JoAnn St.Clair
February 8, 2007
Dr. Buzzanco
20 Century U.S. History
th
Review
The New Deal: The Depression Years 1933-1940
Badger, Anthony J.
Houndmills, Great Britain and New York: Palgrave, 1989.
Badger initially discusses what his book is not: a chronological account of the
New Deal nor a discussion of the foreign relations policies of the 1930s. Although he
does not discount Roosevelt’s role, this work is not intended to be a recounting of the
Roosevelt presidency. Rather, Badger attempts interpretations of various aspects –
industry, organized labor, agriculture, welfare and politics – in their New Deal
operational context. Badger presents four “preconceptions and conclusions:” the New
Deal represented a sharp break with the past; it’s impact was circumscribed and
constrained by uncontrollable forces; in the end, the New Deal was a “holding operation”
for American society; and that WWII, not the New Deal, marked the decisive turning
point for many Americans.
The book opens with a litany of horrors on the conditions during the Depression:
suicides, infanticides, starvation, psychosis, disease and death, in addition to the
economic deprivation. Badger deals with Herbert Hoover’s role in limited space. He
relates that Hoover’s intransigence on his policies, and actions such as his deployment of
MacArthur’s troops against unemployed American veterans and their families encamped
near the Capitol, reinforced Hoover’s “uncaring” image. However, he also states that
although Hoover was earlier “vilified” as indifferent to the poor and a symbol of
Republican responsibility for the Depression, New Left historians have acclaimed his
“reluctance to expand state and bureaucratic power.”
Badger lays out both the failures and successes of the New Deal. The former he
cites as: continued unemployment, no additional purchasing power, insufficient deficit
spending, no redistribution of wealth, continued power of large corporations, weak labor
policies, continues surplus agricultural production, rural poverty, insufficient direct relief,
no civil rights measures, lack of inner city housing for poor blacks, segregation. On the
other hand, Badger holds the New Deal up to the mirror of Hoover’s “inaction” and finds
more positive results: stabilized banking and securities system, assistance to farmers, and
welfare programs. It was especially the welfare programs that Badger claims promoted
the “lasting loyalty of lower-income voters to Roosevelt” and resulted in the political
agenda of the Democratic Party taking on poverty and civil rights issues.
Badger goes beyond this comparison of good and bad results to propose a
comparison of the reforms instituted and their unanticipated consequences. Many of these
were the exact opposite of what the New Deal proposed, such as the stronger
establishment of big corporations, urban sprawl rather than revived inner cities, weak
labor laws, and others. In the New Deal’s defense, Badger does state that “Roosevelt
never pretended that his aim was anything other than to save and preserve capitalism.”
However, the procrastination in establishing a compensatory fiscal policy ultimately
resulted in the demise, or diminishment, of many of the social programs. The structure of
the federal government was “inappropriate to centrally-directed radical reform,” while
locally run programs often benefited those least in need. According to Badger, these
issues, combined with the power of the conservative opposition in the legislature,
checked the New Deal’s effectiveness.
Badger claims that the New Deal was, in the end, a “holding operation” for
American society – “a series of measures that enabled the people to survive the
Depression and to hold on until WWII opened up new opportunities.” Although he says
at one point that this conclusion is “seen through the lens of the war,” he later says that
“this is what most Americans wanted it to be,” although it is unlikely that anyone
struggling through the Depression would have looked forward to a war to “open up
opportunities.”
Badger provides a thorough bibliographic essay, arranged by his chapter topics.
Also included is a listing of acronyms which is helpful in sorting out the alphabet soup of
New Deal programs. However, the book lacks notes and citations, even for direct quotes.
This omission precludes examining his sources, although he occasionally refers to works,
such as newspapers, by title only; the book’s usefulness is therefore somewhat
diminished.