Student Essay on The Usa 1919-1941: the New Deal

The Usa 1919-1941: the New Deal

Summary:   Roosevelt was willing to offer America a New Deal. This could imply that he is eager to try and build America up again form scratch-to give it a fresh start. He was able to give his "fans" large amounts of optimism in his speeches, which he was so well known for, due to his warm, down to earth manner that captured the attention of all. Yet offering the United States a "new Deal" could also be interpreted as a discreet way of attacking Hoover and the way he had run America, it could imply that after having had the latter in charge of the country for a period of time, it was know in need of a serious clean-up.

History course-work

-assignment B, source based questions-

§Q.1: Source A...

I believe people supported Roosevelt in the 1932 elections mainly due to the amount of hope he was able to offer his public in his pre-election speeches. The way he was able to assure people that he was willing to help them re-build America, and that he was willing to put more effort than anybody would usually expect a politician to put in to do so.

This idea is supported by source A; He begins this speech with making a promise, a promise not just to the American people, but to himself as well, by doing this he could be implying that he doesn't see himself as being better than the average American at the time, but was just one more American in need of seeing the end of the depression. Roosevelt also adds that he is willing to offer America a New Deal. This could be implying that he is eager to try and build America up again form scratch-to give It a fresh start. All of this was made even more credible to his avid listeners since he had already made himself a reputation of being a fighter; since he had fought against Polio, and was still able to fight for the presidential seat in the White House, that gave the people suffering so acutely from the hardships of the depression, Hope. Roosevelt was able to give his "fans" large amounts of optimism in his speeches, which he was so well known for, due to his warm, down to earth manner that captured the attention of all.

By Roosevelt saying he is offering the United States a "new Deal", it could also be interpreted as a discreet way of attacking Hoover and the way he had run America, it could imply that after having had the latter in charge of the country for a period of time, it was know in need of a serious clean-up; whether or not Roosevelt is blaming Hoover directly is up to the reader...But, by adding after that this "New Deal" was more than just a political campaign, ( by which he could be insinuating that his running for Office is not just a power trip he could have embarked upon, but an actual need-for everybody.) and following this remark and adding that it was now "a call for arms", makes the actual terribly run-down state of America have an even more serious effect on the listeners, and realise that the public really need someone who appears to be so serious about what the country needs-unlike his predecessor.

Roosevelt's tone then seems to turns extremely patriotic and pleads with his listeners to help him in not just to vote for him, (which makes Roosevelt appear more generous and noble than previously), but to help him "in this crusade to restore America", which in this case would surely appeal to all. In these last sentences Roosevelt seems to be using a numerous amount of metaphors to describe the things he wants to achieve for America. As we know, later on, during Roosevelt's period in Office, he is given the amount of power over the country by Senate and the House of Representatives as if the country was in a war; and it is this type of metaphor which perhaps helped to reinforce the importance that he was giving to the crisis America found itself in; "a call to arms..." and "crusade to...." Seem to have been his way of truly conveying the severity of the depression to his voters.

He finishes his speech by continuing with his war-like metaphors, and insists that he is "waging war against; "Destruction, Delay, Deceit and Despair...." Here Roosevelt appears to pursue his promise to repair America, and he does this by using a variation of a three stage crescendo. By saying he is going to fight against "Destruction", it can be interpreted as the destruction that the depression had brought to the States; the large amounts of unemployment, which by the time Roosevelt won the election, had the numbers as high as 12 million, this in turn meant that many businesses were suffering-which as was proven later on were; in 1932 the number of failed businesses was at it's peak at 150 per ten thousand.

"Deceit and Delay", can be understood as another way of Roosevelt saying that he is going to try and mend as best as he can the damage that Hoover did not actively try and stop throughout his time in the White House; by this I am talking about the latter's 'Rugged individualism' way of thinking, by which I am referring to how when his country was beginning it's worst phase of the depression he merely promised them all that "Prosperity is around the corner"-(as is mentioned further on in Source F), this in itself can be seen as an empty promise, or even a lie, and hence the "Deceit" that Roosevelt is willing to try and put right. As for the "Delay", it could be read as the amount of time Hoover took in doing something for the severely poor of the United States, which anyway turned out to be the least someone in the latter's position could have done. As for the last in this little pattern of alliteration, "Despair" seems to be a word that came up frequently during the worst stages of the American depression, and by this I believe one could interpret it as the extreme misery and hopelessness that the failing of the economy, businesses, the growing of shanty towns and extreme poverty and starvation caused amongst the American people, and due to the fact that their president of the time was giving the impression that only time would get them out of this slump into which they'd all fallen...

I believe that Roosevelt's speech in source A, was thoroughly laced with optimism, and the promise not of an ambitious politician, but of a person like any other-who had been through tough periods in his life, and was willing to and determined to try his hardest to put right the possible mistakes or cases of negligence caused by his predecessor in the White House. His speeches are filled with what appear to be thoughtful metaphors to try and communicate how very serious he is about renovating and helping America and its' people, and how he believes that practically all is possible if everybody is to act like a team. Throughout his speeches and his time in Office, Roosevelt sticks to his idea that the way to go ahead with reinstating America to it's former 'glory' is with teamwork, and reciprocal help and support. And it is for this very reason why I believe that Roosevelt was elected in 1932; because he was able to offer the American people the hope of which they had been mainly starved of in Hoover's time, and they were being offered a realistic goal; to bring relief to them all. They were being offered the chance and the motivation by someone who was a fighter, by someone who although had come form a rich family, had already shown in short period of time that if you wanted something strongly enough than it was possible; and it was this kind of enthusiasm that the American people needed, and were receiving form Roosevelt.

§Q.2: Sources B & C...

I believe the primary difference between these two sources is the blatant distinction in the tones of voices of the authors; one fully praising Roosevelt, and describing how he had managed to fill America with hope and excitement, and the other completely attacking his every decision, and claiming that due to his decisions America had huge financial debts and people were very dependent on the government.

The first difference would be the discrepancies both author's had on the idea of what Roosevelt had done or not done about unemployment; where source B says that ."..introduced unemployment assistance...", and source C opposes it saying; ."..one in four people depends on unemployment by the government..." and ."..more people are on government relief...."

The second most noticeable variation in the authors' opinions would be with the tone of voice, or attitude each one takes up when talking about Roosevelt in general about how he managed to raise people's spirits from "depression and discouragement" to "excitement and hope." Whereas source C immediately starts off with a completely negative attitude towards Roosevelt claiming that all his efforts during the depression caused an enormous debt in the American economy; "debt of $250 billion..." (compared to) ."..pre-Roosevelt debt of $19 billion...." These two other discrepancies between the opinions of both authors is between the amount of power Roosevelt was either given or was using during his time in the White House; In source B, says

"although the government has far greater responsibilities, it has no greater power.."; Source C argues this point by saying that by "congress giving up much of its power to Roosevelt when it put billions of dollars into his hands..",

Last difference in these two extracts; source C says that due to the larger amount of power given to Roosevelt it could result in a ."..dictatorial government...", which is opposed by source B; "The charge that Roosevelt has been a dictator is not true...", which concludes this question and the comparisons made between these two very different extracts, telling two very different points of view.

§Q.3: Source D...

I believe this source is largely against Roosevelt, since it appears to be openly criticising the advertised supposed success of the New Deal.

In this source there is a queue of black, unemployed people, standing in front of a poster boasting the success of the New Deal; that the past-Americans, suffering from acute cases of depression, now had managed to provide the "WORLD'S HIGHEST STANDRD OF LIVING", which I think speaks for itself; Roosevelt believed that America had finally been restored to its former-glory and was now a thoroughly financially stable country, which due to the queue of unemployed could be argued. I believe the person who took this photograph did so to prove how very ironic the patriotic poster was; the words "There's no way like the American way", along with the queue of unemployed black people, awaiting relief from the government, could be showing how Roosevelt was only worrying about a certain type of person, and even insinuating a certain amount of racial unfairness.

I believe the person who took the photograph was indeed black, and was trying to convey the message to an audience who was opposed to Roosevelt, that then, in 1937, the amount of unemployment was actually rising-and rose to 10 million, where it hadn't been so high in 2 years.

As well as trying to high-light the rise in unemployment, and the blatant criticism toward the government, the main point trying to be proven in this source is the fact that so many black people were suffering from unemployment, and were having to be reliant upon the government for help.

Generally, a photographic source would be considered completely reliable, but in this case, one could argue that it could have been set-up in order to accentuate unemployment amongst the black, who still in the late 1930's were experiencing great racial prejudice. But I think this photo wasn't a montage, since I believe it would have had a stronger impact, in a more convincing way if what was occurring was in fact true...I believe there is a great amount of irony in this photo, since I'm sure this poster was one of many around America at the time, but the fact that it should be put near a government relief office, portrays a possible amount of dark humour on behalf of the photographer.

Of-course only the negative interpretation of the source is mentioned, whereas really it depends solely on who the audience is; if it were indeed for an audience a black, or racial equality group, or for those who criticised Roosevelt's ways, than it would be obviously and efficiently high-lighting the rising unemployment, and the little, or short-lived success of the New Deal.

§Q.4: Sources E,F &G...

I believe source E is against Roosevelt since the newspaper publishing this cartoon appears to be throwing a great deal of criticism at the way Roosevelt runs his government, but mainly how he is taking care of the economy.

Towards the beginning of Roosevelt's term in office Roosevelt described the severe actions he was taking to kick start the American economy again as "Priming the Pump,"; and this was to be achieved by spending large amounts of money, which at the time the USA didn't have. Hence the cartoonist drawing Roosevelt working at what looks like a pump, which in this case could represent the American economy.

The image of the weighed-down tax payer, shows how the higher classes were having to be the ones that paid the gradual increases in the taxes Roosevelt was known for imposing; with the reasoning behind it that it was all being done to improve the country, the industries and back his agencies. This caused a great deal of resentment, especially after the bigger problems like starvation, unemployment, bank closures etc were resolved....the American people wanted more, and that is when the more serious criticisms began

The speech mark situated next to Roosevelt; "I hope THIS will work" could imply that he doesn't have a very clear idea of what he is doing, and appears to think that by throwing money into the economy he can resolve all of America's problems. This idea is reinforced by the image of the inside of the pump, which shows a drain, therefore making it possible for one to use the expression of "throwing money down the drain."

The expression painted onto Roosevelt's face in this cartoon, appears to be showing him as being happy, and not in the least bit worried that the pump representing the economy, seems to be about to burst. The look on Roosevelt's face seems to imply that he doesn't really care whether the economy is about to collapse... Another thing the cartoon is showing is that there are plenty of leakages in the pump (and therefore the economy), and that the only thing Roosevelt is achieving by increasing the amount of money the taxpayers have to pay, and therefore putting more money into the economy, is for the already existing leakages to give away more money, which in the long run has caused $16 billion dollars to have been wasted.

On the whole, the imagery used to describe the American economy, the incredibly weighed-down taxpayer, Roosevelt's seemingly happy expression, his continuous pouring of money into the leak riddled pump and the stream of money floating away; all points to how much the author of this cartoon really was against Roosevelt and his ideas of Priming the Pump to kick-start an economy that was already far from perfect and in need of serious repairs.

Source F...

I believe this source is largely in favour of Roosevelt coming into the white house since the main focus of the sketch is of Roosevelt throwing away what looks like a trash can full of either the mistakes Hoover made or of the empty promises the latter made to the American people.

With Roosevelt in the fore-ground and Hoover in the background, walking away, one gets the impression that the former is now the 'protagonist', and Hoover is 'old news', and therefore can go back to being a normal citizen again; I think this last point can be supported by the picture the former President, walking away reading what could be perhaps a time table for a new job...

Roosevelt has been drawn with his sleeves rolled up, and as carrying out the act of cleaning up America on his own; I believe this has been done like this in order to reinforce the idea that this new president was a fighter (he had fought Polio, and managed to survive), and was willing to fight for the United States personally if the need be.

The trash can being taken out appears to be fairly huge, and if what is inside the bin all of the empty promises made by Hoover, then it could be suggesting that those were numerous.

Inside the trash can is a scare-crow wearing a tattered looking rag with the words; "Rugged Individualism", this was the idea Hoover was upholding throughout his time in Office, and it was this very attitude that gave him the bad reputation he had towards the beginning of the depression. Roosevelt's idea was to leave America to pull itself out of its troubles; for the homeless, unemployed and its starving people to help themselves.

Another thing in the bin is the phrase which Hoover was so well known for saying; "Prosperity is around the corner." This was something that Roosevelt never promised, in fact, something he prided himself on doing was supposedly not giving the American people false hopes. Roosevelt never once told the American people that by doing nothing, they were going to somehow miraculously pull themselves out of the misery of the depression. He made people understand that together, as a team, they could work to make America a better pace, and that together they could all work in restoring America to it's 'past glory.'

I believe the infamous phrase of Hoover's mentioned above, ties I with another phrase written on a scrap inside the bin; "a car in every garage", along with Hoover assuring the American nation that they didn't have to do much in order to overcome the depression, was that following the idea of every American working their way up to wealthiness, was that every person would have a car in their garage, this was quite un-true since in the early 1930's there were people who could not even afford to eat, let alone have a car in their garage!

The last visible thing in the trash can is a "chicken pot", with a rather lifeless, fully feathered chicken inside it; this could perhaps be a way of representing all of the animals that died at the beginning of, and during the depression, due to the lack of finances people had to purchase food. By not being able to sell food, many farmers had had to let food either go bad, or simply kill hundreds of live-stock, since it cost so much more to ship them abroad then it did to simply sell them.

Source G...

I believe this source is clearly against Roosevelt due to its various implications of once again, him not knowing quite what he is doing, with relevance to his Alphabet Agencies and the American economy. But, also in a way, is also criticising Congress.

In this source, the old man and patient, appears to be represented by Uncle Sam, this is able to be depicted due to the minute details of his pyjamas and slippers; the bottom of his pyjama bottoms are decorated with little stars, and his socks are patterned with stripes. Just like is so on the American flag. His slippers have the initials U.S intertwined which either give the insinuations of Uncle Sam, or of the United states. In this source, Uncle Sam is drawn with a sad/unhappy expression, which due to other factors in this carton, could lead to the impression that the latter is representing the American economy, which at the time was not in good shape.

The primary relationship that can be established to begin with, is the one between the supposed Doctor (Roosevelt) and the supposed patient (Uncle Sam). The speech bubble coming form the latter's mouth; "Of course we may have to change remedies if we don't get results", is referring to the various little bottles grouped together on the table next to the 'patient'. It is also very visible, the remedies are in fact all of Roosevelt's Alphabet Agencies. All these appear to be half used, and taking up a huge amount of space on the table at Uncle Sam's side. There is one in particular which was strongly criticised by Republicans and Boss' all over the country, and it was the NRA, this appears to be the biggest ailing "remedy", brought out by Roosevelt. What this could be showing the reader is that due to Roosevelt's apparent 'happy-go-lucky' attitude, he bares little thought to the quantity of the agencies he has accumulated in order to try and revive the American economy; the result this appears to be having, on Uncle Sam, is that he (and therefore the economy) is not any better and is therefore suffering due to Roosevelt's uncertainness, concerning his New Deal. This New Deal is also the main focus of criticism of the carton, since the artist appears to be attacking the efficiency of the New Deal, and appears to be insinuating with the apparent half-tried out remedies (agencies), that the New Deal has done little to make the American economy any better, that once again, as mentioned in other sources, that Roosevelt is simply wasting money, and nobody is stopping him. This last point is proven by the other apparent relationship between the Doctor and the nurse in the background; it shows how Congress (the nurse) is obviously in the position of being inferior to Roosevelt, when really it shouldn't be, and shows how when the Doctor makes his comment of possibly needing more remedies (and therefore more agencies, and again more money 'wasted') that Congress merely bows it's head and obeys the 'orders' given.

What this source appears to be showing is the relationship between Congress and Roosevelt, and how it appears that the latter has the former under his 'thumb'. Then the relationship between the patient and the Doctor; that Roosevelt is searching blindly for a solution to make the economy better, but in the opinion of the Republicans, is merely throwing his money away, to see if any "results" are achieved, and is hurting the economy further still.

§Q.5: Sources H & I...

Both sources H & I, are useful to see how the public reacted to Roosevelt's ideas and especially New Deal throughout his time in Office.

Source H is a definite example of subjectivity by selection; since this was a letter published by Roosevelt's supporter's as part of his election campaign in 1936. This source can still be considered useful as far as being able to age to a certain extent the public's opinion towards Roosevelt.

Towards the end of the letter it mentions how the elderly couple will "join those millions of others in praying for you every night...", this we know is indeed true, since it was obvious that Roosevelt had a huge fan-base, most apparently due to the fact that he won for a second time; this makes him incredibly popular, and due to the amount of letters that were sent to the White House, thanking Roosevelt for all he'd been doing, we know that it was very possible that many people were in fact praying for him. Also, the fact people were extremely grateful for all the work that Roosevelt had been doing throughout the depression to help people we know that large amounts of Americans were in fact truly grateful for the things he had achieved.

The fact that this letter is one that heavily praises Roosevelt's actions and was picked out by his party makes it fairly unreliable as far as trying to judge the public opinion; this is due to the various limitations surrounding it; as briefly mentioned above, the origin can be obviously considered unreliable, due it's coming from the election campaign of Roosevelt, although this seems to cancel itself out with the fact that we do know that Roosevelt received many letters, and in fact encouraged this by answering as many as possible personally; since what he appeared to try and maintain throughout his period in Office was a personal touch with all those who needed his help, and were in fact supporting him.

Source I, shows the positive impact that Roosevelt being re-elected had on the what we can see was a large majority of people; due to the fact that at the bottom of the source it says, "popular song." We can assume that it was such since it was the second time that he had been elected, and had indeed won with a landslide.

The song being called popular would immediately refer to all of Roosevelt's supporters ;( who were in no way the Republican Party), which we know were a great number of Americans.

The song describes how "Since Roosevelt's been re-elected, we'll not be neglected," this and "We've got Franklin D. Roosevelt back again", could mean that the song was in fact written as a sort of congratulations towards the President, for having won a second time round. Also the fact that it talks about not being neglected could mean that people might have been worried that if someone like Hoover had been elected, then the American people might have began to suffer like is described in sources A and D. therefore this song is showing its appreciation at Roosevelt having won again.

In my opinion, between sources H and I, I believe that source I is far more useful in beginning to judge 'fairly' the opinion the public held of Roosevelt. I believe this since source H, really held too many limitations, in comparison with the ones source I does. Although source H can be useful to be able to get an idea of Roosevelt's popular -ness, the fact that it was picked out by people in his political Party, and that really it was only the written opinion of one person that was exposed, makes it a lot more unreliable than source I. Even though the same can be argued for source I, the difference that it wasn't actually picked out by Roosevelt's Party, and wasn't actually just from one person, makes my decision that source I is a lot more useful as far as describing public opinion at the time, more substantial.

The fact source I is in fact described as a popular song, insinuates that many, many people were singing it, that many people felt the same way, which therefore makes it pretty obvious that Roosevelt did have many people who supported him, and were happy that he'd been re-elected.

§Q.6: Sources J & K...

I believe the two people, form source J and K, disagree about what the New Deal did for the American people, mainly due to the life they appear to have lead, and the way that they think and see life and how it should be 'run' in general.

There are a couple of main differences between these two sources, which show the reader why these two people vary in their opinions both on Roosevelt and the New Deal, and whether the latter helped or hindered the Americans.

In source J, the self-made businessman says that "The New Deal hurt us.", whereas the Secretary of Labour, in source K says; "The New Deal meant that ordinary people would have a better chance in life." These two quotes differ in the way that one is stating that the New Deal, had only caused the American people harm-since by using "we", one can assume he is talking about the Americans. Whereas source K, explains how by introducing the New Deal, the only thing Roosevelt was doing was trying to offer to the people a more positive way of re-building their lives.

The next difference, I believe is where source J says; "Welfare kills a man's initiative", whereas source K states ."..all forces of the community should be directed to making life better for ordinary people."

The above quotes differ in the way that source J is arguing that by Roosevelt having introduced government help, it was only making people lazy, and too dependent upon a constant aid. Source K argues in turn, that the only thing being done by introducing a help from the government was, simply trying to bring together both the government and the American people to work together to better their country and standard of living.

The self-made businessman speaks with a certain tone of resentment when speaking of Roosevelt; "Roosevelt was a rich man's son.", and makes him sound as if he was just a spoilt man who didn't know what he wanted to do in life. I think that this man is so against Roosevelt and the New Deal, probably due to him being in fact a businessman, and the fact that Roosevelt imposed a certain amount of rules and regulations via one of his Alphabet Agencies in the 'second New Deal'; the NRA, which amongst other things, fixed prices for the goods, and limited workers hours, therefore making it the least favourite of the agencies for businessman and factory owners. Also, I think due to the date when this man made his thoughts on the New Deal known; it was in the 1980's, when the government took a shift and became heavily Republican; I think this had a strong effect of how bitter and resentful S.B Fuller made his statement sound; since then it was not frowned upon for him to speak badly of Roosevelt.

Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labour, speaks with a much more positive and praising tone when talking of the work of the New Deal. I believe this is so due to the fact that she had had a very good relationship with Roosevelt-above all. Also, due to the fact that she was the first woman to be elected as a cabinet minister and therefore the first woman in being given such an important post; I'm sure this did a lot for the amount of respect she had for Roosevelt. The book was written in 1947, shortly after the U.S won the Second World War, and not long after Roosevelt had died. This probably is the reason for the high manner in which she appears to remember him. Also, the fact that she worked so closely with Roosevelt during so many years, will obviously be a cause for her judgement of him to be tainted, rather to the more positive way than any other. Also, what she appears to be defending in this source is the New Deal; Roosevelt did not come up with the ideas for the latter on his own, and therefore had many people helping him...so as well as defending or justifying the late Roosevelt's actions/ideas, the Secretary of Labour, is also doing so for herself.

In conclusion to these very different opinions of why these two people disagree about the New Deal; I believe the main argument here has to do very much with the life each one has lead. The self-made businessman had quite apparently lead a fairly difficult life, and had managed to work his way up, and even put up with the hindrance that Roosevelt put in his path in way of the New Deal, and without what we're assuming is government help. Whereas the Secretary of Labour, worked closely with Roosevelt, was surely at the root of the majority of the New Deal, and was able to give first-hand the actual ideas that Roosevelt had in mind to make life better for the Americans at the time.

I believe the main differences in opinion have very much to do with a popular topic that seemed to arise frequently during Roosevelt's time in Office; and it was whether he was too involved in the American citizens' and business' goings on or not, the 'Rugged Individualism' that got left behind with Hoover, or the new way, Roosevelt's 'New Deal way'.

§Q.7: Interpretations of (i) & (ii)...

(i): "The New Deal helped many Americans and by doing this it gave them self-respect. It gave them confidence to lift the United Sates out of the Depression."

The sources that I think best appear to support interpretation (i), are A,B,F,H,I and K.

Source A, supports it in the way that in Roosevelt's speech he speaks of how he is going to "restore America", and "With confidence we accept..." and by saying and promising these things, he is giving the American people hope, and the confidence that finally someone capable of giving them what they need, and apparently able to help them, has arrived.

Source B, supports this statement in the way that it speaks of how the ."..major achievements of the New Deal..." were the restoration of ."..confidence...", and how Roosevelt ."..introduced unemployment assistance, and old-aged pensions, and he banned child labour," all these things were a way of giving the American people new-found confidence in the way they went about their everyday actions. And due to the fact that now they could begin to work again, and know had a certain safety net beneath them; in the form of the NRA, which gave them the right to join a Trade Union, and supposedly, not be beaten up for it...gave then the security that being able to return to work, and begin to earn their own money again, was encouraging to all, and indeed did give them a large amount of self-respect back.

The only possible problem with these two sources, would be the fact that they are both extracts from speeches made during one of Roosevelt's election campaigns; the problems that could arise due to this, would be that what is being said, and the opinion that is being exposed, is the governments'; and from their point of view, they can only see so much; although I do believe that sources A and B, are indeed stating a truth.

Source F, supports the interpretation in the way that the cartoon shows Roosevelt actively, trying to do something to make America a better place by getting rid of the empty promises, (hence the title of the cartoon; "GETTING RID OF THE RUBBISH"), Hoover had made throughout his time in the White house. By Roosevelt appearing to be physically getting rid of something that was not doing the American Nation any favours, he is giving the American people the first dose of confidence that he would later be know for spreading around during his time in Office.

Source H, supports interpretation (i), by giving a real life example of how Roosevelt (and his employees), were helping the average American, and without a doubt giving this old couple a measure of confidence, especially in their President; "I have never heard of a President like you,." The self-respect that was given back to this elderly couple is visible in the way that the old man appears to sound humble when saying, ."..are old folks and don't amount to much but...", this shows the gratitude and the little bit of self-respect that was returned to these two people with their possessions.

The only problem with this source would be the fact that it is unreliable in the way that it only shows the way one person feels, and the fact that it was picked out by the people in Roosevelt's Office is also a case of subjectivity by selection. Although, what can be argued in turn to the stated limitations of this source; is the fact it is very known, that Roosevelt did actually receive many letters from people showing their appreciation for the work he was carrying out; and it is also known that Roosevelt tried to answer as many of these letters as he could, personally. Since the idea of having as much a personal touch with his public as possible was something that Roosevelt found extremely important throughout his entire time in Office, hence his fire-side chats as well, this only adds to the credibility.

Source I supports the statement in the way that in the song there is a part which speaks of how, "He's got things in full sway, we're all working and getting our pay...", in this line one can see how Roosevelt, through his New Deal, has managed to give people back a type of meaning to their lives, by them beginning to work again; and with this obviously comes self-respect, since without having a meaning to their lives, people would tend to lose their 'sense of worth'.

The only problem with this source would be one of reliability; but I don't believe this is a serious limitation to the source, since it does state at the bottom of the source that it was a ."..popular song...", and in order for a song to be considered popular coming from a country with millions of inhabitants, it must have been sung quite widely.

Source K, in comparison with the other sources, appears to be able to give interpretation (i), the most support, due to the person who wrote it. The source is full of compliments towards the New Deal, and how it was there to offer people ."..a better chance in life...", and of-course with a better chance in life, one will expect new-found confidence and self-respect to come with it. Also at the end of the source it says; ."..idea was...-...all forces of the community should be directed to making life better...", by getting everyone to work together to try and make life better, or easier, once again what it is offering people, as well as a chance to increase their standard of living, is their sense of worth, and with this, self-respect.

The obvious limitation of this source, is the fact that it was written by a Cabinet Minister, and more over the Secretary of Labour; which meant that; primarily, for someone who worked with Roosevelt and believed in his ideas, would certainly then be supporting his ideas...But, the fact that this woman was actually the Secretary of Labour, means that she would have been heavily involved in the building up of the ideas of the New Deal, so as well as justifying Roosevelt's actions at the time, she is also justifying her own.

Even though this appears to be a fairly important limitation, I believe that it sincerely supports the statement made in question 7. Due to the fact, that the extract in source K, seems to be filled with the sense that Francis Perkins truly believed that what they were dong was offering the Americans a way of recuperating their confidence and self-respect, and this was being done by incorporating certain new things; like the New Deal.

(ii): "The New Deal wasted a lot of money. It made people dependent on the government and led to the government becoming too powerful. It did not solve America's economic problems - the Second World War did that."

The sources which appear to best support this interpretation are C,D,E,G and J.

Source C appears to be able to support the interpretation in every aspect; in the way that it comments on how Roosevelt caused a great deal of people to be dependent on government help, "one in every four people depends on employment by the government." Also, to support the idea that great amounts of money were being wasted during Roosevelt's time in office, "There is a national debt of $250 billion, compared to pre-Roosevelt debt of $19 billion." The quotation ."..war rescued him...-...seized on it like a drowning man." Supports perfectly the statement that it wasn't Roosevelt who brought America's economic problems to an end, but it was the Second World War. This very clearly shows how obviously the source coincides with what the interpretation is saying, and how really it did occur, since there are figures to prove it.

Source D supports interpretation (ii), by showing that the New Deal, was not as successful as everyone was painting it to be; that in fact, there was still a problem with unemployment; and therefore still an existent economic problem. Also, the queue of people, irrelevant to it being a queue of black people, is indeed one that is there to receive aid from the government. This obviously supports the statement (ii), where it says that people were too dependent upon government relief.

The only possible limitation in this source, and this would be referring to their colour; could be the fact that although this is a photographic source, there is still a huge possibility that it was set up; by a black photographer, to show the pursuing in-equality that blacks were suffering, and the continuing problem with unemployment.

Although, this is a fairly important point to consider when looking at the reliability of a source; the fact that in 1937, the unemployment did actually begin to rise again to the highest it had been since 1935, could very well work to neutralise the limitation mentioned, since really this source does offer support to the interpretation in a realistic manner.

Source E supports the statements idea that "The New Deal wasted a lot of money", in the way that the cartoon shows, very clearly, Roosevelt pumping thousand's of millions of dollars into this supposedly efficient pump (in his eyes), and not realising, or wanting to admit that so much money had already been wasted. The wasted money can be seen in various ways. It begins with the actual pump Roosevelt is working at the top of the 'machine', with its leaks, then further down, there are more leaks, and finally, a river of what we can assume is money, just floating away. The amount of money stated in the river is "$16 billion spent", this is a large amount of money, especially for a country that was supposedly going through the worst economic depression ever. Therefore I believe this source backs up perfectly the financial points made in question 7.

Source G, supports interpretation (ii), in the way that it appears to insinuate that the New Deal agencies had done nothing to repair the economy; which in this cartoon is being represented by Uncle Sam in this cartoon.

This source offers support by showing that even with so many little agencies already being tried out, therefore wasting money, and the American economy was still 'unwell'. Thus showing that the money Roosevelt had wasted in putting these agencies into practice, supposedly in order to help the American economy, had done nothing but waste money. And had not even helped the economy to recover, since by looking at the cartoon, one can see that Uncle Sam does not look as healthy and happy, as he may have done in another context, or cartoon.

Another way the cartoon supports the interpretation is in the way that it does show the amount of power the government had at the time; by interpreting the relationship between the Doctor(Roosevelt) and the nurse(Congress), one cans see that Congress is in fact answering and respecting the 'orders' given by the President, and odes not appear to argue them. This shows how the much more power the government had, compared to how much was usually expected of a President to have.

There are no apparent limitations for this source, no questions about the origin and whether it is biased. Hence, my belief that it works well with the interpretation in backing up its statements on the amount of power the government had, and the lack of success the New Deal was showing.

Source J supports interpretation (ii), by apparently backing the idea that Roosevelt only achieved for people to become too dependent upon government help, and the general idea that the New Deal was not good.

As for people becoming too dependent on government aid, this can be proven by the metaphor used in the extract; "A dog you do not feed will not hunt. If you want a dog who hunts...-...let him go hungry." This, I believe backs up fully the idea that by introducing government help, it caused the American people to grow lazy and too reliant upon the help Roosevelt was offering.

As for supporting the general idea that the New Deal was not helpful, "The New Deal hurt us." This appears to say it all, and make it perfectly clear what the author of the extract thought.

The limitation I would put for this source is that the man who is saying this apparently holds some kind or resentment towards Roosevelt in general, not just in the way he was a rich man's on, but just someone who had an easier life than him. Also, the fact that this man was speaking about this in 1980, a good 50 years after the Depression; I'm sure this had some effect upon the way the man remembered how the depression days were, and everybody knows that as time passes, events and happenings gradually change. Also, since at the time these comments were made, the political parties had taken a change, towards the Right-Wing, then I believe that the man had more security to say what he meant, and not be frowned at; I believe this has a great deal to do with how much emphasis one would put into their words, and how much they would or wouldn't exaggerate something.

All this said, this source is still perfectly valid when supporting a few of the points made in the interpretation in question 7.

Although the two interpretations have a number of sources which support them both, in very specific ways, I believe that interpretation (ii), has fewer points which support the statement made. Though it appears that the second interpretation has more concrete points which back up and can offer more 'proof' as to what is being said, I think there are many more reasons inside the other six sources which support the first interpretation in a much clearer manner.

This, therefore brings me to my conclusion; I believe that interpretation (i), has more sources that support the statement made in question 7, in a more concise way. I believe that as well as there being the obvious points which can be picked out in order to support the statement, that there also other factors inside the ones relating directly to the interpretations being studied, which strengthen the way in which they support the statement, and my choice as to which interpretation is best supported by the sources.

§Q.8...

I believe that there are three main reasons as to why there have been so many disagreements surrounding the New Deal; how people were affected by the New Deal being put into practice, the political views that are behind each source and the effects, both positive and negative that the New Deal had on a number of people.

By gathering information from sources B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I and J, we can deduce what kind of effect the New Deal had on a number of people. Although it is only in sources B and C, that a more political point of view is seen.

In source B, we can see what kind of affect the New Deal had on a number of unemployed as well as average American people. It also shows a caring part to Roosevelt, and a political view.

The affect that the Alphabet Agencies had on a huge number of people was the offer of work. There was plenty of work to do, as far as making America a better place to be in general; like the work the CCC was doing, which was trying to restore the land that had been destroyed during the Dust Bowl, and build over 6 million dams(but not with the same size as the in the TVA), and all this gave jobs, and therefore a sense of usefulness and being to ."..three million young men..."And by this we can see an example of the positive side of the New Deal, and the effect it was having on a small majority of unemployed people, with the result of a better America. The work performed by similar agencies to better the physical America, as well as giving many people jobs, were, as mentioned in source B, the CCC, the CWA, the PWA and possibly the most important one; the TVA, which worked at building 33 dams across seven states. This was done in order to improve the quality of the soil, much like the CCC.

Therefore, we can see that as well as giving millions of people a job, and a sense of being, and therefore their self-respect and confidence slowly being restored, the people living in the areas being tended to would also have been benefiting.

A caring side of Roosevelt is seen, as he shows consideration for "old-age pensions and he banned child labour..." as well as introducing "unemployment assistance", though this shows a caring side to Roosevelt that real wasn't that hidden, it also gives an idea as to how much he was truly considering those less able to care for themselves, by this we can see that the people affected by these new rules would have been very grateful, and would probably have felt a lot more secure, knowing that they had the support of the government behind them/protecting them.

Source C on the other hand shows a much more negative affect that the New Deal supposedly had on people. It speaks about the dependency upon government help that was created due to the introduction of the Alphabet Agencies, and the opinion that it was not Roosevelt that brought an end to the Depression, but the Second World War, and the also frequently discussed issue of the amount that the tax payers had to pay, in order to support Roosevelt's ideas.

In this source a great deal of importance seems to have been put in when talking about negative affect the New Deal had on the aid the government was offering the unemployed. It states that "one in four people depends on employment by the government..." and that "More people are on government relief." Although unemployment decreased from 14 million, form before Roosevelt was in Office, to a later 8 million in 1937, there was still until 1942 a great amount of people that were unemployed, which meant even with offering government help that the numbers of the unemployed were not being completely and efficiently reduced. Which when being seen in the eyes of the writer, was a pointless waste of money, since there was a huge amount of money being given out to provide help, and still there was a large number of unemployed; therefore making any agencies dedicated to eradicating unemployment completely useless.

The other thing mentioned in this source is that Roosevelt wasn't really the 'hero' that everyone made him out to be, but really only managed to pull America out of the Depression due to the Second World War. Since every citizen was needed to be put to work to try and pull the US out of the war; therefore everyone had a job, and everyone was earning a salary. And this was not due to Roosevelt having spent millions 'Priming the Pump', and creating all his Alphabet Agencies and New Deal in general.

The complaint the tax-payers put forward mainly throughout the 1930's was that F.D.R was increasing the taxes too much. The reason this bothered the people that had the money to be paying the taxes was because they were putting an amount of money that kept increasing, into Roosevelt's palm, to feed his New Deal, which many of the actual tax-payers opposed-due to their political and American view of life in general. By which I am referring t the much loved and used phrase of 'Rugged Individualism', which seemed to be banned after Roosevelt came to power.

Source D shows two parts of how the New Deal being put into practice affected the American people.

There is a queue of black people in this source, which shows them queuing up for what we can assume is relief form the government; which shows the reader that the New Deal did not have the wonderful effect that is advertised just behind them; opulence for all, and a dreamt of standard of living. It shows that although this is well into the 1930's and therefore also into Roosevelt's time in Office, the unemployment had not only not stopped, but had even risen, (in 1937 it began to rise, and from '37 to '38 it rose 3 million). What this shows is that in this case, black people in particular were still having a hard time, since we know that white people were always picked over black when a job-place was being considered. This shows that the millions that had already been spent by 1937, had more or less been to no avail, f Roosevelt's plan was to better everyone's life, and make people not need to depend upon the government. What this also shows is that perhaps F.D.R, had unwillingly been racist, and concentrated mainly on white people when giving the people the opportunity of a job-although this seems unlikely, it is also possible. Therefore this source shows that although there is a poster boasting an American type of lavishness, that the affect of the New Deal has not been felt throughout America.

Source E, gives us an insight as to how the tax payers felt about the New Deal. This cartoon shows us obviously that the tax payer is having a hard time coping with the demands we know that Roosevelt was imposing upon them, as far as having to pay more taxes. It shows the tax-payer as being heavily weighed down, and possibly over-worked. As well as offering the point of view, of the tax payer, it gives us an insight into the general feeling of those that were against Roosevelt; that he was spending a lot of money in a very careless way. Source D, is similar to source C, in the way that both speak of how much money Roosevelt is in fact wasting, and the fact that this will surely have repercussions on the economy, and therefore the amount of resources available to the American people.

By source F, we can see that the possible reaction from the American people would be one of encouragement, of hope and added confidence. Encouragement, due to the fact F.D.R. was being seen to be doing something about the mistakes of Hoover. Hope and confidence, because by the cartoon it seems like Roosevelt is prepared to do what he can to help re-build the American nation, and it was his kind of hope and sense of something actually happening that the Americans needed to kick-start their recovery.

Source G, shows the affect that the New Deal has had on Congress and the American economy. On congress we can see that the New Deal had the affect of making it appear less powerful, and therefore being under Roosevelt's command, more than would usually happen with a President and Congress. As for the American economy, we can see, that by Uncle Sam representing it, that although it has been given plenty of little "remedies", otherwise know as the Alphabet agencies, it is still unwell and suffering. This, like the other sources that are against the New Deal, insensate that the Alphabet Agencies, and mainly anything to do with New deal are completely useless and a huge waste of money, and that the only thing that is being achieved by this, is that a huge debt of over $250 billion is being accumulated, and perhaps that false hopes are being given to the American people.

I believe sources H and I go hand in hand when explaining what type of effect the New Deal had on people; these two sources show that the New Deal made them looked after, ."..everything is alright now..." and "No more standing in the blowing, snowing rain...." Although these sources can be classified as being unreliable due to their individual limitations, I believe they are a perfectly good example of what a positive affect the New Deal had on people that were not accustomed to much; "My wife and I are old folks and don't amount to much," therefore making them feel cared for; ."..we'll not be neglected...."

Source J, like a few others before it, comments a fair amount on the amount of dependency the government aid has created amongst the Americans, and that now due to this people will only grow lazy, and will not feel an urgency to look for work; "Welfare kills a man's initiative."

I believe what this source is showing, is the affect that the New Deal had on business men in particularly. Due to one of the alphabet Agencies; the NRA, which was set up to; increase workers wages, to increase prices of the factory goods, and to give workers a firer deal in the work place. This lat point included the possibility of workers being given the right to join a Trade Union, and having their working hours limited, and forbidding child labour. Although, some of the rules made did benefit the factory owners, or businessmen, there were more in favour of the worker, which mad the factory owners and the like lose out on money they could have been making. This and the extra amount of taxes those who were working were having to pay, was a constant subject of complaint when faults in the New Deal were being spoken about.

Source K, on the other hand, is showing us the point of view from someone who worked with Roosevelt, which was something that we have seen/heard little of. I believe that this source is offering us the point of view of the ideas that people that created the Ned Deal, had in mind for the Americans. This was a fresh start in life, to look towards the government for help that had never been offered, to be able to look at the positive side of the New Deal; it was an opportunity for everyone to work together to re-build their lives. I believe this source although obviously biased is useful in the way that it is the only one that offers us a view into how the New Deal affected the people in government.

As mentioned at the very beginning of this question there are obviously political views in these sources, but there are some sources that have more substantial points which are obviously political, whereas others that merely have the possible undercurrent of politics to them.

The two sources that are strongest in their political views are sources B and C. Although their opinions are completely opposite.

Source B argues that although the government did become stronger due to it's new, numerous activities to help people; that although it did have more responsibilities it did not actually have any more power. It makes it very clear that there is in fact a difference between power and strength, which was something that many people seemed to mix up. It goes on to reassure the reader that "All power is still in the hands of the people." And finishes with what appears to have been quite a topic worth of conversation, which was whether Roosevelt had turned into a type of Dictator; at one point he was even compared to Hitler and Mussolini. Source B's answer to this was; "The charge that Roosevelt has been a dictator is not true."

Source C on the other hand speaks of the opposite more or less that B did.

It argues that since Congress gave most of its power to Roosevelt in the shape of giving him easy access to billions of dollars due to critical state of America. And that by doing so, unwillingly gave F.D.R a huge amount power which he supposedly used ."..ruthlessly." This source argues in a more concise way what it is trying to say, and finishes it's paragraph with getting directly to the point; "The only result of this will be dictatorial government." I believe this source is doing just what source B was saying should not, and had not happened; it mixed up the difference between more power and more strength. I believe with the help of these two sources we are shown the main political arguments that the affects of the New Deal had on the two different political parties; both the Democratic and Republican parties.

The last in these reasons as to why there were so many disagreements about the New Deal, is the different effects it had on women, black people and the average Native American Indians.

The affect the New Deal had on women was actually that it offered fewer jobs to them, than it did to the men. Although the number of women being employed did actually go up during the 1930's due to them being cheap labour.

One of the Alphabet Agencies, called the Social Security act, did promise money to women and their dependent children, but a large number of states tried to avoid this by putting their loop-holes to these. One area where women did actually benefit was with the New Deal agencies themselves; where they were given the jobs of responsibility and the running of the agencies.

The affect the New Deal had on black people was that they really remained second class citizens, since there was still a wide spread amount of racism and discrimination. Things continued to be terribly hard for the blacks living in the south. And even in other areas, they continued to suffer from segregation in the CCC camps and when the Tennessee Valley was being built, they were not allowed to live there.

Although blacks did not benefit nearly as much as white people from the New Deal, they did receive benefits form the CCC programme, and also got a large share of housing in slum-clearance projects.

The affect the New Deal had on the Native American Indians was pretty positive, since many of the New Deal measure were in fact put in place to improve the situations of the Native American Indians.

The Indian Re-Organisation Act of 1934 which provided money to buy reservation land so that it could be owned by tribes rather than individuals.

Government loans helped Native American Indians to set up businesses. This helped the amount of land they owned to go up form 47 million acres to 50 million. The Native American Indians were encouraged to follow their own cultural and religious traditions.

In conclusion to this question, I believe that the main differences as to why there were so many disagreements surrounding the New Deal was mainly due to the disagreement of how Roosevelt managed the money he was given by Congress, and the amount of 'power' he was given. Also the amount of people that were accustomed to the Republican way of life and suddenly were given this drastic Democratic way, obviously took some getting used to. Also, the fact that the New Deal took time in working, and when it did appear to reach its peak, did not end up helping all; but what looked like only the able.

I believe that as much as the New Deal was extremely helpful in many ways, it also had a number of down-sides that weighed heavily against the positive things Roosevelt had managed to achieve.