![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
This article examines the concept and the discontinuous historical usage of the term ‘economic rights’ in American political discourse from the perspective of democratic political freedom. It views the idea and ideology of ‘economic rights’ as a discursive marker pointing to historically contingent relations between government, national economy and individual freedom. It focuses on the only two American presidential articulations of an Economic Bill of Rights and their conjunctures: one by Franklin Roosevelt and another by Ronald Reagan. These two articulations represent two opposing political traditions of economic rights in the United States: the neo-liberal laissez-faire free market tradition and the liberal welfare-state tradition. Both of these liberal traditions are haunted by an older democratic-republican discourse of economic rights, from which they continue to draw normative and affective energy without ever confronting its guiding premises. Contemporary popular discourses about the economic crisis demonstrate the continuation of deeply entrenched though historically outdated understandings of the promise and possibilities of individual freedom and autonomy within the folds of a society completely transformed by capitalist modernity. Present considerations of this history reveal possible resources for political struggles.
Notes
1. The method is historical and discourse-analytical. The archive consists of a synthesis of wide-ranging American histories, primary-source pamphlets, speeches, presidential press conferences and memoranda, and newspaper and magazine articles.
2. Of course, Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence, not the US Constitution (Jefferson 1782/Citation2005).
3. I choose to employ ‘democratic-republican’ as its ideas about economic rights are similar to those espoused by the political party founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, though scholars often refer to it as ‘republicanism’ or ‘civic republicanism.’
4. For a more detailed argument about the prelude to the Reagan conjuncture see Harsin (Citation2005, chapter 6).
5. Former general and flamboyant head of the NRA Hugh Johnson devised these ways for citizens to recognize businesses that had voluntarily supported a new code devised to rescue the country and redeem US economic practice. The code's hallmarks were support of a 35–40 cent minimum wage; the abolition of child labor; and a 40 hour work week (Cohen 2003, pp. 8–10).
6. On the public opinion issue see Gilens (1999) and Neubeck and Cazenave (Citation2001).
7. A search of ‘major newspapers and wires’ on Lexis-Nexis in early March 2009 for FDR in the prior six months revealed over 2,000 results, over 1,000 more than a year before. A search of Ronald Reagan in the prior six months found Reagan a strong public presence, with over 3,000 citations, roughly the same number as the year before (of course closer analysis is needed to determine whether he was cited critically or favorably). The increase for Reagan was much clearer in magazines, where he rose over 100 percent, while FDR also rose in both categories by over 100 percent (accessed March 7, 2009).
8. I mean roughly speaking. It is true that both FDR and Reagan moved between various economic policies which could be viewed as inconsistent, certainly in FDR's case, but the policy facts still stand with de-regulation and regulation, taxation, social security, labor law, and securities, etc.
9. Again, the preferred Republican theorist (Friedman) had more initial attention, while Keynes has been cited slightly more in the six months since Bush publicly declared a crisis (332 > 317). Results were similar for searches of television network and cable news shows and popular talk show transcripts; likewise for blogs.