Historians talk about change over time, but change is not linear. Rather nebulous and with unforeseen consequences. The historian Nancy Hewitt talks about a complexity of change over time. While change can positively affect one group sometimes that same change negatively affects another group, she argues. Change is both progressive and regressive. Change is embraced and at the same time rejected. The events of January 6th, 2001 demonstrate that.
For example, The territory of Washington granted women the right to vote in 1883, then took away that right in 1887. Women regained the right to vote in 1888 by another act of the territorial legislature, but that bill was overturned by the Territorial Supreme Court the same year. Women in Washington then re-regained the right to vote with the adoption of the new state Constitution in 1910.
The Prohibition Amendment was supposed to result in a cleaner, more sober society. What it brought, among other things, was the rise of organized crime. The Eighteenth Amendment was the only change to the Constitution that restricted rights. And the Supreme Court’s decisions sometimes restricts or or even takes rights away (see “Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization 2022). The idea that change necessarily advances society is inaccurate. In fact, continuity and change can happen simultaneously.
The world is too complex for a linear narrative. The trajectory of society on an evolutionary tract that is positive is not a normal phenomenon. Change does not always mean better. Likewise, continuity has both its detractors and proponents such as the vote in the US Senate for removing the 17th, 37th, 42nd, and 45th (twice) president from office after the House of Representatives had found those men guilty of various high crimes and misdemeanors.
Impeachment is not normal. Republicans impeached Andrew Johnson (D) for a myriad of things to include “heaping ridicule upon Congress.” Richard Nixon (R) resigned when it became apparent that he did not have the number of votes in Congress to keep him in the Oval Office. Republicans impeached Bill Clinton (D) for lying about committing adultery. Democrats, who controlled the House after the 2018 and 2020 elections, impeached Donald Trump, twice, including “inciting violence against the government of the United States.” Impeachments are not normal times.
Not unlike Andrew Jackson, Donald Trump attracted exceptionally divergent positions. All presidents have their detractors. Some more than others. Rush Limbaugh seemingly made his career going against the Clinton administration (and women and POC).
I think presidents tend to be more of a continuity of policy, but in personality and thought some more in line with Gilded Age policies as some historians have pondered. A change from the path the US has been on since the Progressive era? And, how did those changes and continuities affect various groups of Americans?
The idea of “All men are created equal” didn’t mean “all men” in 1776 but by 1877 “all men” certainly included most American men, at least on paper. Women were granted the right to vote, then Native Americans, then the 1964 Civil Rights Act, then the Americans with Disabilities Act. Our liberties seemingly expand over time. But then the Supreme has been chipping away at the 1965 Voting Rights Act since 2013. Then the Dobbs decision (2022) took away a woman’s right to control her own body. A right she had since Roe (1973). So in some cases, liberties might be contracting.
Was the exclusion of Chinese or the forced Americanization of Native American children in the nineteenth century similar or not to policies that restrict Muslim immigration or remove immigrant children from their parents in the 21st century (the “Zero tolerance” initiative)? Or, politicians who lament that certain ethnic groups do not assimilate as quickly or thoroughly as other groups in both the Gilded Age and more recently?
Are the speeches, policies, and practices normal throughout US history over the long run, or has US history altered its path since September 11th? And what about American culture and society? How different is baseball in the 21st century than in the 19th century? What about violence in sports, such as football. 21 college men died playing football in 1904. Song lyrics. Every generation thinks they were the first to rebel against their parents. Every generation thinks their music is the best. And every generation thinks they invented sex. How has youth culture changed over time? What about protest movements: from those against liquor importation in the 1830s to Black Lives Matter in the 20-teens? Is there a strand of continuity there? I could go on.
Finally, what does that change or continuity mean? Donald Trump, as I will talk about in my next post, is indeed more in line with his Gilded Age counterparts. Except, he says it louder.
