Homework answers / question archive / Instructions What follows is a series of, unless otherwise indicated), questions to which a short answer is required (i

Instructions What follows is a series of, unless otherwise indicated), questions to which a short answer is required (i

Sociology

Share With

Instructions What follows is a series of, unless otherwise indicated), questions to which a short answer is required (i.e., about a paragraph. Many of the questions ask you to tell me what the author of the book thought or what she wrote. Some other questions ask for your thoughts on a topic (i.e., the question says “Your Thoughts.” Use your own judgment as to what constitutes a “short answer.” For the last two questions I would like a little more expansive answer, so give me about a page on each question. Additional directions are provided in those questions for your answer. This is not intended to be difficult. It is intended as a means to facilitate your thinking about the topics addressed from a different perspective. Introduction In her book, The Forgotten Man, Amity Shlaes writes that “…it is time to revisit the late 1920s and the 1930s…” Why does she want to revisit this period of time in American economic, cultural and social history? (4-5) How does she describe the “standard history” and the “standard rebuttal?” (3-4) Who, according to Shales, is “the forgotten man?” (13) Why is the “forgotten” man “forgotten?” What do you think she means by this allusion? (13) (Your thoughts) Chapter 1 “The beneficent hand” to which Shales refers in Chapter 1 alludes to Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” in the economy. What is this “beneficent hand” and how does Hoover’s notions of the role that government should play in the economy differ from that of Coolidge?(18-19) Hoover’s view of the role of government and Mellon’s view of the role of government were opposed (33-36) and Hoover believed that government must move toward “greater regulation” (i.e., what we now know as the “administrative state). Explain how the views of Mellon and Hoover as to the role of the government in economic life coincides with Professor Cann’s observation Chapter 2 The American intellectual class (or at least the sampling provided by Shlaes), whose beau ideal was Felix Frankfruter (later to become a prominent justice on the United States Supreme Court) wanted an “active” American government that “regulated,” especially business (63-67) How does this view of the role of American government differ from the traditional understanding of the role of American government (see, e.g., Cann, Ch. 1, pgs. 9-11- I have posted Chapter 1 from Cann on the Course site where you have been finding the Funk material) Were you surprised that prominent American intellectuals viewed the Soviet Union of the 1920s-1930s sympathetically? Why do you think that these American intellectuals viewed the economic and social reforms of the Soviet Union sympathetically? Why do you think that these intellectuals downplayed obvious “human rights violations” of Joe Stalin? (74-84; 133) (Your thoughts) Having had a chance to reflect on those thoughts, I’d like to invite you to revisit a question that Professor Cann asked earlier in the Course: “How democratic would you think our government was if it were true that 90 percent of laws that regulate everyday life were made by unelected, politically insulated job secure career bureaucrats? What if it were true that the policy making or legislative branch of government (at any level…) passed only broad and vague legislation and then delegated the power to agencies to adopt standards, rules and policies to fill in the gaps and holes, leaving those agencies with a tremendous amount of discretion?...” (Cann, 8) By now you know that what Cann posits as a hypothetical possibility is, in fact, the truth. So, your thoughts: how democratic do you think our government is in light of what we now know is the “Fourth Branch of government” and how it operates. And as a follow up to that question, if popular democracy diminishes as the “Fourth branch” of government expands, does that mean that America is (or will be) more ruled by the intellectual class than say, the people (generally speaking)? Your thoughts. Was the aim of the intellectual class to shape our governmental institutions more along the lines of that of a collectivist economy/society (e.g., 63-64; 84; 133) consistent with our original Constitutional understandings of the role of government (as articulated by Professor Cann, for example) Your thoughts Assuming for argument’s sake that regulation is now (and maybe then was) “a fact of life” is it appropriate to transform the original intent of our constitutional system (as described by Professor Cann) as a negative or “limited” government into a collectivist society by increasing the degree of regulation, thus increasing the role of government in people’s everyday lives? In other words, if someone wants to change the nature of our constitutional ideals as expressed in the Constitution from limited government to a progressive/active/positive role of government shouldn’t we amend the constitution to express that change? What would that require? Your thoughts. Chapter 4 Shales seems to think that the Depression was caused by “deflation.” How does she describe “deflation” and how did deflation cause and/or contribute to the Great Depression? (108-112) The Federal Reserve was (and is) the administrative agency that was/is supposed to regulate the banking system in the United States. Shlaes argues that the Fderal Reserve and the Treasury were governmental agencies that could have alleviated the misery of the Great Depression but these government agencies did not do so. How does Shales explain these agencies’ failure to respond appropriately? (108-109) Chapter 5-15 Having read the book (your thoughts): Before you read the book, what was your understanding of the history of “the Great Depression?” (Give me about one page on this question and tell me where your understanding of this history came from or how you think you acquired it) Chapter 5-15 Having read the book (your thoughts): What is your understanding now of the history of “the Great Depression?” In other words, has your understanding changed in any respect as a result of reading the book? How so, or why not? (Give me: (a) about one page on this question; and (b) provide examples from the rest of the book to help me understand what you mean and illustrate your thinking). 5)