Rachael Kaplan

American Conservatism- B Block

1/31/20
Response to Documents 1 and 2

The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 was a major conservative victory. It was beginning to undo

the work of the New Deal with laws prohibiting union campaign contributions, secondary

boycotts, sympathy strikes, and enacting “right to work” laws. This lessened the power of the

working class, therefore decreasing the threat of communism that conservatives feared above all

else. The fact that Taft-Hartley was repassed after President Truman vetoed it is also important.

This showed that the President was not in complete control of the government. David Lawrence

called the repassing “the people’s veto.” It was significant because it gave hope that a “radical”

socialist or democratic President could not control the entire government.

Taft-Hartley leads to an “era of stability” because unions have less control over the

corporations. According to Lawrence, with the threat of the working class no longer as prevalent,

America’s capitalist society is safer from socialism, therefore more stable. Taft-Hartley also

leads to a “truly representative society” because a representative society is where the government

is the servant of the citizens, not vice versa. This put the people back in control of the direction

they wanted their country headed.

Thurmond bases his opposition to the Truman Administration on the basis that the

Constitution is “the greatest charter of human liberty.” He states later that social and economic

justice can be guarantees by “strict adherence to our Constitution.” Invasion upon the

constitutional rights of states and individuals put that in jeopardy. Thurmond also states the it is a

constitutional right to choose one’s associates. Dixiecrats condemn desegregation, the repeal of
miscegenation statutes, and Federal control of private employment that Thurmond says “is called

for by the misnamed civil rights program.”

Thurmond claims that a strong central government would be detrimental to the Southern

way of life. He says it would destroy the “social, economic, and political” aspects of the South.