amongst themselves, maintaining a great amount of the population to remain in poverty. There began to be a divide between the pay of business versus cheap labor that continued to separate as production rose. The wealthy became wealthier and the poor poorer. Banks took complete charge over the finances of the country. Specific industries (such as the automobile industry) bombarded the less effective businesses and began to rule the distribution of goods and intake of wealth. Unemployment began to be more of a problem as well. The rise of machines and technology caused labor work for the manufacturing of goods to not be as critical as before. Farm production took a dive as nutritional demand from the war subsided and farmers could not afford to keep up the large amounts of land they purchased with the reduction of wages. Ultimately, prosperity among the successful industries with the greatest production of goods and demand rapidly increased in fortune as their technology became more advanced and popularized. On the other hand, cheap labor, farmers, miners, industrial workers, and the like were faced with detrimental effects in lower wage increases, less demand of goods, and a stunted advancement of technology, causing them to miss out on the wealth and success of the 1920s.
LikeLike
By the time the “roaring 20s” rolled around, women had been fighting for different roles long enough that they had actually been making quite a bit of progress. The 20s, though, were the setting of a massive shift that really had never happened before. Where, before, women were still seen as property or dependent, second-class citizens, the 20s housed a sort of revolution personified in the flapper. What used to be completely taboo for any respectable woman was suddenly the norm, at least in urban settings.
The decades leading up to the 20s were stepping stones that made the women’s revolution possible, but they were still steeped in the social views of the past. Women’s rights movements pushed for more freedom in personal lives, but very little progress was made until the birth control movement started to make its way across the country. For example, the Republican party’s support of women was based on the perception of women as mothers. This was seen as the respectable role for women from before the beginning of the country, and had held firmly in place through this time. The later support of the Democratic party was based on the perception of women as primary consumers. The disappearing stigma of women working outside of the home was a major leap forward, but it was almost set back by court cases of the time. Muller v Oregon, while protecting the rights of women in the workplace, was based in the archaic idea that women needed protecting because of their role as living baby-makers-and-carriers. It took the persistence of those involved in the birth control movement and their persistent in obtaining more sexual freedom for women to really get the major shifts in the perception of women going.
By the 20s, women had much more sexual freedom and had really acquired a more sexual role overall. It was now socially acceptable for young women to wear skirts above the knees, have more casual relationships with men unchaperoned, and were finally able to take part in “the finer things,” such as smoking in public, drinking in clubs, and dancing with abandon. It was no longer scandalous for a woman to play up her sexual appeal, where before it would push her to the status of a social pariah, as she would have been considered lost or compromised based on the level of intactness of her virtue. Not only that, but before the 20s she would have been perceived to be a decrepit member of society for not being the picture of morality by abstaining from such behaviors as mentioned above. Marriage became more free, as well, as women were no longer punished for marrying men that were not natural-born Americans.
The 20s were a time of massive social shifts in the perception of what a woman was. Personal freedoms became reality rather than a dream (a least for the unmarried woman). While there was still some scandal associated with the behavior of the flapper, businesses- which still held serious amounts of influence over policy-making- were suddenly championing the causes brought forth by the women’s rights movements. It’s important to note that this still came from the desire to increase sales and extend the market for products, but the causes took on lives of their own from there.
LikeLike
The progressive movement accomplished many of its goals in the 1920s. Women’s suffrage was granted by the 19th amendment in this time period. Reforms in the conditions of factory workers and the end to child labor meant a greater focus on individualism, more leisure time for the lower middle class, and new ideas about youth and childhood that advocated more exploration and less supervision. Investment, even the investment of money that one did not possess, flourished and Americans had higher incomes and access to cheaper manufactured goods.
After World War I, America sat uncontested as the world’s major industrial power. Its industry had increased during the war, and its infrastructure and workforce were not destroyed, as had happened in Europe. This allowed America to serve a more global market and to bring in a great deal more money from international markets than it had before the war. American Business had successfully begun to apply the principles of Fordism.
Mass production allowed manufacturers to lower prices and advertise to the masses. The middle class wanted luxury goods and had the money to afford them. Luxury goods were a sign of social status. The American way of life was one in which any person could make money and live in luxury. Debt was widely accepted as a means of acquiring luxury goods.
American youth had a major impact on society. They challenged cultural ideas about gender roles, dating, marriage and sex. The old ideal of fidelity within marriage and women working in the home was preserved, but youth was seen as a period of exploration. Dating and premarital sex were more common. Birth control piggybacked on the women’s rights movement. Women wore shorter skirts, played men’s sports, and strayed from traditional ideas about womanhood. Automobiles allowed young people more freedom to go and do as they pleased and spend more time out of the home. These new views on women’s sexual freedom were very different from what had existed before.
Leisure activities such as movies, dance clubs, and speakeasies were popular. Music took a more vibrant turn with the advent of jazz, ragtime, and swing. Cars allowed Americans to travel more easily. Leisure became a very important in American culture as part of the ideal American way of life. Freedom accompanied leisure and a person’s ability to do what they wanted with their own free time. Leisure time was increased by the new appliances available such as washing machines, vacuum cleaners, and refrigerators.
Investment allowed Americans to dream of getting rich quickly. Investing on the margins was a means that allowed people who had no money to invest to make a profit by investing money that they planned on earning or owned in real estate or some other invested commodity. Returns from these stock market investments were part of this consumer culture and contributed to the idea that anyone could make money and live in luxury in America if they wanted to.
This new focus on buying and spending, free time and exploration made for a great change in American culture. The American way of life was exciting and full of promise. Faced with more money, cheaper goods, and more opportunities to make money, Americans got carried away. People aspired for a more affluent lifestyle than they could afford. This pattern of spending money that one does not have set America up for the crash at the end of the decade.
LikeLike