By Akeem Mellis
America’s leading ideologies-liberalism and conservatism-have had their times of dominance in the 20th Century. But their fate in the 21st Century is still undetermined, according to the two speakers at one of the events held for Wednesday’s Day of Dialogue.
In the forum “Liberal, Conservative or Neither: The Fate of 20th Century Ideologies in a 21st Century World,” David Green, an associate professor of history, and Seth Forman, a professor from Stony Brook University, contemplated this issue, with both taking different stances on which ideology has been successful.
“Conservative projects have failed, while conservatism has flourished. Liberalism’s projects have been popular, yet it remains unpopular,” Green said, as he dedicated half of his 25-minute speech to praising what he saw as liberal “Golden Age” of the 1930s to the 1970s, highlighting achievements of that era.
“There was more economic, political, social, and moral equality in the 1970s then there was in the 30s mostly because of liberal legislation,” he continued, as he would use the rest of his speech to criticize conservative ideals and policies, and branded them as failures.
Regarding the economy, Green said, “These are bad times for poor Americans and good times for rich Americans. . . the legacy of conservatism is of massive debt, stagnation and inequality.”
He sustained this line, going after conservatives on foreign policy, saying “neoconservatives have angered the world, costing us prestige, money and lives” and, while citing examples, speculated that conservatism has remained successful because they have “fought very dirty” in elections, are winning “among the poorly informed,” and that “liberalism has achieved most of their goals.”
Furman strongly disagreed with this line of reasoning, and started to defend conservatism by saying that some liberal policies-specifically regarding crime-destroyed inner cities, and conservative policies reversed saved it.
He went on to demonstrate in his opinion why conservatives have remained the influential ideology, saying, “conservatives have a opportunistic and optimistic view, while liberal support the European thought of the world.”
Furman dedicated the vast majority of his speech to showing how liberalism fell out of favor, including, according to Furman, “liberal support of secularism, as opposed to how Catholics and Protestants once voted for them in droves.”
“Liberalism’s hostility to religion and the traditional family caused them to lose their majority. They have rejected tradition to pander to political interests, such as the feminist movement,” he stated.
Furman highlighted how, despite the conservative setback in the 2006 elections, conservatives are still the influential ideology since “social values triumphed throughout the states in the last election-it moved into the conservative direction,” and concluded by warning liberals if they associate themselves with what he calls “radical liberals”-especially regarding foreign policy-they will continue to lose.
In the question and answer segment, both men agreed the two-party system draws voters to the middle, and whomever appeals to moderate voters the best will be successful.
After the discussion, Green said that a future liberal resurgence “depends on what the Democrats will do. Conservatives are vulnerable, and liberals need to start throwing punches.”
Simon Doubleday, an associate professor of history, who moderated the discussion, concurred, stating, “There needs to be a intensification of ideology on the left, and the wishy-washiness of liberals need to end.”
Regarding who will be victorious in the next few elections, Furman said “it’s hard to say-more people will define themselves along conservative lines. More people my age will depend on government since we’re retiring, but it’s very hard for me to say.”