Summary: Did The Progressives Fail?
Issue 8:
Did the Progressives fail?
Yes (Abrams): Professor of history Richard M. Abrams maintains that progressivism was a failure because it tried to impose a uniform set of values upon a culturally diverse people and never seriously confronted the inequalities that still exist in American society.
No (Link and McCormick): Professors of history Arthur S. Link and Richard L. McCormick argue that the progressives were a diverse group of reformers who confronted and ameliorated the worst abuses that emerged in urban industrial America during the early 1900s.
Body: I do not agree with Professor Abrams in that the progressives failed because they tried to make everyone conform to one set of values. Abram argued that the progressivism …show more content…
focused mainly on a government that was honest and efficient, recognition of the different societies of the rich and the poor, wanting a use of the nations resources that made sense, and a rejection on social values that hindered social solutions such as poverty. He said that progressivism failed in what it considered to be its principle objective, which was, more than anything, to restore and maintain the conventional consensus on a particular view of the universe, a particular set of values, and a particular constellation of the different moods of the commerce of the united states. All of these factors were why Abrams said progressivism failed, along with its industry, social relations, and its politics.
Body: I highly agree with Professors Link and McCormick in that the progressives bettered the worst aspects of urban industrial America in this time.
The professors argue that the progressives not only recognized the diversity of cultures, but also compromised and wanted to diminish the conflict between social and economic groups. They explain that there would be no reason to blame the progressives for the failure of their new ideas and that they should eliminate all the arguments of an industrial city. Asking the progressives why it was that the adopted measures, which tended to disguise and obscure economic and social conflict would be understandable as it happened as soon as they uncovered it. Although attempts to reduce divisions sometimes came off as trying to impose their ways on the urban middle class, it wasn’t intended to come off that way. In result, the progressives never had lived their dream of eliminating social conflict. All of these are the different reasons are why progressivism did not live up to the standards of its intentions. The social lives and personal lives of people were also affected greatly by progressivism. These problems that the progressives faced are still problems that the Americans have challenged ever since. Progressivism was also known as a source of strength, which is now missing from
America.
Conclusion: Although Link and McCormick do agree that the improvements that they set out for did not exactly turn out the way intended, they argue that even though they failed at growing big business, the progressive reforms highly improved the worst of the new urban industrial city. Abrams believes that progressivism had quite the huge effect on seriously blunting the edges of American life and people’s self interest and highly reduced the harsh conditions of the underprivileged like with poverty. His main point was that progressivism accomplished nothing of value and considers their reforms inadequate. Link and McCormick’s main point was that the progressives bettered the worst of urban industrial city and that the progressives were the first group to confront the problems of modern America, which still affect modern society.
Did the Progressives fail?
Yes (Abrams): Professor of history Richard M. Abrams maintains that progressivism was a failure because it tried to impose a uniform set of values upon a culturally diverse people and never seriously confronted the inequalities that still exist in American society.
No (Link and McCormick): Professors of history Arthur S. Link and Richard L. McCormick argue that the progressives were a diverse group of reformers who confronted and ameliorated the worst abuses that emerged in urban industrial America during the early 1900s.
Body: I do not agree with Professor Abrams in that the progressives failed because they tried to make everyone conform to one set of values. Abram argued that the progressivism …show more content…
focused mainly on a government that was honest and efficient, recognition of the different societies of the rich and the poor, wanting a use of the nations resources that made sense, and a rejection on social values that hindered social solutions such as poverty. He said that progressivism failed in what it considered to be its principle objective, which was, more than anything, to restore and maintain the conventional consensus on a particular view of the universe, a particular set of values, and a particular constellation of the different moods of the commerce of the united states. All of these factors were why Abrams said progressivism failed, along with its industry, social relations, and its politics.
Body: I highly agree with Professors Link and McCormick in that the progressives bettered the worst aspects of urban industrial America in this time.
The professors argue that the progressives not only recognized the diversity of cultures, but also compromised and wanted to diminish the conflict between social and economic groups. They explain that there would be no reason to blame the progressives for the failure of their new ideas and that they should eliminate all the arguments of an industrial city. Asking the progressives why it was that the adopted measures, which tended to disguise and obscure economic and social conflict would be understandable as it happened as soon as they uncovered it. Although attempts to reduce divisions sometimes came off as trying to impose their ways on the urban middle class, it wasn’t intended to come off that way. In result, the progressives never had lived their dream of eliminating social conflict. All of these are the different reasons are why progressivism did not live up to the standards of its intentions. The social lives and personal lives of people were also affected greatly by progressivism. These problems that the progressives faced are still problems that the Americans have challenged ever since. Progressivism was also known as a source of strength, which is now missing from
America.
Conclusion: Although Link and McCormick do agree that the improvements that they set out for did not exactly turn out the way intended, they argue that even though they failed at growing big business, the progressive reforms highly improved the worst of the new urban industrial city. Abrams believes that progressivism had quite the huge effect on seriously blunting the edges of American life and people’s self interest and highly reduced the harsh conditions of the underprivileged like with poverty. His main point was that progressivism accomplished nothing of value and considers their reforms inadequate. Link and McCormick’s main point was that the progressives bettered the worst of urban industrial city and that the progressives were the first group to confront the problems of modern America, which still affect modern society.