Great Depression Resolved by Government Intervention: Myth or Fact?

From 1929-1941, the United States economy crashed, causing inflation and many financial difficulties for most Americans. It impacted millions of Americans. The question is whether the Great Depression was caused by failure of the free market and then saved by government intervention. Myth or fact? I believe it is fact that by the government intervening in the economic problems, it saved Americans from the situation from getting any worse.

President Herbert Hoover, an advocate of "hands-off", or laissez-faire, economic policy, refused to use the power of the government and conditions worsened as a result. The job of saving the United Sates economy then rested on the shoulders of Hoover's successor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt used government intervention and steered the nation toward recovery.

The apparent lesson to be drawn is that capitalism cannot be trusted; government needs to take an active role in the economy to save us from inevitable decline. The government is the only thing that is constant in the economy; it constantly changes everyday and having something stable to regulate it is a very comforting thought to many Americans who do not want a repeat of the Great Depression.

Federalist 51

In The Federalist 51, James Madison raised a very interesting paradox: “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” So how do we overcome such a difficulty? Madison says. "In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments." He was saying that the people of America must be the primary control of who is in government and what they are doing. America is by the people, for the people, and of the people. That's not just a saying, it's also very true about how the country is run.

Another thing our government needed to overcome this paradox is auxiliary controls, also known as checks and balances. The Constitution has many different checks and balances to make sure that one branch of the government does not get too powerful. Because of this, our government has lasted since the writing of the Constitution and will last for much longer past now.

Was the Constitution Inspired?

Many people wonder if the U.S. Constitution is inspired and if that is the case, how so? I believe that it is very inspired because once you consider the fact that so many different minded people back in the day all united for one common cause and made something that has been copied by many countries and lasted hundreds of years. They had to sort through so many different opinions and eventually, they created something amazing. Only something inspired of God could be such a force of nature. Also, if the United States did not break away from England, Joseph Smith may have never been able to restore the gospel on the earth today because of lack of religious freedom in England. Everything the Constitution has done since then has only helped the well-being of man and of our natural rights. Without it, we might not even be here. The Constitution, despite being written by men who were not part of our church, was inspired to be written for us today.

The Moral Foundation for the American Struggle for Independence

Starting in 1764, England began passing acts to gain greater control over the American colonies, which had little or no control under the past two kings. In 1764, Parliament passed the Sugar Act, which increased duties on foreign sugar imported from the West Indies. Also, a Currency Act was passed in 1764 because England believed that if America issued paper bills, the colonial currency would devalue British money. Then, in 1765, Parliament passed the Quartering Act and the Stamp Act. After all of these had been enacted, the American colonists started to realize that they were being unfairly treated. England was imposing taxes on them without representation and they thought if they were going to be taxed, they should have representation in the British Parliament. The Stamp Act was put in place to help raise revenue for the standing British army that was in America. This act required that stamps be purchased or included on many different items and documents. It was the first direct tax that England had placed in the colonies. After the colonists to no avail protested the act, they decided to boycott, or using their phraseology, imposing non-importation agreements. In 1770, the Boston Massacre occurred, killing and injuring several American civilians. This incident only created more tension between the colonies and England. Finally, after months of protests and contention from the colonists, Parliament voted to repeal the Stamp Act in March 1766. Then, in 1767, the Townshend Acts were passed. These acts were created to help colonial officials from England to be paid so as to become independent from the colonists. Then, in 1773, the Parliament put the Tea Act into effect, which was designed to help the British’s failing East India Company by lowering their tax which created a monopoly on the tea trade in America. The colonists did not agree with this act, however, and in response to it, launched what is known as the Boston Tea Party. The colonists banded together, dressed as Indians, and dumped tea from three ships into the Boston Harbor. After this happened, the Parliament enacted the Coercive Acts in 1774, which the colonists called the Intolerable Acts. These acts required the colonists to house British troops, gave the British military control in Massachusetts, and made the British officials immune to prosecution in America.  They also closed Boston Harbor, restricting all trade in and out of Boston. The colonists finally had it. They were being taxed without representation, their liberty was being infringed upon, the king of England was appointing government officials for America that the American people didn’t want and then he made the colonists pay for them, and the British government itself was blatantly breaking the rule of law that was established in England. The colonists decided they were morally justified in breaking away from England and getting their freedom from the crown. On November 29, 1775, Thomas Jefferson states, “Dear Sir: there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America”. They called together the first Continental Congress to ponder united American resistance to England. Massachusetts led the resistance, creating a secret revolutionary government and creating militias to resist the British military’s presence in the colonies. They came together to send a letter to the king of England saying that three things are obviously true: all men are created equal, men have some unalienable rights given to them by God, and these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When the king infringed upon these rights, the colonists felt morally justified to get rid of their ties to the British government and establish their own. The colonists interpreted the British Constitution that it recognized “certain fundamental rights that no government – not even Parliament – could violate”. The British believed that the Parliament was the supreme authority and by definition anything Parliament did was constitutional. The British had taken away all of these fundamental rights. Life was taken through the Boston Massacre. Liberty was taken through taxation without representation in the British Parliament and also all of the acts passed by the British government. And the pursuit of happiness was infringed upon by the Americans having to fight for their right to separation from England. England was using the Americans to pay off war debts that the colonists didn’t even have anything to do with. They treated them unfairly by not giving them their right to have a say in what laws and taxes were passed for the colonies. Parliament would hold secret and abrupt meetings in random places so that the colonial agents that were in Britain wouldn’t be able to have a say in what laws were passed. So would I say that America was morally justified to rebel against British rule and break away from England as its own country? Yes I would. The second and most famous line of the Declaration of Independence is "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." America was founded upon these principles because of everything that England had done to the Americans. America was founded because the colonists wanted religious freedom to be able to practice whatever religion they wanted. When England couldn’t allow them that much, they traveled all the way across the ocean to settle in America. When England tried and tried again to tax the colonists unfairly and without reason, the colonists did all they could to retain their newfound freedom in America. Finally, after the whole American Revolution, America became its own country, separate from England. The struggle for independence made by our ancestors was well worth it because we would not be here in America today without everything they fought for.