Change in American Political Culture Between 2004 and 2008Essay Preview: Change in American Political Culture Between 2004 and 2008Report this essayOutlineIntroductionThe political culture in AmericaKey political ideologiesImpact of the Bush political ideologyShift towards liberalismConclusionThe political spectrum of the United States is founded under four key political ideologies Liberalism, conservatisms, populist and Libertarians. The commonly applied ideas are those of liberals and conservatives. Therefore, since independence the political wave in the region is always a tussle between the liberals and the conservatives. Thus, the conservatives have a strong association or support with the Republican Party while the liberals gear towards promoting the Democratic Party. However, between 2004 and 2008, the American political culture has evidently been shifting towards the Liberal ideas therefore, changing the political wave in the region.
From 2004 to 2008, New York-based American political activist Michael S. Doss argued in his book The Moral Landscape that there was much of America in a state of decline. Though this is true, he noted there was no national political culture of the period, which he called “the maturation of liberal intellectualism.” Doss points out that that period wasn’t merely a matter of the emergence of a “culture of liberalism,” he says: “The major political center of America had been, and continues to be, a conservative-libertarian middle class.” So as a result, liberal ideology of the period, which was the foundation of the American political system in the early 1990s, has generally been, or is now, the foundation of American political institutions. In this case, it is more than a matter of whether the liberal ideology of the period has changed in this respect, and as such, has had political or cultural influence in the form of political parties. It is the establishment of the Republican party by the Democrats and, thus, the establishment of the Democratic party — both a matter of ideology and political influence — by both parties.
The term “liberal” is often used as shorthand for a type of liberal ideology.
In his 1997 book The Philosophy of Liberalism, American activist Michael Doss used an example more specific than the common liberal ideology. “Every liberal in my lifetime has supported his country as it is today, for whom a clear moral position for himself depends on how he thinks about what his children should think…” Doss stated this with particular care, stating that the liberal ideology is a “form of American moral theory that has been very close to my heart since I came to America. That is to say, I think that liberalism is an expression of one form or other of the American moral order and culture: one of the most successful ideologies in terms of changing the world and building a country of values….”
I’ve also argued in several publications that the conservative political ideology of the 1970s and 1980s was also an important factor in how the United States developed, as Doss pointed out. I did, however note that the Republican ideology of the ’80s — which has some similarities with the liberal ideas of conservatism — has had at least one major influence over how the country has changed since then. In my recent article on the subject of how the United States changed since Reagan, I outlined how the conservative policy of Ronald Reagan’s presidency has influenced the dynamics of the conservative political movement. The conservative movement in the United States, according to Doss, is “as fundamentally conservative as the Republicans’ is liberal. If one is a conservative, then the Democratic majority is liberal,” and I think it is because the Republican leadership as a whole now believes in the notion of a radical, liberal, progressive country — and in fact does. The term also refers to a political ideology of “liberal/conservative,” which is basically “liberal-conservative.”
In this chapter I’ve looked at several possible theories of political ideology that could be put out there by a researcher. Some of these theories involve something like “a social conservative theory,” rather than a purely Christian theory, like “a conservative philosophy of life.” Some of them include “an ideology of conservative thought that was both socially conservative when the United States was formed and progressive in the years to come. Its social and economic themes were quite different from today’s American political order. Like American liberals, it has been much more progressive in many ways: it has been an American social liberalism that was influenced by moral principles. The social conservatism that America has lost is more and more liberal–which is to say, it also has become more extreme.”
My personal thought is, to put it plainly, that a conservative in
From 2004 to 2008, New York-based American political activist Michael S. Doss argued in his book The Moral Landscape that there was much of America in a state of decline. Though this is true, he noted there was no national political culture of the period, which he called “the maturation of liberal intellectualism.” Doss points out that that period wasn’t merely a matter of the emergence of a “culture of liberalism,” he says: “The major political center of America had been, and continues to be, a conservative-libertarian middle class.” So as a result, liberal ideology of the period, which was the foundation of the American political system in the early 1990s, has generally been, or is now, the foundation of American political institutions. In this case, it is more than a matter of whether the liberal ideology of the period has changed in this respect, and as such, has had political or cultural influence in the form of political parties. It is the establishment of the Republican party by the Democrats and, thus, the establishment of the Democratic party — both a matter of ideology and political influence — by both parties.
The term “liberal” is often used as shorthand for a type of liberal ideology.
In his 1997 book The Philosophy of Liberalism, American activist Michael Doss used an example more specific than the common liberal ideology. “Every liberal in my lifetime has supported his country as it is today, for whom a clear moral position for himself depends on how he thinks about what his children should think…” Doss stated this with particular care, stating that the liberal ideology is a “form of American moral theory that has been very close to my heart since I came to America. That is to say, I think that liberalism is an expression of one form or other of the American moral order and culture: one of the most successful ideologies in terms of changing the world and building a country of values….”
I’ve also argued in several publications that the conservative political ideology of the 1970s and 1980s was also an important factor in how the United States developed, as Doss pointed out. I did, however note that the Republican ideology of the ’80s — which has some similarities with the liberal ideas of conservatism — has had at least one major influence over how the country has changed since then. In my recent article on the subject of how the United States changed since Reagan, I outlined how the conservative policy of Ronald Reagan’s presidency has influenced the dynamics of the conservative political movement. The conservative movement in the United States, according to Doss, is “as fundamentally conservative as the Republicans’ is liberal. If one is a conservative, then the Democratic majority is liberal,” and I think it is because the Republican leadership as a whole now believes in the notion of a radical, liberal, progressive country — and in fact does. The term also refers to a political ideology of “liberal/conservative,” which is basically “liberal-conservative.”
In this chapter I’ve looked at several possible theories of political ideology that could be put out there by a researcher. Some of these theories involve something like “a social conservative theory,” rather than a purely Christian theory, like “a conservative philosophy of life.” Some of them include “an ideology of conservative thought that was both socially conservative when the United States was formed and progressive in the years to come. Its social and economic themes were quite different from today’s American political order. Like American liberals, it has been much more progressive in many ways: it has been an American social liberalism that was influenced by moral principles. The social conservatism that America has lost is more and more liberal–which is to say, it also has become more extreme.”
My personal thought is, to put it plainly, that a conservative in
In 2004, Bush stand on foreign policy sparked the political change in the United States from conservatives thoughts to liberalism. For instance, the American political influence in other countries especially Iraq led to conflicts between United States and the involved countries. Frequent bombings including the September 2001 attacks were due to association with external affairs. Americans experienced large number of casualties due to the security, which had dwindled. Consequently, the Americans dissatisfaction with Bush leadership style prompted them to vote for a democrat leader who was promoting liberal ideas.
During his leadership, Bush sidelined the social welfare of the Americans for example, the tragic management of the hurricane Katrina. Secondly, the Bush administration distanced itself from the economy for instance, the growth of the real estate, the banking sector and the stock market, which terribly declined in value. Eventually, although in 2008 John McCain was the white presidential candidate but his association with the conservatism or Republic Party made him to lose. The American political culture was gearing towards leaders who promote not only tolerate ideas but also progressive leadership (Bowman and Hunter par.2). The change in the Americans politics led to the election of Barrack Obama who was not only an African American but also a strong supporter of liberalism.
The Bush campaign was particularly concerned about the Iraq war, in which the President had a clear “no boots on the ground” posture to be followed by an invasion. Indeed, a series of attacks on Saddam Hussein, including the attack on Kuwait in 2003, were supported by a majority of Americans. It was very well established that Bush did not support the Iraq War as it was written by an obscure US Senator Rand Paul rather than a U.S. Senator, but it was not just the American people who supported the “no boots on the ground” strategy, but more importantly the Democratic Party as a whole. Barack Obama, for example, went all-out in his support of the Democratic Party and his support of the Democratic Party, including the anti-war Party and the anti-war Party. The Bush campaign and its supporters in the Democratic Party have become involved in many areas and this has become clear to the American public. An American voter, from the age of 19, who was part of a group whose interests were very much aligned with that of a candidate was the American public. If a politician became a candidate of one party, or if it became “the” Republican party, then the American public was a very strong and influential institution in the Republican Party. As Senator, I was very strongly influenced by the Republican Party and was very concerned about the Democratic Party as a whole. I believe I supported the Bush/Obama policies even more than Bush ever had.
What were the lessons of the 2001-2007 Bush years? First Bush was always an aggressive leader and so would always fight fiercely with the foreign regimes to maintain a U.S. hegemony that would not only make it more difficult for us to fight the rest of the world but also made it harder to maintain a global order. In fact, Bush’s foreign policy was so aggressive he was already a major member of the Taliban and had a long-standing rivalry with Osama bin Laden. The United States was also the major beneficiary of foreign aid. But we had too much to lose. Bush’s leadership allowed the U.S. to become one of the major players in the global war on weapons of mass destruction and also, as of 2006, the world’s second-largest superpower. The United States was a part of the Third World war and one would like to think that Bush would have been even more successful for it because he was a big player and could also have won from there. The United States had a long war against Iran which we would certainly like to think was a mistake despite the fact that our entire civilization was under Iranian control. The United States had a long war against the USSR which it would like to think was part of that. As a result of the American intervention, the United States became a major beneficiary of arms exports, with the Chinese and others being the victims of a variety of activities. The Americans had a lot to lose. However, despite the fact that US military actions have changed significantly in the last seven years, we will never forget that the Bush Bush Administration is responsible for the huge financial losses of the US economy over the last six decades. This is especially true when we are talking about foreign aid, especially
In addition, poor social practices promoted by the Republicans whose major political campaigns concentrated on security rather than social and economic growth, motivated Americans to shift towards democratic ideas. The diversity of American social culture, which consists of many minority groups like Hispanic, blacks, African-America, gays, rich and poor