The Kennedys in the World: How Jack, Bobby, and Ted Remade America's Empire

Joshua D. Farrington
{"title":"The Kennedys in the World: How Jack, Bobby, and Ted Remade America's Empire","authors":"Joshua D. Farrington","doi":"10.1162/tneq_r_00926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"order that arose from the ashes of the New Deal Order. Neoliberalism marked a return to classical liberalism’s laissez-faire ethic and free markets, which, Gerstle reminds us, was not originally conservative but rather progressive and emancipatory. Per Adam Smith, classical liberalism “discerned in markets extraordinary dynamism” and sought to liberate that dynamism from established hierarchies, bureaucracy, red tape, artificial borders, and tariffs (262). That emancipatory spirit was—and is—present in neoliberalism, which attracted not just conservatives, but also progressive liberals and even parts of the New Left, as suggested in section three essays. While rejecting “big government” New Deal liberalism, neoliberalism was liberal in its embrace of freedom: “the freedom of movement, the freedom to don different identities, the ability to live as a cosmopolitan, the ability to think outside the box, as the hippie capitalist Steve Jobs did so brilliantly” (263). This energy blew away the old, established (New Deal) Order and created a new economy based on finance, tech, and levels of economic inequality not seen since the Gilded Age. Astutely, Gerstle calls Bill Clinton the Eisenhower of the Neoliberal Era. Just as the Republican Eisenhower grudgingly accepted the New Deal as a political reality, so too did the Democrat Clinton embrace welfare reform, globalization, and free trade, which further curtailed US-based manufacturing and labor unions, the heart of the old economy. Given this final essay on the Neoliberal Order, it is surprising that the volume did not contain any essays on globalization, trade, or the rise of the nonunion finance and tech sectors, which replaced manufacturing. This is a glaring oversight, especially since the roots of globalization, off-shoring, and international supply chains lay in the New Deal Order itself. The Democratic Party of Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Kennedy was internationalist and pursued lower tariffs, freer trade, and intercultural understanding throughout the years of its dominance, building the international infrastructure needed for the movement of goods, people, and services across borders. Moreover, there has been excellent work on the economic transformation Gerstle identifies in his final essay, including, for just one example, Gerald F. Davis’s Managed by Markets: How Finance ReShaped America (2011). Nonetheless, this is an extremely valuable book for anyone looking to understand the limits and unfulfilled promise of the New Deal state.","PeriodicalId":44619,"journal":{"name":"NEW ENGLAND QUARTERLY-A HISTORICAL REVIEW OF NEW ENGLAND LIFE AND LETTERS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NEW ENGLAND QUARTERLY-A HISTORICAL REVIEW OF NEW ENGLAND LIFE AND LETTERS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/tneq_r_00926","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

order that arose from the ashes of the New Deal Order. Neoliberalism marked a return to classical liberalism’s laissez-faire ethic and free markets, which, Gerstle reminds us, was not originally conservative but rather progressive and emancipatory. Per Adam Smith, classical liberalism “discerned in markets extraordinary dynamism” and sought to liberate that dynamism from established hierarchies, bureaucracy, red tape, artificial borders, and tariffs (262). That emancipatory spirit was—and is—present in neoliberalism, which attracted not just conservatives, but also progressive liberals and even parts of the New Left, as suggested in section three essays. While rejecting “big government” New Deal liberalism, neoliberalism was liberal in its embrace of freedom: “the freedom of movement, the freedom to don different identities, the ability to live as a cosmopolitan, the ability to think outside the box, as the hippie capitalist Steve Jobs did so brilliantly” (263). This energy blew away the old, established (New Deal) Order and created a new economy based on finance, tech, and levels of economic inequality not seen since the Gilded Age. Astutely, Gerstle calls Bill Clinton the Eisenhower of the Neoliberal Era. Just as the Republican Eisenhower grudgingly accepted the New Deal as a political reality, so too did the Democrat Clinton embrace welfare reform, globalization, and free trade, which further curtailed US-based manufacturing and labor unions, the heart of the old economy. Given this final essay on the Neoliberal Order, it is surprising that the volume did not contain any essays on globalization, trade, or the rise of the nonunion finance and tech sectors, which replaced manufacturing. This is a glaring oversight, especially since the roots of globalization, off-shoring, and international supply chains lay in the New Deal Order itself. The Democratic Party of Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Kennedy was internationalist and pursued lower tariffs, freer trade, and intercultural understanding throughout the years of its dominance, building the international infrastructure needed for the movement of goods, people, and services across borders. Moreover, there has been excellent work on the economic transformation Gerstle identifies in his final essay, including, for just one example, Gerald F. Davis’s Managed by Markets: How Finance ReShaped America (2011). Nonetheless, this is an extremely valuable book for anyone looking to understand the limits and unfulfilled promise of the New Deal state.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
世界上的肯尼迪:杰克、鲍比和特德如何重塑美国帝国
从新政秩序的灰烬中产生的秩序。新自由主义标志着古典自由主义的自由放任伦理和自由市场的回归,格斯特尔提醒我们,自由市场最初不是保守的,而是进步的和解放的。根据亚当·斯密的说法,古典自由主义“在市场中发现了非凡的活力”,并试图将这种活力从既定的等级制度、官僚主义、繁文缛节、人为边界和关税中解放出来(262)。这种解放精神过去和现在都存在于新自由主义中,它不仅吸引了保守派,也吸引了进步的自由主义者,甚至新左派的一部分,正如第三节文章所建议的那样。在拒绝“大政府”新政自由主义的同时,新自由主义在拥抱自由方面是自由的:“行动的自由,拥有不同身份的自由,作为世界主义者生活的能力,跳出框框思考的能力,就像嬉皮士资本家史蒂夫·乔布斯所做的那样出色”(263)。这种能量摧毁了旧的、既定的(新政)秩序,创造了一个基于金融、技术和自镀金时代以来从未见过的经济不平等水平的新经济。格斯特尔称比尔·克林顿为新自由主义时代的艾森豪威尔。正如共和党人艾森豪威尔不情愿地接受新政作为政治现实一样,民主党人克林顿也接受福利改革、全球化和自由贸易,这进一步削弱了美国制造业和工会这一旧经济的核心。鉴于这篇关于新自由主义秩序的最后一篇文章,令人惊讶的是,这本书中没有任何关于全球化、贸易或取代制造业的非工会金融和科技部门崛起的文章。这是一个明显的疏忽,尤其是因为全球化、离岸外包和国际供应链的根源在于新政秩序本身。由威尔逊、富兰克林·罗斯福和肯尼迪组成的民主党是国际主义者,在其统治地位的多年里,一直追求更低的关税、更自由的贸易和跨文化理解,建设货物、人员和服务跨境流动所需的国际基础设施。此外,Gerstle在其最后一篇文章中指出的经济转型方面也有出色的工作,包括Gerald F.Davis的《由市场管理:金融如何重塑美国》(2011)。尽管如此,对于任何想要了解新政国家的局限性和未兑现的承诺的人来说,这是一本非常有价值的书。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
50.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Contributions cover a range of time periods, from before European colonization to the present, and any subject germane to New England’s history—for example, the region’s diverse literary and cultural heritage, its political philosophies, race relations, labor struggles, religious contro- versies, and the organization of family life. The journal also treats the migration of New England ideas, people, and institutions to other parts of the United States and the world. In addition to major essays, features include memoranda and edited documents, reconsiderations of traditional texts and interpretations, essay reviews, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Cotton Mather's Spanish Lessons: A Story of Language, Race, and Belonging in the Early Americas Editorial Afro-Caribbean Women's Literature and Early American Literature Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States Revisiting the Ruins: The Great Boston Fire of 1872
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1