Finally, in the heart of the Western democracies most responsible for propagating the liberal consensus, opposition to many of its core principles began to emerge following the global financial crisis, as a result of the successes as well as the shortcomings of that consensus. The impact of global trade on domestic industries fueled popular resentments against cosmopolitan elites who seemed to exist as part of a global leadership caste transcending national identity.
At the same time, the failure to evenly distribute the gains of globalized trade to mitigate that impact stoked discontent even among constituencies not historically hostile to globalization. And in many cases, the reaction to the changes wrought by globalization has been accompanied by nativist narratives that scapegoat immigrants and minorities.
With the exception of Tunisia, though, the protest movements were all either violently repressed or bought off with public subsidies. In , the end of the global commodities boom left the social redistribution models of the Pink Tide unsustainable, ushering in a series of right-wing governments and austerity policies across South America. And in , the success of the Brexit referendum and the election of Donald Trump as U. In many ways, the protests today in South America and the Middle East are aftershocks from the events of the early s.
In both cases, they represent the refusal of those who had historically been excluded from the political arena to accept that exclusion. In South America, it is a refusal to let go of the gains made in the preceding decade by the most economically and socially vulnerable members of the population.
In the Middle East, it is a refusal to relinquish the aspirations that were seemingly silenced in The liberal consensus essentially describes a political culture built on the following shared assumptions: 1 American capitalism sought to use economic growth to steadily expand the Most users should sign in with their email address. If you originally registered with a username please use that to sign in. To purchase short term access, please sign in to your Oxford Academic account above.
Don't already have an Oxford Academic account? Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Sign In or Create an Account. Sign In. Advanced Search. Rightly cautions against drawing too sharp a contrast between this period and the polarization of our time.
Although the term liberal consensus , or its approximation, had received some previous expression, Hodgson was responsible for its entry into the lexicon of American history. Yet what he considered a substantive phenomenon would inevitably become a controversial paradigm as a massive outpouring of literature cited evidence of a significant conservative presence at the grassroots level from the s to the s.
Here, leading scholars--including Hodgson himself--confront the longstanding theory that a liberal consensus shaped the United States after World War II. The essays draw on fresh research to examine how the consensus related to key policy areas, how it was viewed by different factions and groups, what its limitations were, and why it fell apart in the late s. They find that although elite politicians from both parties did share certain principles that gave direction to postwar America, the nation still experienced major political, cultural, and ideological conflict.
Recently viewed 0 Save Search. Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Authors Affiliations are at time of print publication. Your current browser may not support copying via this button. Show Summary Details. Subscriber Login Email Address. Password Please enter your Password.
0コメント