Question

DIRECTIONS: The below passage describes how one historian prefers to see the history of the United States written. Use the passage to help you answer Question 19. I would prefer to try to tell the story of the discovery of America from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees... of the rise of industrialism as seen by the young women in the Lowell textile mills... the Gilded Age as seen by southern farmers... the New Deal as seen by blacks in Harlem... the postwar American empire as seen by peons in Latin American..... Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States 1980 How might the topic you selected be interpreted from two different perspectives? Explain how the two perspectives would lead to different historical interpretations of the topic.​

Answer 1

Considering the topic of the "New Deal" from two different perspectives can lead to divergent historical interpretations.

Perspective 1: Government as a Savior
From this standpoint, the New Deal is viewed as a pivotal moment in American history, signifying the proactive efforts of the government to address the severe economic hardships of the Great Depression. It emphasizes the positive outcomes of Roosevelt's policies, such as job creation, social welfare programs, and infrastructure development. This perspective highlights the New Deal's role in stabilizing the economy, providing relief to the unemployed, and establishing a foundation for future economic growth and prosperity.

Perspective 2: Government Overreach and Criticism
In contrast, an alternative perspective may perceive the New Deal as an instance of excessive government intervention and encroachment. It could underscore concerns regarding the expansion of federal powers and potential infringements on individual liberties. This viewpoint might emphasize criticisms that the New Deal's policies had unintended consequences, such as impeding innovation, fostering dependency on government assistance, and burdening future generations with debt. It could also shed light on the arguments made by opponents of the New Deal who advocated for limited government involvement and laissez-faire economic principles.

These two perspectives provide distinct interpretations of the New Deal, highlighting the variation in historical narratives that can arise from different viewpoints. They underscore the intricate and contested nature of historical events, demonstrating that historical interpretations can diverge depending on the particular lens through which they are examined.