进步的幻想:美国世纪的商业、贫困与自由主义》,布伦特-塞布尔著(评论)

IF 0.8 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN HISTORY Pub Date : 2024-07-16 DOI:10.1353/soh.2024.a932597
Darren E. Grem
{"title":"进步的幻想:美国世纪的商业、贫困与自由主义》,布伦特-塞布尔著(评论)","authors":"Darren E. Grem","doi":"10.1353/soh.2024.a932597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century</em> by Brent Cebul <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Darren E. Grem </li> </ul> <em>Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century</em>. By Brent Cebul. Politics and Culture in Modern America. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023. Pp. x, 466. $39.95, ISBN 978-1-5128-2381-3.) <p>Brent Cebul’s <em>Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century</em> argues that neoliberalism is neither “neo” nor “liberal.” <strong>[End Page 648]</strong> New Dealers invented it nearly a century ago, and it is better understood as a political economy that Cebul terms “supply-side liberalism” (p. 4). This approach privileged local business interests, public-private partnerships, and market solutions to poverty. Historians have long acknowledged the business- friendly approaches of liberal social policy. But none have delved as deeply into the archives and told as subtle a story as Cebul, who masterfully traces the American welfare state’s early and long-lasting capture by the market’s means and ends.</p> <p>Half of Cebul’s book focuses on northwest Georgia, especially the small city of Rome, which he casts as a counterpart and contrast to Cleveland, Ohio, the setting of the book’s other half. Both Rome’s and Cleveland’s civic and business leaders privileged job growth and urban renewal–based development schemes, partnering with state planners, advisory boards, governmental commissions, and nonprofit entities to manage rural and urban poverty as primarily a local matter. “Liberals’ faith in economic growth also ensured that poverty continued to be immensely profitable for local elites,” Cebul argues, “cementing decentralized, administrative partnerships between liberals and often conservative businesspeople” (p. 91). Though hardly a radical policy shift, the War on Poverty presented “an unprecedented threat to their [business elites’] relationship with the supply-side state,” all while sparking revolt by the very communities under its administration (p. 148). Supply-side liberalism, however, would prove durable under protest. Urban renewal’s failures in Cleveland and the limits of liberalism’s growth-oriented platform in Rome set up space for a new round of Democrats in the 1960s and 1970s to “more muscularly articulate their producerist bona fides, expanded to include not simply their essential role in producing jobs, taxes, or affordable housing, but also their role in fighting poverty and reforming government itself” (p. 148).</p> <p>For Cebul, the quintessential supply-side liberal was Jimmy Carter. Carter advanced a “generational suspicion about traditional public programs,” especially as he and other “younger liberals reckoned with the reality that even initiatives they supported were often underfunded, disjointed, and difficult to reform thanks to crosscutting intergovernmental administration and funding” (p. 267). Block grants, education reform, think tanks, balanced budgets, and subsidized entrepreneurialism became the policies of the so-called New Democrats, which replaced spending on what critics on the left and right called special interests. After Carter, Ronald Reagan’s dogmatic commitment to the idea that “the market was a space freed from public responsibilities or social obligations” chafed business interests indebted to supply-side programs, who looked to another southern Democrat, Bill Clinton, to privilege work as a sign of citizenship and austerity as pragmatic statesmanship (p. 291). Clinton did just that, doubling down on “the language of social progress, of democracy itself” as marketized (p. 291). In other words, Clinton finished a neoliberal project the New Deal started.</p> <p>Cebul’s book adds balance to the historiographical overemphasis on business influence from the right, revealing how liberal endeavors also normalized marketization in American party politics and public policy. To make its argument, however, <em>Illusions of Progress</em> frontloads the presumably illusory effects of public policy on poverty reduction. This framework oddly <strong>[End Page 649]</strong> downplays the lasting influence of antipoverty advocates in places outside Rome and Cleveland, thereby reducing the antipoverty advocacy of civil rights figures and organizations to the periphery of historical import. Undoubtedly, this was not Cebul’s intent, but genuine postwar wins against poverty—especially extreme poverty—seem underexplained, whether in specific states, across the South, or nationwide. Still, it is not debatable that poverty under supply-side liberalism remained a stubborn reality for far too many, despite a multigenerational effort by a long line of elected and...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":45484,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN HISTORY","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century by Brent Cebul (review)\",\"authors\":\"Darren E. Grem\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/soh.2024.a932597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century</em> by Brent Cebul <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Darren E. Grem </li> </ul> <em>Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century</em>. By Brent Cebul. Politics and Culture in Modern America. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023. Pp. x, 466. $39.95, ISBN 978-1-5128-2381-3.) <p>Brent Cebul’s <em>Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century</em> argues that neoliberalism is neither “neo” nor “liberal.” <strong>[End Page 648]</strong> New Dealers invented it nearly a century ago, and it is better understood as a political economy that Cebul terms “supply-side liberalism” (p. 4). This approach privileged local business interests, public-private partnerships, and market solutions to poverty. Historians have long acknowledged the business- friendly approaches of liberal social policy. But none have delved as deeply into the archives and told as subtle a story as Cebul, who masterfully traces the American welfare state’s early and long-lasting capture by the market’s means and ends.</p> <p>Half of Cebul’s book focuses on northwest Georgia, especially the small city of Rome, which he casts as a counterpart and contrast to Cleveland, Ohio, the setting of the book’s other half. Both Rome’s and Cleveland’s civic and business leaders privileged job growth and urban renewal–based development schemes, partnering with state planners, advisory boards, governmental commissions, and nonprofit entities to manage rural and urban poverty as primarily a local matter. “Liberals’ faith in economic growth also ensured that poverty continued to be immensely profitable for local elites,” Cebul argues, “cementing decentralized, administrative partnerships between liberals and often conservative businesspeople” (p. 91). Though hardly a radical policy shift, the War on Poverty presented “an unprecedented threat to their [business elites’] relationship with the supply-side state,” all while sparking revolt by the very communities under its administration (p. 148). Supply-side liberalism, however, would prove durable under protest. Urban renewal’s failures in Cleveland and the limits of liberalism’s growth-oriented platform in Rome set up space for a new round of Democrats in the 1960s and 1970s to “more muscularly articulate their producerist bona fides, expanded to include not simply their essential role in producing jobs, taxes, or affordable housing, but also their role in fighting poverty and reforming government itself” (p. 148).</p> <p>For Cebul, the quintessential supply-side liberal was Jimmy Carter. Carter advanced a “generational suspicion about traditional public programs,” especially as he and other “younger liberals reckoned with the reality that even initiatives they supported were often underfunded, disjointed, and difficult to reform thanks to crosscutting intergovernmental administration and funding” (p. 267). Block grants, education reform, think tanks, balanced budgets, and subsidized entrepreneurialism became the policies of the so-called New Democrats, which replaced spending on what critics on the left and right called special interests. After Carter, Ronald Reagan’s dogmatic commitment to the idea that “the market was a space freed from public responsibilities or social obligations” chafed business interests indebted to supply-side programs, who looked to another southern Democrat, Bill Clinton, to privilege work as a sign of citizenship and austerity as pragmatic statesmanship (p. 291). Clinton did just that, doubling down on “the language of social progress, of democracy itself” as marketized (p. 291). In other words, Clinton finished a neoliberal project the New Deal started.</p> <p>Cebul’s book adds balance to the historiographical overemphasis on business influence from the right, revealing how liberal endeavors also normalized marketization in American party politics and public policy. To make its argument, however, <em>Illusions of Progress</em> frontloads the presumably illusory effects of public policy on poverty reduction. This framework oddly <strong>[End Page 649]</strong> downplays the lasting influence of antipoverty advocates in places outside Rome and Cleveland, thereby reducing the antipoverty advocacy of civil rights figures and organizations to the periphery of historical import. Undoubtedly, this was not Cebul’s intent, but genuine postwar wins against poverty—especially extreme poverty—seem underexplained, whether in specific states, across the South, or nationwide. Still, it is not debatable that poverty under supply-side liberalism remained a stubborn reality for far too many, despite a multigenerational effort by a long line of elected and...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45484,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN HISTORY\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN HISTORY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/soh.2024.a932597\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN HISTORY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/soh.2024.a932597","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者: 进步的幻想:美国世纪的商业、贫困和自由主义》,布伦特-塞布尔著,达伦-E. 格雷姆译:美国世纪的商业、贫困与自由主义》。作者:布伦特-塞布尔。现代美国的政治与文化》。(费城:费城:宾夕法尼亚大学出版社,2023 年。第 x 页,第 466 页。39.95美元,ISBN 978-1-5128-2381-3)。布伦特-塞布尔(Brent Cebul)的《进步的幻想》(Illusions of Progress:Brent Cebul's Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century)认为,新自由主义既不是 "新",也不是 "自由"。[新政派在近一个世纪前发明了新自由主义,它最好被理解为一种政治经济学,宿雾称之为 "供给方自由主义"(第 4 页)。这种方法将地方商业利益、公私合作伙伴关系和解决贫困问题的市场方案置于优先地位。长期以来,历史学家们一直承认自由主义社会政策的商业友好型方法。但没有人像宿雾那样深入研究档案,讲述如此微妙的故事,他巧妙地追溯了美国福利国家早期和长期被市场手段和目的俘获的过程。宿雾的书有一半集中在佐治亚州西北部,尤其是小城市罗马,他将罗马与俄亥俄州克利夫兰(本书另一半的背景)作为对应和对比。罗马和克利夫兰的公民和商界领袖都将就业增长和城市重建作为发展计划的重点,与州规划师、咨询委员会、政府委员会和非营利机构合作,将农村和城市贫困问题作为主要的地方事务来管理。Cebul认为,"自由派对经济增长的信心也确保了贫困问题继续为地方精英带来巨大利润","巩固了自由派与通常保守的商界人士之间分散的行政合作关系"(第91页)。尽管扶贫战争算不上激进的政策转变,但它 "对他们(商业精英)与供应方国家的关系构成了前所未有的威胁",同时也引发了受其管理的社区的反抗(第 148 页)。然而,供应方自由主义在抗议声中被证明是经久不衰的。城市重建在克利夫兰的失败,以及自由主义以增长为导向的纲领在罗马的局限性,为二十世纪六七十年代新一轮民主党人 "更有力地阐明其生产者的身份,不仅包括其在创造就业、税收或经济适用房方面的重要作用,还包括其在消除贫困和改革政府本身方面的作用"(第148页)提供了空间。在塞布尔看来,供应方自由主义者的典型代表是吉米-卡特。卡特推动了 "一代人对传统公共项目的怀疑",尤其是当他和其他 "年轻的自由主义者面对这样的现实:即使是他们支持的计划,也往往资金不足、相互脱节,而且由于政府间管理和资金的交叉而难以改革"(第 267 页)。整笔拨款、教育改革、智囊团、平衡预算和补贴创业成为所谓新民主党人的政策,取代了左右两派批评者所谓的特殊利益开支。在卡特之后,罗纳德-里根(Ronald Reagan)对 "市场是一个摆脱了公共责任或社会义务的空间 "这一理念的教条式承诺,让依赖于供给方计划的商业利益集团大为不满,他们寄希望于另一位南方民主党人比尔-克林顿(Bill Clinton),希望他将工作视为公民身份的象征,将紧缩视为务实的政治家风范(第291页)。克林顿正是这样做的,他将 "社会进步、民主本身的语言 "加倍市场化(第291页)。换句话说,克林顿完成了新政启动的新自由主义项目。宿雾的这本书平衡了史学界对右翼商业影响的过度强调,揭示了自由派的努力如何在美国政党政治和公共政策中将市场化正常化。然而,《进步的幻觉》一书在论证其观点时,将公共政策对减贫的虚幻效果放在了前面。这个框架奇怪地 [第 649 页完] 淡化了反贫困倡导者在罗马和克利夫兰以外地方的持久影响力,从而将民权人物和组织的反贫困倡导贬低到历史意义的边缘。毫无疑问,这并不是塞布尔的本意,但战后反贫困--尤其是极端贫困--的真正胜利似乎没有得到充分解释,无论是在特定的州、整个南方,还是在全国范围内。尽管如此,毋庸置疑的是,在供应方自由主义的影响下,贫困对于太多人来说仍然是一个顽固的现实,尽管民选和自由主义者几代人都在努力消除贫困。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century by Brent Cebul (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:

  • Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century by Brent Cebul
  • Darren E. Grem
Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century. By Brent Cebul. Politics and Culture in Modern America. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023. Pp. x, 466. $39.95, ISBN 978-1-5128-2381-3.)

Brent Cebul’s Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century argues that neoliberalism is neither “neo” nor “liberal.” [End Page 648] New Dealers invented it nearly a century ago, and it is better understood as a political economy that Cebul terms “supply-side liberalism” (p. 4). This approach privileged local business interests, public-private partnerships, and market solutions to poverty. Historians have long acknowledged the business- friendly approaches of liberal social policy. But none have delved as deeply into the archives and told as subtle a story as Cebul, who masterfully traces the American welfare state’s early and long-lasting capture by the market’s means and ends.

Half of Cebul’s book focuses on northwest Georgia, especially the small city of Rome, which he casts as a counterpart and contrast to Cleveland, Ohio, the setting of the book’s other half. Both Rome’s and Cleveland’s civic and business leaders privileged job growth and urban renewal–based development schemes, partnering with state planners, advisory boards, governmental commissions, and nonprofit entities to manage rural and urban poverty as primarily a local matter. “Liberals’ faith in economic growth also ensured that poverty continued to be immensely profitable for local elites,” Cebul argues, “cementing decentralized, administrative partnerships between liberals and often conservative businesspeople” (p. 91). Though hardly a radical policy shift, the War on Poverty presented “an unprecedented threat to their [business elites’] relationship with the supply-side state,” all while sparking revolt by the very communities under its administration (p. 148). Supply-side liberalism, however, would prove durable under protest. Urban renewal’s failures in Cleveland and the limits of liberalism’s growth-oriented platform in Rome set up space for a new round of Democrats in the 1960s and 1970s to “more muscularly articulate their producerist bona fides, expanded to include not simply their essential role in producing jobs, taxes, or affordable housing, but also their role in fighting poverty and reforming government itself” (p. 148).

For Cebul, the quintessential supply-side liberal was Jimmy Carter. Carter advanced a “generational suspicion about traditional public programs,” especially as he and other “younger liberals reckoned with the reality that even initiatives they supported were often underfunded, disjointed, and difficult to reform thanks to crosscutting intergovernmental administration and funding” (p. 267). Block grants, education reform, think tanks, balanced budgets, and subsidized entrepreneurialism became the policies of the so-called New Democrats, which replaced spending on what critics on the left and right called special interests. After Carter, Ronald Reagan’s dogmatic commitment to the idea that “the market was a space freed from public responsibilities or social obligations” chafed business interests indebted to supply-side programs, who looked to another southern Democrat, Bill Clinton, to privilege work as a sign of citizenship and austerity as pragmatic statesmanship (p. 291). Clinton did just that, doubling down on “the language of social progress, of democracy itself” as marketized (p. 291). In other words, Clinton finished a neoliberal project the New Deal started.

Cebul’s book adds balance to the historiographical overemphasis on business influence from the right, revealing how liberal endeavors also normalized marketization in American party politics and public policy. To make its argument, however, Illusions of Progress frontloads the presumably illusory effects of public policy on poverty reduction. This framework oddly [End Page 649] downplays the lasting influence of antipoverty advocates in places outside Rome and Cleveland, thereby reducing the antipoverty advocacy of civil rights figures and organizations to the periphery of historical import. Undoubtedly, this was not Cebul’s intent, but genuine postwar wins against poverty—especially extreme poverty—seem underexplained, whether in specific states, across the South, or nationwide. Still, it is not debatable that poverty under supply-side liberalism remained a stubborn reality for far too many, despite a multigenerational effort by a long line of elected and...

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
220
期刊最新文献
Faith, Race, and the Lost Cause: Confessions of a Southern Church by Christopher Alan Graham (review) Nothing More Than Freedom: The Failure of Abolition in American Law by Giuliana Perrone (review) A Man of Bad Reputation: The Murder of John Stephens and the Contested Landscape of North Carolina Reconstruction by Drew A. Swanson (review) Ruin and Resilience: Southern Literature and the Environment by Daniel Spoth (review) In the Shadows of the Big House: Twenty-First-Century Antebellum Slave Cabins and Heritage Tourism in Louisiana by Stephen Small (review)
×
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