Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Fifth Party System

The Fifth Party System in politics denotes the period of ascendancy commencing with Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1932 presidential victory and extending through the 1950s or early 1960s, defined by a stable electoral alignment favoring expansive federal government intervention in the economy. This system emerged amid the , consolidating a coalition comprising industrial workers, labor unions, urban immigrants, shifting from Republican loyalty, , and white ethnics in Northern cities, which delivered consistent Democratic majorities in and the . Central to the Fifth Party System were policies emphasizing economic redistribution and social welfare, including the programs of the 1930s—such as Social Security and the —and subsequent expansions under Harry Truman's and Lyndon B. Johnson's initiatives like and , which entrenched the as the advocate for government-led solutions to socioeconomic challenges. Republican opposition, led by figures like and later Dwight Eisenhower, focused on and but struggled against the Democratic electoral edge until internal fissures appeared. The system's stability rested on class-based cleavages, with economic security overriding cultural or regional divides temporarily, though underlying tensions over civil rights and sowed seeds for its eventual realignment. Notable achievements included unprecedented legislative productivity in social legislation, fostering postwar economic growth and middle-class expansion, yet controversies arose from the coalition's contradictions—particularly the alliance of Northern liberals with segregationist Southerners—which intensified after the 1964 , accelerating partisan dealignment and paving the way for the Sixth Party System's cultural and ideological polarizations. This era's legacy endures in the institutionalization of the , though its class-centric framework has been critiqued for overlooking emerging identity-based conflicts that reshaped American politics.

Definition and Overview

Core Characteristics

The Fifth Party System emerged in 1932 with Franklin D. Roosevelt's election amid the , marked by dominance through the . This coalition united organized labor, urban Catholic and Jewish immigrants, white Southerners, increasingly African American voters, farmers, intellectuals, and low-income groups around demands for federal economic intervention. Democrats won presidential elections in 1932, 1936 ( with 60.8% popular vote), 1940, 1944, and 1948, while maintaining congressional majorities except briefly in 1946 and 1952–1954. Ideologically, the system emphasized class-based economic conflict, with Democrats advocating expanded government roles in welfare, regulation, and relief—core to policies like Social Security (enacted August 14, 1935) and the National Labor Relations Act (July 5, 1935)—contrasting Republican commitments to and limited intervention. The coalition's breadth reflected pragmatic alliances rather than ideological uniformity, incorporating socially conservative supportive of alongside Northern progressives focused on and relief. Republicans, representing and rural Protestant interests, mounted opposition but struggled against Depression-era incumbency advantages. Electoral stability characterized the era, with and elevated by economic stakes; Democrats averaged 53% of the two-party presidential vote from to 1964. Yet, the system's core tension lay in unresolved social fissures, particularly civil rights, which Southern defections (e.g., revolt in 1948) highlighted without immediate collapse. This class-rooted alignment distinguished it from the Fourth System's sectional and tariff-focused divisions, fostering a framework that endured until cultural realignments in the .

Distinction from Prior Systems

The Fifth Party System marked a profound realignment from the immediately preceding Fourth Party System (1896–1932), inverting partisan dominance through Franklin D. Roosevelt's landslide victory in the 1932 presidential election, which capitalized on the Great Depression's economic collapse following the 1929 stock market crash. Whereas the Fourth featured Republican hegemony, with the party securing seven of nine presidential elections and averaging 57.7% of the national two-party vote, the Fifth established Democratic control, yielding five straight White House wins from 1932 to 1948 and sustained congressional majorities. This shift dismantled the Fourth's equilibrium, where Democrats held power only via Woodrow Wilson's 1912 fluke amid a Republican schism, toward a new era of Democratic electoral supremacy rooted in crisis-driven voter mobilization. Voter coalitions realigned starkly, with the Fifth's New Deal framework assembling a multiclass Democratic alliance of urban Catholics, blue-collar laborers, (shifting en masse from Republican loyalty post-1936), , and white Southerners—contrasting the Fourth's base in the industrial Northeast and urban workers paired against Democratic strongholds in the agrarian , Great Plains, and western mining regions. Republicans in the Fourth drew from Protestant business interests and tariff beneficiaries, while Democrats emphasized among farmers; the Fifth inverted this by prioritizing organized labor's via unions like the CIO, which boosted turnout among industrial workers alienated by Hoover-era policies, fundamentally reorienting parties around socioeconomic rather than purely regional lines. Ideologically and in policy thrust, the Fifth diverged from the Fourth's debates over monetary standards (gold versus ) and protectionist tariffs, embracing federal activism through programs like the of 1935 and , which institutionalized welfare provisions and absent in prior limited-government paradigms. Earlier systems, such as the Third (1854–1896) fixated on sectional slavery and divides or the Second (1828–1854) on patronage and , lacked the Fifth's sustained emphasis on class-inflected , which normalized government as economic stabilizer amid 25% peaks in 1933. This evolution reflected not mere incumbency advantage but a durable reconfiguration, as evidenced by Democratic persistence even under Dwight Eisenhower's 1952–1956 Republican interludes, where architecture endured.

Historical Origins

New Deal Coalition Formation (1932–1940)

The emerged amid the , as Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1932 presidential victory capitalized on widespread dissatisfaction with incumbent Herbert Hoover's policies. Roosevelt secured 472 electoral votes to Hoover's 59, with 57.4% of the popular vote (22.8 million votes) against Hoover's 39.7% (15.8 million), marking a decisive rejection of Republican laissez-faire approaches. This shift drew urban industrial workers, immigrants, and farmers alienated by economic collapse, with initial support from white who retained loyalty despite policy differences. Roosevelt's New Deal initiatives from 1933 onward, including the Civilian Conservation Corps (established March 31, 1933) and the Agricultural Adjustment Act (May 1933), provided direct relief and recovery measures that appealed to labor unions and rural constituencies. The Works Progress Administration (created May 6, 1935) employed over 8.5 million workers by 1943, fostering dependence among blue-collar voters and big-city machines. Social Security Act (August 14, 1935) further entrenched benefits for the elderly and unemployed, solidifying urban ethnic groups' allegiance. African American voters, previously Republican loyalists, began defecting; despite discriminatory implementation in Southern programs, New Deal aid exceeded prior Republican efforts, with black support for Democrats rising from under 20% in 1932 to around 70% by 1936. The coalition's durability was affirmed in the 1936 election, where Roosevelt defeated Alf Landon with 523 electoral votes to 8 and 60.8% of the popular vote (27.7 million), reflecting enthusiasm for Second New Deal reforms amid ongoing recovery. By 1940, despite opposition to a third term and Wendell Willkie's challenge on isolationism, Roosevelt won 449 electoral votes to Willkie's 82 and 54.7% of the popular vote (27.3 million), as war threats in Europe reinforced perceptions of steady leadership. This period established Democratic dominance through programmatic appeals, though Southern conservatives tolerated expansions for regional patronage, forming an ideologically heterogeneous bloc. Unemployment fell from 25% in 1933 to 14.6% by 1940, crediting relief efforts while debates persist on whether policies prolonged stagnation absent wartime mobilization.

World War II and Immediate Postwar Period (1941–1952)

The entry of the into after the Japanese on December 7, 1941, solidified the Democratic dominance of the Fifth Party System under President , as the —comprising urban laborers, ethnic minorities, intellectuals, and Southern whites—rallied behind the war effort despite prewar isolationist sentiments within parts of the . Wartime economic mobilization transformed the stagnant Depression-era economy, achieving full employment with unemployment falling to 1.2% by 1944 and GDP nearly doubling from 1940 to 1945 through massive federal spending on defense production, which reinforced public support for interventionist government policies central to the Democratic platform. Bipartisan consensus emerged on key war measures, including aid and the draft, though Republicans criticized extensions like and as overreach, yet failed to erode the coalition's electoral base. In the 1944 presidential election, held amid ongoing combat in Europe and the Pacific, Roosevelt secured a fourth term with 432 electoral votes and 53.4% of the popular vote against Republican Thomas E. Dewey's 99 electoral votes and 45.9%, reflecting sustained loyalty from core New Deal constituencies despite war weariness and Dewey's attacks on bureaucratic excess. The Democratic ticket's switch to Harry S. Truman as vice presidential nominee over the more leftist Henry Wallace aimed to balance the coalition by appealing to moderates and Southern conservatives wary of radicalism. Roosevelt's death on April 12, 1945, elevated Truman to the presidency, where he initially maintained wartime unity but faced postwar reconversion turmoil, including labor strikes affecting 4.6 million workers in 1946 and inflation peaking at 25% annually on consumer goods. The 1946 midterm elections marked a Republican resurgence, with the GOP gaining 55 seats to secure a 246-188 —their first congressional control since 1931—and 12 seats for a 51-45 edge, driven by voter frustration over economic dislocations, Truman's perceived inexperience, and opposition to continued federal interventionism. This "" of s and blocked much of Truman's domestic agenda, including expansive and federal aid to education. Truman's program, outlined in his September 6, 1945, address to and expanded in the 1949 , sought to codify gains through national health insurance, a higher (raised from 40 to 75 cents per hour in 1949), and civil rights measures, but succeeded only partially amid and anticommunist fears post-WWII. Despite intraparty fractures—evident in the 1948 Progressive Party challenge from Henry Wallace and the States' Rights (Dixiecrat) bolt led by over Truman's civil rights desegregating the military on July 26, 1948—Truman's vigorous whistle-stop campaign against the "do-nothing" revitalized the , securing 303 electoral votes and 49.6% of the popular vote against Dewey's 189 electoral votes and 45.1%. This victory underscored the enduring appeal of Democratic commitments to (via the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act's overrides notwithstanding) and social welfare among urban ethnic voters, shifting from the GOP, and white working-class ethnics, even as Southern support eroded slightly with Thurmond carrying four states for 39 electoral votes. The Korean War's outbreak on June 25, 1950, further tested the system, boosting defense spending to $50 billion annually by 1952 and fueling accusations of Truman's "creeping socialism," yet Democrats retained narrow congressional majorities in 1950 midterms. By the 1952 , war fatigue and scandals like the steel mill seizure contributed to Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower's win with 442 electoral votes over Adlai Stevenson's 89, ending 20 years of Democratic control, though Democrats held the House (213-221) and (48-47, with independents). This presidential shift highlighted strains in the coalition from suburban growth and but preserved systemic Democratic congressional strength rooted in legacies through 1952.

Evolution and Realignment

Civil Rights Era Shifts (1950s–1960s)

The of the 1950s and 1960s precipitated significant fractures within the Democratic Party's , which had relied on the electoral loyalty of white opposed to federal intervention in racial matters. Landmark decisions, such as on May 17, 1954, declared segregated public schools unconstitutional, prompting resistance from Southern state governments and highlighting tensions between national Democrats and their wing. Subsequent weak legislative efforts, including the signed by President Eisenhower on September 9, 1957, aimed to protect voting rights but faced dilution by in , underscoring the coalition's internal divisions over enforcement. By the early 1960s, President Kennedy's proposed civil rights bill in June 1963 sought to ban discrimination in public accommodations, but its passage stalled amid Southern filibusters until President Johnson revived it after Kennedy's . The Civil Rights Act of 1964, signed by Johnson on July 2, 1964, prohibited discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in employment and public facilities, marking a pivotal break in the party system as it alienated the Southern Democratic base. Passage required overcoming a 75-day Senate filibuster led by Southern Democrats, achieved through a bipartisan cloture vote of 71-29 on June 10, 1964, with Republican support crucial—82% of Senate Republicans voted yes compared to 69% of Democrats. The Voting Rights Act of 1965, enacted on August 6, 1965, further targeted Southern disenfranchisement by suspending literacy tests and authorizing federal oversight of elections in discriminatory jurisdictions, solidifying national Democratic commitment to civil rights at the expense of regional unity. These measures, while advancing legal equality, eroded the New Deal coalition's cross-regional appeal, as Southern Democrats viewed them as overreach eroding states' rights and local customs. Electorally, the 1964 presidential contest exemplified the emerging realignment, with Republican nominee , who opposed the on federalism grounds, capturing five Deep South states—, , , , and —despite Johnson's national of 61.1% of the popular vote. This marked the first Republican breakthrough in the South since , driven by white Southern voters' backlash against federal civil rights enforcement, with Goldwater receiving over 90% of the white vote in and . Black voter allegiance shifted decisively to Democrats, rising from approximately 66% for in 1960 to 94% for Johnson in 1964, a trend accelerated by the legislation. Empirical analyses of voter attitudes confirm that racial , rather than economic factors alone, primarily motivated white Southerners' departure from the during this era, with surveys linking opposition to and affirmative policies to partisan realignment. By the late , these shifts signaled the Fifth Party System's decline, as the Democratic coalition fragmented along racial and regional lines, paving the way for Republican gains in the Sun Belt.

Nixon-Reagan Conservative Ascendancy (1968–1980s)

Richard Nixon's victory in the presidential election marked an initial conservative breakthrough, securing 43.4 percent of the popular vote and 301 electoral votes against Democrat Hubert Humphrey's 42.7 percent and 191 electoral votes, with American Independent taking 13.5 percent and 46 electoral votes. Nixon's campaign emphasized "" in response to urban riots following the 1967 race disturbances and rising crime rates, which had increased by 17 percent annually in major cities from 1960 to , appealing to voters alienated by perceived social disorder and anti-war protests. This resonated with the "," a term Nixon popularized in a 1969 speech to describe middle-class Americans supporting orderly governance and policy over radical activism, helping consolidate support among Democrats and suburbanites disillusioned with expansions. Nixon's 1972 reelection amplified this ascendancy, winning 60.7 percent of the popular vote and 520 electoral votes in a landslide against , reflecting voter backlash against liberal excesses like and critiques. Policies such as opposition to forced school busing, creation of the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 for targeted regulation rather than broad intervention, and "" to withdraw U.S. troops—reducing forces from 543,000 in 1969 to 24,000 by 1972—aligned with conservative priorities of fiscal restraint and realism, though wage-price controls from 1971 contributed to later inflation by distorting markets. While the "" is often invoked to explain Dixiecrat defections, evidence shows Nixon carried only five states in amid Wallace's third-party surge, with broader realignment driven by ideological shifts on , taxes, and federal overreach rather than explicit racial appeals; Southern white voters gradually migrated due to Democratic civil rights enforcement and . Ronald Reagan's 1980 election extended this momentum, defeating incumbent with 50.7 percent of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes to Carter's 41 percent and 49, amid with at 13.5 percent and at 7.1 percent. Reagan's supply-side reforms, including the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 cutting top marginal rates from 70 percent to 50 percent and later to 28 percent by 1986, combined with Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker's tight , ended : fell to 3.2 percent by 1983, GDP growth averaged 4.2 percent annually from 1983 to 1989, and dropped from 10.8 percent in 1982 to 5.3 percent by 1989. in , airlines, and spurred productivity, while buildup—increasing spending 40 percent in real terms—pressured Soviet concessions, aligning with anti-communist . Reagan's 1984 reelection achieved a historic , capturing 58.8 percent of the popular vote and 525 electoral votes across 49 states against Walter Mondale's 40.6 percent and 13 votes, solidifying voter realignment as "Reagan Democrats"—white working-class ethnics and union members—shifted Republican by margins exceeding 20 points in key states, driven by economic recovery and rejection of Mondale's proposed 25 percent tax hike. This era saw Republican presidential dominance from 1968 to 1988, with Southern states flipping reliably: by 1980, Reagan won every former Confederate state except . Conservative fusion of , traditional values, and strong defense eroded the New Deal coalition's class-based loyalty, as empirical data on voter surveys indicate ideology—favoring and personal responsibility—outweighed demographics in driving the shift. Despite deficits rising to 6 percent of GDP, outcomes validated causal links between tax cuts, , and growth, contrasting prior Keynesian failures.

Electoral and Ideological Dynamics

Voter Base Transformations

The formation of the fundamentally transformed the Democratic Party's voter base, incorporating urban industrial workers, organized labor, and ethnic minorities who had previously leaned Republican or abstained. In the 1932 presidential election, secured support from recent immigrants and city dwellers alienated by the , building on Al Smith's 1928 urban gains among Catholics and gaining traction in manufacturing counties that shifted toward Democrats as federal relief programs expanded. This marked a departure from the Fourth Party System's rural Protestant dominance, with Democrats capturing majorities in urban areas by 1936, where economic distress and initiatives like the mobilized previously disengaged voters. A critical transformation involved African American voters, who began defecting en masse from the —the "party of "—due to tangible economic benefits from programs, despite their uneven administration amid Southern Democratic resistance. In 1932, received only about 23% of the black vote nationwide, with holding a majority among urban blacks in key cities like (around 79%). By 1936, however, won approximately 71% of the African American vote, a surge attributed to relief efforts reaching Northern black migrants and the symbolic appointment of figures like to advisory roles. This realignment persisted, with Democrats averaging over 70% of black support through 1960, accelerated by the that added millions of enfranchised black voters to Northern industrial cities, bolstering Democratic machines in places like and .
Presidential ElectionDemocratic Share of Black Vote (%)
193223
193671
194067
194468
194877
195279
195661
196068
Note: Percentages approximate based on exit polls and aggregate studies; share averaged 30% from –1960. Catholic and Jewish voters also realigned durably toward Democrats, drawn by 's cultural affinity and opposition to isolationist critics. Catholics provided 70–81% support for in , reflecting ethnic solidarity in urban enclaves and backlash against economic . Jewish voters similarly delivered overwhelming majorities (over 80%), influenced by social welfare aligning with communal values and 's stance against European . Organized labor cemented this base, with union households and relief recipients voting 80%+ Democratic by the late , as Wagner Act protections and CIO organizing converted working-class Protestants and ethnics. Republicans, conversely, saw their base contract to affluent suburbs, business owners, and rural Protestants, losing ground in the industrial heartland as voters associated the party with Depression-era inaction. While retaining majorities among farmers initially (through agricultural adjustments), Republicans faced erosion in the Midwest by the , as urban-rural divides deepened and the party's opposition to expansive alienated emerging welfare beneficiaries. These shifts, blending of existing voters and of newcomers, sustained Democratic dominance until mid-century fissures emerged.

Policy Priorities and Economic Outcomes

The policy priorities of the Fifth Party System emphasized expansive federal intervention in the economy, rooted in the Democratic New Deal coalition's response to the Great Depression, including public works programs, social welfare expansions, and labor protections aimed at stabilizing demand and reducing inequality. Key initiatives encompassed the National Industrial Recovery Act (1933), which sought to boost industrial production through industry codes and wage-price controls; the Social Security Act (1935), establishing unemployment insurance and old-age pensions; and the Works Progress Administration (1935–1943), which employed over 8.5 million workers in infrastructure and arts projects by 1943. These measures reflected a shift toward Keynesian demand management, with federal outlays rising from 5.9% of 1929 GDP in 1933 to nearly 11% by 1939, prioritizing relief for the unemployed and rural electrification via the Tennessee Valley Authority (1933). Republican opposition, though present, often accommodated these priorities under presidents like Eisenhower, who expanded interstate highways while maintaining balanced budgets. Economic outcomes during this era showed initial recovery from the Depression's nadir, with real GDP contracting 1.2% in 1933 before expanding at an average annual rate of 9.3% from 1933 to 1937, driven partly by multipliers where $1 in federal relief and public works spending yielded approximately $0.44 to $1.50 in local retail sales increases by 1939, varying by program type. fell from 24.9% in 1933 to 14.3% by 1937, but rebounded to 19% in 1938 amid policy reversals and a , with (1.2% rate) achieved only through mobilization rather than domestic policies alone. Critics, including economists and Lee Ohanian, contend that labor and price controls under the and National Labor Relations Act elevated by 20–30% above market-clearing levels, distorting competition and prolonging output shortfalls by 50–60% relative to pre-Depression trends through 1939. Empirical simulations support this, showing reduced hours worked and investment due to cartel-like effects, though counterarguments highlight that monetary factors and banking reforms also contributed to persistence. Postwar outcomes under the system's continuation featured robust growth, with real GDP averaging 3.8% annually from to 1960, unemployment stabilizing at 4–5%, and rising 2.5% yearly amid and consumer durables boom. Bipartisan commitments to via the Employment Act of and sustained this, but emerging inflationary pressures—consumer prices up 3–5% annually by the late —foreshadowed challenges, as wage-price spirals from union strength and fiscal expansions tested the interventionist model's limits without corresponding surges. Overall, while delivering short-term relief and long-term gains, the era's policies fostered dependency on , with federal debt-to-GDP peaking at 106% in before declining, yet setting precedents for later fiscal imbalances critiqued for crowding out private investment.

Theoretical Foundations and Debates

Origins of Party System Theory

The concept of party systems in American politics emerged as a framework for understanding long-term patterns of electoral competition and voter alignments, positing that periods of partisan stability—characterized by dominant coalitions and issue hierarchies—are periodically disrupted by "critical elections" that forge new alignments. This theoretical approach gained prominence in the mid-20th century amid behavioralist shifts in , which emphasized empirical analysis of data over institutional formalism. Early precursors included E. E. Schattschneider's 1942 work Party Government, which highlighted parties as the central organizers of democratic conflict and competition, laying groundwork for viewing party interactions as systemic rather than isolated events. A pivotal advancement came with V. O. Key Jr.'s 1955 article "A Theory of Critical Elections," published in The Journal of Politics, where Key introduced the idea of infrequent, transformative elections that deviate sharply from prior patterns, reshaping voter loyalties along socioeconomic, regional, or issue-based lines and inaugurating enduring party systems. Analyzing aggregate election returns from 1916 to 1952, Key identified deviations in Democratic vote shares across diverse locales, such as urban Somerville versus rural Ashfield in Massachusetts, to illustrate how critical shifts embed lasting partisan structures, with subsequent "maintaining elections" reinforcing them. This model drew on empirical data from state-level and congressional contests, challenging cyclical interpretations like Arthur Schlesinger Sr.'s "tidal theory" of periodic swings by stressing structural realignments over mere fluctuations. Building on Key's foundation, scholars in the 1960s and 1970s, including Walter Dean Burnham, refined the framework into sequenced "party systems"—typically numbered from the Federalist-Republican (1790s–1820s) onward—each bounded by realigning like 1896 or 1932. Burnham's analyses of turnout declines and sectional emphasized and ethnic realignments, though he cautioned against over-rigid given evidence of overlapping transitions. This evolution integrated Key's critical mechanism with broader historical data, such as presidential vote shares and control of , to explain systemic stability punctuated by exogenous shocks like economic crises or wars. Despite its influence, the theory has faced scrutiny for underemphasizing gradual secular changes over abrupt breaks, as evidenced in post-1960s deconstructions by critics like David Menefee-Libey.

Disputes on Duration and End

Scholars concur that the Fifth Party System commenced with Franklin D. Roosevelt's presidential victory, which established the of urban workers, Southern whites, ethnic minorities, and intellectuals aligned against the economic orthodoxy of the prior era. This period featured Democratic dominance in presidential elections through 1964, with the party securing seven of nine contests from onward, underpinned by expansions in federal welfare programs and regulatory interventions. However, consensus dissolves regarding the system's termination, as the coalition's erosion lacked the abrupt "critical election" characteristic of prior realignments, such as 1896 or , complicating precise demarcation. Debates often center on the 1960s as a transitional decade, with proponents of an early end citing the 1964 candidacy and Lyndon B. Johnson's overwhelming reelection as initiating a resurgence among Southern and working-class voters alienated by civil rights legislation and expansions. The 1968 , pitting against amid unrest and urban riots, is frequently invoked as a pivotal "critical election" signaling the system's close, as it accelerated partisan sorting along cultural and racial lines, diminishing the cross-class alignment. Arthur Paulson, analyzing voting patterns from 1964 to 1972, contends this sequence constituted a secular realignment, with gains in the Sun Belt and among white ethnics eroding Democratic hegemony without a singular electoral rupture. Alternative views extend the Fifth System's duration into the or beyond, arguing that Democratic congressional majorities persisted until the late and that presidential anomalies—like Dwight Eisenhower's 1950s victories—prefigured incomplete transitions rather than systemic collapse. For instance, some scholars posit 1972, marked by George McGovern's landslide defeat, or 1980, when Ronald Reagan's triumph solidified conservative fusion of economic liberalism critiques with social traditionalism, as more definitive endpoints, given lingering policy vestiges in both parties. This prolongation perspective emphasizes gradual dealignment over realignment, attributing disputes to the absence of uniform voter shifts; Southern Democratic loyalty endured into the despite presidential trends, while urban liberal bases solidified Democratic resilience. Empirical analyses of turnout and underscore these ambiguities, revealing no uniform partisan lock until ideological intensified post-1980. Critics of rigid periodization, drawing on V. O. Key's critical elections framework, caution that overemphasizing 1968 ignores preceding fractures like the 1952 and 1956 Eisenhower wins, suggesting the Fifth System's "end" reflects retrospective imposition rather than causal rupture. Recent scholarship highlights how economic in the 1970s and cultural backlash against 1960s blurred boundaries, with no scholarly majority endorsing a post-1968 Sixth System until Reagan-era metrics confirmed voter base transformations. These contentions persist due to varying metrics—presidential versus congressional control, policy continuity versus voter migration—yielding durations from 1932–1960 to 1932–1980 in academic literature.

Criticisms and Empirical Challenges

Overemphasis on Class-Based Explanations

Traditional interpretations of the Fifth Party System attribute its Democratic dominance to a profound cleavage, wherein welfare and labor policies aligned industrial workers and the urban poor against business-oriented Republicans, culminating in Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1936 landslide with over 60% of the manual labor vote. This view posits economic redistribution as the causal engine, evidenced by union membership surging from 3 million in 1933 to 9 million by 1939 under pro-labor legislation like the National Labor Relations Act. However, aggregate election data from 1932 to 1948 reveal correlations with Democratic voting averaging only 15-20% explanatory power, substantially weaker than contemporaneous European social democratic alignments exceeding 40%. Non-economic cleavages, particularly and , exerted comparable or greater influence on voter behavior, fragmenting purported unity. Urban Catholics, comprising , , and immigrants, formed a bedrock of the —delivering 70-80% Democratic support in 1936-1940—driven by cultural and historical antagonism toward Protestant elites rather than uniform proletarian interests, as middle-class Catholic professionals mirrored working-class co-religionists in partisanship. Similarly, Jewish voters shifted en masse to Democrats, with 85% backing in 1940, attributable to ethnic networks and perceptions of FDR's internationalism amid rising European , transcending lines evident in high-income Jewish support. These patterns underscore how immigrant enclaves in cities like and prioritized communal ties over economic position, with ethnic machines like channeling bloc voting irrespective of occupational stratification. Regional and racial factors further undermine class monocausalism, as the —predominantly low-income white farmers and sharecroppers—sustained Democratic supermajorities through 1960 not via economic populism but defense of Jim Crow segregation, yielding 90%+ Democratic congressional seats despite shared class grievances with northern laborers who defected post-1930s. Empirical regressions of 1940s survey data confirm sectional loyalty added 25-30% variance in Southern voting beyond income or occupation controls. Critiques of in electoral highlight how such overreliance distorts causal realism, as mid-century scholars like V.O. Key emphasized cultural while later materialist models retrofitted class narratives to fit ideological priors. This interpretive skew persists in academic literature, where empirical anomalies are downplayed in favor of class-conflict frameworks resonant with progressive , despite multivariate analyses affirming multidimensional alignments.

Failures of Expansionist Policies

Expansionist policies during the Fifth Party System, encompassing the New Deal's initial fiscal interventions and the Great Society's subsequent expansions, aimed to combat economic downturns and through increased and programs. However, empirical analyses reveal significant shortcomings, including prolonged economic recovery delays and unintended social consequences. Critics, drawing on data from federal spending records and longitudinal studies, argue that these policies fostered and contributed to macroeconomic , challenging the of unqualified success often promoted in mainstream academic accounts. The New Deal's regulatory and spending measures, such as the National Industrial Recovery Act and , are estimated to have reduced industrial production by up to 27% and prolonged the by approximately seven years compared to a counterfactual without intervention, according to econometric models incorporating wage rigidities and cartelization effects. Unemployment remained above 14% through 1940, with full recovery only occurring post-World War II mobilization rather than domestic policy alone. While providing short-term relief, these interventions distorted labor markets and investment incentives, as evidenced by slowed GDP growth relative to pre-Depression trends. Great Society initiatives, including the launched in 1964, expanded welfare expenditures dramatically, with Aid to Families with Dependent Children caseloads surging from 4.7 million in 1966 to 9.7 million by 1970. Despite over $22 trillion (in 2012 dollars) spent since 1965 on anti- programs, the poverty rate plateaued around 11-15% after an initial decline from 19% in 1964, failing to eradicate as promised and instead correlating with rising . Longitudinal data indicate these programs disincentivized work and , contributing to a tripling of out-of-wedlock birth rates among low-income families from 24% in 1965 to over 70% by the , exacerbating intergenerational cycles. Macroeconomic fallout materialized in the late and , as unfunded spending—totaling $1 trillion annually by 1968 alongside costs—fueled inflation without corresponding tax hikes, eroding purchasing power and setting the stage for . Inflation averaged 5.7% annually from 1965-1980, peaking at 13.5% in 1980, while real GDP growth stagnated below 2% in several years, contradicting Keynesian expectations of stimulus-driven prosperity. analyses attribute this to loose accommodating fiscal expansion, which entrenched inflationary expectations and undermined the era's . Social metrics further underscore policy shortfalls: rates quadrupled from 1960 to 1980, correlating with in welfare-dependent areas, while educational outcomes stagnated, with high school completion rates for disadvantaged youth showing minimal gains despite Head Start and similar investments. These outcomes prompted backlash, including the welfare reforms and eventual 1996 overhaul, reflecting empirical recognition that expansionist approaches prioritized redistribution over structural incentives for self-sufficiency.

Legacy and Contemporary Relevance

Long-Term Institutional Impacts

The New Deal legislation enacted during the Fifth Party System irrevocably reshaped American by instituting a regime of conditional federal grants-in-aid, which compelled s to align with national policy objectives in exchange for funding, transitioning from —where federal and spheres operated largely independently—to marked by intergovernmental partnerships and fiscal interdependence. Matching grants for programs like unemployment insurance and public assistance, initiated under acts such as the of , elevated federal expenditures on state aid from under 5% of total federal outlays in 1932 to over 20% by 1940, embedding mechanisms of centralized oversight that persisted and expanded post-World War II. This framework increased state reliance on for revenue, with federal grants comprising more than one-third of state budgets by the , thereby constraining state fiscal and standardizing implementation nationwide despite initial intentions of temporary relief. The period also catalyzed the entrenchment of through the creation of independent regulatory agencies endowed with quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers, fundamentally altering the balance of authority among branches by delegating extensive to unelected bureaucrats. Agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (1934) and the (1935) exemplified this shift, as they assumed ongoing roles in market supervision and labor disputes, setting precedents for executive aggrandizement that outlasted the era and underpinned subsequent regulatory proliferations. By 1940, federal civilian employment had surged from approximately 600,000 in 1932 to over 1 million, institutionalizing a bureaucratic apparatus that influenced policy continuity and resisted contraction, even as economic recovery advanced. In the judiciary, Roosevelt's failed 1937 court-packing plan—proposing to add up to six justices for those over 70—triggered a pivotal doctrinal reversal, known as the "switch in time that saved nine," exemplified by the Supreme Court's upholding of state's in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish (April 1937), just months after striking down similar measures. This capitulation extended to validations of programs under expansive interpretations, such as in NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Corp. (1937), which deferred to congressional delegations of authority and curtailed Lochner-era scrutiny of economic regulations. The resulting precedents endured, enabling unchecked growth in and federal interventionism, with the Court rarely invalidating economic statutes thereafter until the late , thus solidifying institutional deference to legislative and executive expansions forged in the Fifth Party System.

Transitions Toward Subsequent Systems

The erosion of the Fifth Party System's New Deal Coalition became evident in the mid-1960s, as divisions over civil rights legislation fractured the Democratic Party's electoral base. The coalition, which had unified urban laborers, Southern whites, ethnic minorities, and African Americans through economic populism, faced irreconcilable tensions when President advanced the and Voting Rights Act of 1965. These measures, prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations and protecting minority voting rights, respectively, prompted a mass exodus of Southern white voters from the , who viewed them as federal overreach infringing on and local customs. Johnson's private remark to aides—that the Democrats had "lost the South for a generation"—reflected the immediate political cost, with the party forfeiting its dominance forged since . This fracture accelerated during the 1964 presidential election, where Republican nominee Barry Goldwater's opposition to the appealed to conservative Southerners disillusioned with national Democrats. Goldwater secured five Deep South states—, , , , and —traditionally Democratic strongholds, amassing 87% of the white vote in despite a national landslide loss to . His campaign emphasized and , foreshadowing ideological realignment by attracting defectors from the Democratic ranks without relying on the coalition's economic redistribution focus. Scholars note this as an early indicator of partisan sorting, where racial conservatism supplanted class-based loyalty as a cleavage. The 1968 election crystallized the transition, with Richard Nixon's narrow victory over signaling the emergence of a new partisan equilibrium. Amid urban riots, protests, and cultural upheaval, Nixon captured 43.4% of the popular vote by courting the ""—white, working-class voters alienated by Democratic embrace of civil rights and anti-war activism—while employing coded appeals to . He won key Northern states and began peeling away Southern support, though third-party candidate siphoned 13.5% nationally by echoing segregationist sentiments. This outcome, following the Democratic National Convention chaos in , marked the Fifth System's collapse, as plummeted to 60.9% and regional loyalties realigned along cultural and racial lines rather than economic ones. Subsequent Republican strategies, including Nixon's "Southern Strategy," institutionalized these shifts by targeting disaffected white Southerners through opposition to busing, , and welfare expansion, without explicit racial rhetoric. By 1972, Nixon expanded his coalition to include former voters, sweeping the and achieving a 60.7% popular vote landslide. Political scientists date the Sixth Party System's onset variably between 1964 and 1972, characterized by ideological polarization, with Democrats consolidating urban, minority, and liberal voters while Republicans dominated suburbs, the , and conservatives. This realignment endured through the 1980s, as evidenced by Ronald Reagan's triumph, which further entrenched class dealignment and cultural divides.

References

  1. [1]
    The Party Battle in America
    Parties became quasi public agencies subject to legislative control. The Fifth Party System, 1932-?: The Democratic New Deal Era and Beyond. President Herbert ...
  2. [2]
    Sex, Race, Religion and Partisan Realignment - Jo Freeman
    The fifth party system, in which class was the major line of cleavage, gave way to the sixth, in which race, or more specifically views on racial issues, was ...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] More than Red and Blue: Political Parties and American Democracy
    Jul 1, 2023 · The fifth party system was the famed New Deal party system rooted in class differences and economic conflict while the sixth party system ...
  4. [4]
    The Emergence of the New Deal Party System - jstor
    Bernard Sternsher is Professor of History at Bowling Green State University and the author of Consensus, Conflict, and American Historians (Bloomington, Ind., ...Missing: timeline | Show results with:timeline<|separator|>
  5. [5]
    More than red and blue: Preface - Protect Democracy
    Oct 6, 2023 · The fifth party system was the famed New Deal party system rooted in class differences and economic conflict while the sixth party system added ...Missing: timeline | Show results with:timeline
  6. [6]
    The New Deal Party System: A Reappraisal - jstor
    graph that tells us nothing of voters' motivation. But the election of 1936 tells us much about why the fifth party system endured. In 1944 the leading ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] A Crisis In the Republic: The Shifting American Political System
    prominent during the entire fifth party-system. There are several challenges that make pinpointing a shift in party system in this modern era compared to ...
  8. [8]
    The Fifth Party System - Shmoop
    The combination of voters that elected Roosevelt president four times included union members, immigrants, minority and low-income voters, Catholics, Jews, ...<|separator|>
  9. [9]
    american party system history
    AMERICAN PARTY SYSTEM HISTORY · 1) Elitist party, slower to respond to democratic style · 2) Bad image, viewed as anti-democratic. · 3) Alien, Sedition, and ...
  10. [10]
    Fifth Party System | Historica Wiki - Fandom
    The party was divided between its liberal faction, led by Governor Nelson Rockefeller, and the conservative faction, led by Senator Barry Goldwater. Goldwater ...History · Roosevelt Presidency · Truman Presidency · Johnson PresidencyMissing: characteristics | Show results with:characteristics
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Policy and Performance in the New Deal Realignment
    Apr 1, 2020 · Recent research has challenged the policy bases of the New Deal realignment, arguing that it was instead driven by.
  12. [12]
    1932 | The American Presidency Project
    1932. Party, Nominees, Electoral Vote, Popular Vote. Presidential, Vice Presidential. Democratic, election party winner, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John Garner, 472 ...
  13. [13]
    1932 Electoral College Results | National Archives
    Mar 3, 2020 · President Franklin D. Roosevelt [D] Main Opponent Herbert C. Hoover [R] Electoral Vote Winner: 472 Main Opponent: 59 Total/Majority: 531/266 ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] OEEH The New Deal 1 Between 1933 and 1939 the structure of ...
    The Democrats built a coalition of urban workers, northern and southern farmers, and the solidly Democratic (although conservative) South.<|control11|><|separator|>
  15. [15]
    President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal
    By 1939, the New Deal had run its course. In the short term, New Deal programs helped improve the lives of people suffering from the events of the depression.
  16. [16]
    African Americans and the New Deal - Digital History
    In order to pass major New Deal legislation, Roosevelt needed the support of southern Democrats. ... Most New Deal programs discriminated against blacks. The NRA, ...
  17. [17]
    President Franklin Roosevelt's Radio Address Unveiling the Second ...
    Feb 8, 2022 · The most dramatic shift to the Democratic Party was seen in the voting patterns of African Americans. The Republican Party nominated Alfred M.
  18. [18]
    1940 | The American Presidency Project
    1940 ; Party · Presidential, Vice Presidential ; Democratic, election party winner, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Henry A. Wallace ; Republican, Wendell L. Willkie ...<|separator|>
  19. [19]
    [PDF] The Democratic New Deal Coalition, Khalil 2000
    an electoral coalition for the Democratic Party that would last for ... '1'he New Deal programs had brought to the llemocratic Yarty the black vote ...Missing: impact | Show results with:impact
  20. [20]
    How World War II Almost Broke American Politics - Politico
    Jun 6, 2019 · The nation that waged that war was racked by deep political divisions, some with echoes that are still reverberating today.
  21. [21]
    [PDF] The Case of Democrats and World War II
    The war helps to explain the Gerring-identified shift in Democratic ideology away from economic populism.Missing: Fifth | Show results with:Fifth
  22. [22]
    FDR and American Politics During WWII - The History Reader
    Prior to the war, the Democratic Party dominated the South, where Democratic leaders upheld white supremacy through segregationist Jim Crow laws.
  23. [23]
    1944 | The American Presidency Project
    Electoral Vote, Popular Vote. Presidential, Vice Presidential. Democratic, election party winner, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S Truman, 432, 81.4%, 25,612,610 ...
  24. [24]
    Franklin D. Roosevelt: Campaigns and Elections - Miller Center
    The Campaign and Election of 1932: Political observers in the early 1930s were of decidedly mixed opinion about the possible presidential candidacy of Franklin ...
  25. [25]
    Harry S. Truman: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center
    Two related issues—the future of New Deal liberalism and the reconversion of the American economy from a war-time to a peace-time footing—topped his agenda. As ...
  26. [26]
    Republicans recapture House majority, Nov. 5, 1946 - POLITICO
    Nov 5, 2012 · Riding a widespread wave of unhappiness with the postwar economic policies of the Truman administration, the Republicans on this day in 1946 ...
  27. [27]
    President Harry S. Truman's Fair Deal proposal to a Joint Session of ...
    Truman delivered his Fair Deal proposal to a Joint Session of Congress. ... The President requested action on initiatives such as an increase in the minimum wage, ...Missing: 1945-1952 | Show results with:1945-1952
  28. [28]
    The Election of 1948 | Harry S. Truman
    His inconsistencies on the Palestine issue contributed to a sense that he wasn't up to his job. The Republican Congress had rejected almost all of his proposals ...
  29. [29]
    Harry S. Truman: Campaigns and Elections | Miller Center
    The Campaign and Election of 1948: The Democratic Party's poor showing in the 1946 mid-term congressional elections—in which the Republican Party took control ...
  30. [30]
    Upset of the Century | Harry S. Truman
    In early 1948, Harry Truman prepared to run for President in his own right. Few people gave him any chance of reaching his goal.
  31. [31]
    Party politics in the U.S., 1950-1962 - Kenneth Janda
    But, in the congressional elections of 1954, the Republicans lost control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The presidential campaign of 1956 ...
  32. [32]
    Landmark Legislation: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Senate.gov
    On June 10, a coalition of 27 Republicans and 44 Democrats ended the filibuster when the Senate voted 71 to 29 for cloture, thereby limiting further debate.
  33. [33]
    Why did the Democrats lose the South? Bringing new data to an old ...
    In 1960, all 22 U.S. Senators from the South were affiliated with the Democratic Party. Today, all but three are Republican.[i] For decades, historians and ...
  34. [34]
    The Roots of the Parties' Racial Switch - Niskanen Center
    Aug 12, 2020 · Today, Black Americans are the strongest Democratic constituency and White Southerners are the strongest Republican group—but it used to be ...
  35. [35]
    1968 | The American Presidency Project
    Republican, election party winner, Richard Nixon, Spiro Agnew ; Democratic, Hubert Humphrey, Edmund Muskie ; American Independent, George Wallace, Curtis LeMay ...
  36. [36]
    Richard Nixon: Campaigns and Elections | Miller Center
    He spent six years shaking it before he could win the 1968 Republican presidential nomination. During that time, he joined a prestigious law firm in New York ...
  37. [37]
    Nixon Silent Majority Speech Text - Voices of Democracy
    The American people cannot and should not be asked to support a policy which involves the overriding issues of war and peace unless they know the truth about ...Missing: law | Show results with:law
  38. [38]
    Richard Nixon: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center
    Nixon adopted a policy of monetary restraint to cool what his advisers saw as an overheating economy. "Gradualism," as it was called, placed its hopes in ...
  39. [39]
    What we get wrong about the Southern strategy - The Washington Post
    Jul 26, 2019 · Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater first wielded this strategy in 1964 and Richard Nixon perfected it in 1968 and 1972, turning ...
  40. [40]
    The Reagan Presidency
    Ronald Reagan was elected President of the United States on November 4, 1980. His triumph capped the rise of the new right/conservative wing of the Republican ...
  41. [41]
    Ronald Reagan: Campaigns and Elections - Miller Center
    Meanwhile, within the Republican Party, resurgent conservatives mobilized against what they saw as the "me-too" policies of the GOP's long dominant Eastern ...
  42. [42]
    Franklin D. Roosevelt: The American Franchise | Miller Center
    This "New Deal coalition," as it came to be known, powered the Democratic Party for the next thirty years. Its strong hold on these voters was due largely to ...Missing: 1932-1940 | Show results with:1932-1940
  43. [43]
    Why did the electorate swing between parties during the Great ...
    Manufacturing-oriented counties and urban counties increasingly supported the Democrats, while farming counties increasingly opposed the Democrats, ceteris ...
  44. [44]
    [PDF] Did the New Deal Solidify the 1932 Democratic Realignment?
    The critical election of 1932 represented a turning point in the future electoral successes of the Democrats and Republicans for over three decades. This paper ...
  45. [45]
    [PDF] The Civil Rights Realignment: How Race Dominates Presidential ...
    After receiving only 23% of the black vote in the 1932 presidential election, Roosevelt's candidacy was not a catalyst for African Americans to shift ...
  46. [46]
    [PDF] How Blacks became Blue: The 1936 African American Voting Shift ...
    The black vote would be a boost for the GOP and weakening blow to the. Democratic Party which has held the black vote unchallenged for over half a century. I n ...Missing: 1932-1960 | Show results with:1932-1960
  47. [47]
    GREAT MIGRATION POLITICS | Du Bois Review
    The Great Migration fundamentally reshaped Northern electorates. Millions of Black voters, who had been unable to vote in the South, became eligible to vote ...
  48. [48]
    No, Trump Didn't Win 'The Largest Share Of Non-White Voters Of ...
    Nov 9, 2020 · Nonetheless, from 1936 to 1960, Republicans garnered a meaningful share of the Black vote, averaging 30% over that period. The sea change took ...
  49. [49]
    Catholics and the 1936 Roosevelt Victory - Catholics and Politics
    Sep 16, 2024 · Millions of Catholic voters helped bring Roosevelt his landslide victory in 1936. Estimates of the number of Catholics voting for FDR range from 70% - 81%.Missing: Jewish | Show results with:Jewish
  50. [50]
    [PDF] The Contributions of Conversion and Mobilization to Partisan Change
    The mobilization hypothesis claims that the shift in the relative strengths of the parties is a result of new voters entering the electorate. People are ...Missing: demographics | Show results with:demographics<|separator|>
  51. [51]
    The Impact of New Deal Spending and Lending During the Great ...
    Many new programs involved large increases in funding; real federal outlays increased from 5.9 percent of 1929 real GDP in 1933 to nearly 11 percent by 1939.Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
  52. [52]
    [PDF] The Impact of New Deal Expenditures on Local Economic Activity
    This paper empirically examines the New Deal,s impact on local economic activity, as measured by retail sales, during the 1930s. Using a recently-uncovered data ...
  53. [53]
    [PDF] Did the New Deal Prolong or Worsen the Great Depression?
    We argue that initiatives in these policy areas probably did not slow economic growth or worsen the unemployment problem from 1933 to 1939, as claimed by a ...
  54. [54]
    [PDF] A Theory of Critical Elections
    graphs in Figure A, which show the Democratic percentages of the presidential vote from 1916 through 1952 for the city of Somerville and the town of Ashfield in ...
  55. [55]
    Party Systems and Realignments in the United States,1868-2004
    Jan 4, 2016 · The analysisdemonstrates the onset of realignments in the 1894-96 and 1930-32 elections anda staggered realignment in recent decades.Missing: framework | Show results with:framework
  56. [56]
    Party Systems and Realignments in the United States, 1868-2004
    American electoral history has long been characterized as a series of party systems and realignments.1 Party systems define normal partisan politics, and ...
  57. [57]
    Fifth Party System - Citizendium
    Aug 16, 2024 · The Fifth Party System, also called the New Deal Party System, refers to the system of politics in the United States that began in 1933
  58. [58]
    [PDF] Realignment and Party Revival: Toward a Republican Majority?
    The most compelling electoral realignment in American history occurred in. Presidential elections between 1964 and 1972 (Paulson 2000, xv-42). A dramatic.Missing: fifth | Show results with:fifth
  59. [59]
    [PDF] DEALIGNMENT, REALIGNMENT, AND CRITICAL ELECTIONS
    FIFTH PARTY SYSTEM (1932-1968). Democrats vs. Republicans ... Some scholars have concluded that the election of 1968 turned out to be a critical election.
  60. [60]
    Fifth Party System - Institute of History, Archaeology, and Education
    The Fifth Party System or New Deal Coalition lasted from 1932 until 1968. The Democrats dominated this period. That dominance began to fade when Republicans ...Missing: postwar 1941-1952<|separator|>
  61. [61]
    Understanding American political history - From Poverty to Progress
    Jan 31, 2024 · The Fifth Party System (1932-1968) · Whether to expand social insurance programs such as Social Security. · The degree to which the federal ...
  62. [62]
    [PDF] Lessons from the political economy of the New Deal - econ.umd.edu
    Abstract The New Deal produced a fundamental change in the structure of American government. The national government came to play a much larger role in the ...Missing: overemphasis | Show results with:overemphasis
  63. [63]
    [PDF] The Democratic Class Struggle in the United States, 1948-1992.
    We present evidence of a historic realignment in the relationship between class and voting behavior in U.S. presidential elections in the postwar pe-.
  64. [64]
    God and the New Deal - The American Prospect
    Nov 22, 2004 · A clear religious component to the New Deal. No group was more central to the Roosevelt coalition than America's urban Catholics.
  65. [65]
    Religion and American Politics from FDR to George W. Bush
    Religious communities are key parts of the New Deal coalition. These ... Historians have documented the close connections among religion, ethnicity, and voting ...
  66. [66]
    New Deal Coalition - Citizendium
    Sep 25, 2024 · The New Deal coalition was an alliance of voting blocs and interest groups that joined forces in support of U.S. President Franklin D.
  67. [67]
    American Political Cleavages in the Twentieth Century - jstor
    The evolution of a politics based on cultural as opposed to economic issues may therefore prove to be destabilizing for the American political system in the ...
  68. [68]
    The Case of Charles A. Beard and His Critics - jstor
    economic determinism. By the 1960s, Beard's reputation stood "like an impos- ing ruin on the landscape of American historiography."2 After that pronounce ...
  69. [69]
    Full article: Updating cleavage theory for the twenty-first century
    Oct 6, 2025 · Contemporary cleavage research has linked 'socio-cultural' conflicts mobilised by new left and far right parties to structural divides in ...
  70. [70]
    The Not-So-Great-Society | The Heritage Foundation
    The War on Poverty programs of the second half of the 20th century failed to give children the chance to succeed in school and in life. These programs represent ...
  71. [71]
    American Social Policy in the 1960's and 1970's
    Oct 30, 2017 · (The poverty status of older Americans improved considerably during the 60s thanks to increases in Social Security benefits.) To illustrate, in ...
  72. [72]
    Seduced: How Radical Ideas on Welfare, Work, and Family Sent ...
    The nation's welfare rolls exploded, jumping from 4.7 million to 9.7 million between 1966 and 1970 alone. This new version of welfare quickly took over poor ...
  73. [73]
    The Rise in Dependency - The Heritage Foundation
    Consider welfare programs. Since the 1960s, the country has spent more than $8.5 trillion on food, housing, medical care and social services for the needy.Missing: US | Show results with:US
  74. [74]
    The Great Inflation | Federal Reserve History
    The late 1960s and the early 1970s were a turbulent time for the US economy. President Johnson's Great Society legislation brought about major spending ...
  75. [75]
    Stagflation in the 1970s - Investopedia
    Stagflation in the 1970s was a period with both high inflation and uneven economic growth. High budget deficits, lower interest rates, the oil embargo, and the ...
  76. [76]
    The Forgotten Failures of the Great Society - Manhattan Institute
    Jan 10, 2020 · In Great Society: A New History, she notes that “just as the 1960s forgot the failures of the 1930s, we today forget the failures of the 1960s.” ...
  77. [77]
    [PDF] The Impact of the New Deal on American Federalism
    The federal government tended to operate in its own sphere of activity encompassing national defense, foreign relations, the postal service, and various ...
  78. [78]
    [PDF] Did a Switch in Time Save Nine? - Emory Law Scholarly Commons
    Franklin Delano Roosevelt's court-packing plan of 1937 and the “switch in time that saved nine” animate central questions of law, politics, and history. Did.
  79. [79]
    The New Southern Strategy | Othering & Belonging Institute
    When President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he told an aide that Democrats had “lost the South for a generation,” anticipating a white ...
  80. [80]
    [PDF] Critical Elections and Political Realignments in the USA: 1860–2000
    The sequence of US presidential elections from 1964 to 1972 is generally regarded as heralding a fundamental political realignment, during which time civil ...
  81. [81]
    Party Affiliation in the Southern Electorate - Seth C. McKee, 2024
    Nov 26, 2023 · The Long Southern Strategy: How Chasing White Voters in the South Changed American Politics. New York: Oxford University Press. Go to ...
  82. [82]
    Toward a Modern Southern Strategy, 1933–1968 (Chapter 6)
    6 - Toward a Modern Southern Strategy, 1933–1968. from Part I - The South and National Republican Party Politics, 1865–1968. Published online by Cambridge ...
  83. [83]
    Political Parties in a Critical Era - JOHN H. ALDRICH, 1999
    The sixth American party system: The 1960s realignment and the candidate-centered parties (Duke University Working Paper in American Politics, No. 107) ...Missing: fifth | Show results with:fifth
  84. [84]
    Party Strategies and Transition in the Northeast (Chapter 1 ...
    1 - Party Strategies and Transition ... Aistrup, Joseph, The Southern Strategy Revisited ... Party Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001)Google ...