|
1. FDR - While it was likely due to him running at the right time, he did come at a time when the American people and economists had a left learning surge. His terms were at a time that cultivated American leftism. And while he wasn't the left's best friend, he wasn't the worst enemy either. 2. Reagan - The American reactionary movement was boiling for years and Reagan took full advantage. He dominated the political sphere at managed to craft not only American politics in his image, but American culture as well. 3. Trump - Yes, Trump. This is extremely early, but Trump's victory marked the end of "the end of history" and third wayism. He showed how truly weak and ineffective liberalism is. And his win resulted in the "radicalization" of many on both the right and the left. If/when the political consensus looks significantly a generation from now, Trump's presidency will be involved heavily, as he proved to the racists that "one of them" can win power in the Big House and to the left that the liberals have no loving clue what they are doing so you have to do it yourself. 4. LBJ - The last real Democrat to many. Basically translated to poo poo foreign policy, good domestic policy. He may not have had the best decorum, he did get poo poo done. The Great Society tenets may have never been passed without him, while the Civil Rights Act likely passed a decade or so earlier than it would have otherwise. 5. Bill Clinton - Reagan beat back American leftism to the point that it was on life support. However, it was Bill Clinton who pulled the plug. Embracing Third Wayism fully, Clinton deregulated what Reagan could not, most notably the banks and the media, as well as tried to privatize social security. He led the police to become further militaristic and jailed large amounts of people, especially those of color. His election wins also popularized the concept of "running in the middle" in an attempt to not offend liberal and conservative voters too much. Which was a tactic that only "worked" under highly specific conditions (e.g. the lowest voter turnout in American history for the two main parties at the time).
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:It's way too early to say too much about Trump IMO. Third way politics is weakened and losing influence, but it's still very much alive and kicking and has some degree of sway over the Democratic Party. The reactionary march towards the right that started under Reagan would have gone on anyway had Hillary won. The left was already mobilized to a degree in the primary, but it's certainly gone into overdrive under Trump. Under Hillary, the full power of the DNC would have been dedicated to crushing that movement, but as things stand now, I have doubts that a left-wing movement will get as much power this year as we want it to. This is true, which is why I was a bit hesitant to list him. That being said, you could say the same with Reagan and FDR. It would have been only a matter of time before America would have went full throttle with neoliberalism if Carter won reelection. Similarly, with FDR, it also likely would have been a matter of time before the New Deal, or at least tenets of it, would have passed. Remember, FDR was pressured, if not forced, by unions and various organizations to pass both new deals. I more so see the rankings of these presidents as the "tipping points" in US history. get that OUT of my face posted:Trump did bring about a post-Fukuyama neoliberal consensus world in the US, but this is also nothing new in other parts of the world. Populist right-wing surges happened outside of the Anglosphere a couple years before in Poland, Hungary, and Austria. Before that, Italy got the ball rolling with Berlusconi, who is probably the leader most similar to Trump. This is also true. Technically the post-Fukuyama consensus was dead during the 2000s. One part due to the Middle East showing no signs of easing tensions even after the "help" the West gave it, and also due to several populist governments showing up in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Later on, Western Europe began getting a taste of this as well as the United States as well. But the former had it hidden a bit better due to the ironclad two party system. Trump's victory was merely a signal that the populist wave has finally reached American shores. But being honest, you can say the same about FDR as the New Deal tenets and even getting off the gold standard were things some European countries had already undergone. History truly is global, but I'm just going by it from an American perspective. get that OUT of my face posted:After 2018, the picture might be more clear. Absolutely. There is a lot riding on 2018. Yes, organizations like the DSA have grown significantly last year, but just how many of those members will stay, and how many of those members will be willing to put in work remains to be seen. If organizations such as the DSA are very active from 2018 and on, and manage to change much of the fabric of politics, then Trump would be used as a good tipping point. Ditto if the alt-right manages to hold on and build on their results. However, if things are back to business as usual with centrists leading the way, then Trump will essentially be the red flag, which signals that poo poo will hit the fan, only just quite a bit down the line. Zas posted:you're thinking of osama bin laden While it is true that 9/11 did a lot to damage Fukuyama's outlandish claim, many people, particularly the "educated elite", merely saw the bungles in the Middle East as sheer growing pains. They believed as a whole the world was getting better and moving toward a pure open market and republic based democratic society. That large competing political ideologies such as Marxism or major powers butting heads with each other would soon be a thing of the past once a few obvious examples cool down. For reference I never believed in any of this for a second but there were large amounts of people who did. Hence why after Trump's victory so many people were in disbelief that such a thing could even occur. punk rebel ecks has issued a correction as of 23:50 on Jan 6, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
Didn't Woodrow Wilson significantly expand government power (in a relative way) more than any other president during the 20th century? I know anti-government types hate his guts.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
Who was the president who tried to lock up all the suspected socialists in a sports stadium? I heard about them on Hardcore History some time ago.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2018 07:36
|
|
|
What made Teddy Roosevelt so remarkable?GoluboiOgon posted:he was the first 20th century president to use mass deportations, created the espionage act that is currently being used against reality winner, and invaded russia without a declaration of war from congress. he also created a centralized censorship board for the media, the CPI. Sounds like the 20th century version of W.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2018 07:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Dreddout posted:Essentially the progressivism of Roosevelt was State Capitalism in it's purest form, he'd probably like the modern PRC, if only it was more environmentally friendly. So there were a lot of state owned companies?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2018 03:19
|
|