Saturday, January 4, 2014
The Great Depression in Canada: Key Historical Debates
When preparing a paper 3, it is always best to reference historical perspectives to earn the highest marks possible. Consider historians like John Boyko on Bennett's conversion to New Deal policies. How about Findlay's perspective on Canada and Keynsian economics? How do historians such as Bumstead, Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag address how the Depression led to the growth of a strong federal government in Canada?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In the reading it talked all about all of the famous historians mentioned in the question, about their views on Bennett, King, Canada, etc. To answer the first question about John Boyko’s views on Bennett’s conversion to the New Deal, in the reading it said, “Many historians including John Boyko in his 2010 biography agreed that Bennett’s conversion was genuine, although Boyko went on to argue that his change of heart had not come quickly enough”. To answer the second question about Findlay’s perspective on Canada and Keynsian economics, in the reading it says, “Writing in the 1970s, historian J.L. Findlay argued that the ideas were taken up in Canada before Bennett’s apparent conversion”. I really didn’t understand much of this part of the reading other than that I think people are trying to say that Bennett didn’t have original ideas? Lastly, historians such as Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag addressed the Great Depression in Canada, in the article it states, “Finkel, Conrad and Strong-Boag, writing in the 1990s, agreed that the Depression his Canada particularly badly and required extensive measures”.
ReplyDeleteJohn Boyko said that Bennett's conversion to New Deal policies was genuine which I don't really understand why because it was not at all authentic since FDR had done it right before him and as it was working, Bennett decided to try as well even though he completely failed. He also said that he decided to do the New Deal when it was too late which is true, but all he did was nothing from my point of view because he did not try at first and when he actually tried he just talked more than actually taking action. Therefore I agree more with what King said about Bennett's actions.
ReplyDeleteHistorians talking about the Depression in Canada agreed that it hit the country so hard that weaker firms started closing, but stronger ones got stronger in a long term. It opened federal government's eyes and its power and strength increased a lot with the Depression since they had a hard time.
According to the reading, historians like John Boyko believe Bennett's conversion to direct government intervention through was genuine. However, these ideas were not very original because Bennett converted after he saw that Roosevelt's New Deal programs were effective in America. And, by the time he'd finally realized that the old capitalist ways of Canada just weren't working, it was already too late. That is in line with the beliefs of historian J.L. Findlay; Bennett's ideas weren't original at all. As far as Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag, they believed the Depression left Canada with a lesson on survival of the fittest. The strong firms survived, while the weaker ones collapsed.
ReplyDeleteAll of the historians that were featured in the reading have different opinions on the topics discussed. Boyko believes that the New Deals were a good thing and that they really helped and also that they were genuine. This goes against a lot of opinions because most thought that Bennett was being too generous and that eventually his money would run out. The part about Findlay confused me cause we didnt really talk about that much in class and the article wasn't really clear on it. The last historians that were named thought that the great depression ruined canadas government and it was difficult for the country and their government to get back on their feet.
ReplyDeleteJohn Boyko believed that Bennett’s conversion to the New Deal policies was genuine. He also believed that Bennett did not react quickly enough to the Depression. Historians such as Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag all agree that, “the Depression hit Canada particularly badly and required extensive measures.” The Depression led to the growth of a strong federal government in Canada because many realized, that in order for Canada to prosper and come out of the Great Depression, the federal government would have to get involved. It is agreed that the Depression showed that Canada’s federal government was inadequate. It is also stated that there was “growth in [the] federal government but politicians and historians disagree to the extent and impact of this.”
ReplyDeleteWell all of these historians that were talked about in the reading, all had good ideas and a lot were helpful. They all brought to the table different things that would help the federal government. But they all had there opinions some thought Bennett was doing the wrong thing by giving his own money. But what they did not realize is that nothing else was working so he took money out of his own pocket which helped Canada rise again. They all agreed that the Depressions was hard on everyone in Canada but the depression made them stronger as a unit and would be prepared if something were to happen again.
ReplyDeleteAfter I read this reading, I realized to myself that all of the historians have there own opinions on what they think it right and was is wrong. John Boyko felt that Bennett's conversion to the New Deal policies was very intelligent. Although these ideas were genuine they were no where near original because Bennett converted and changed after he saw how successful Roosevelt was in the United States Of America. Also, historians talking about the Depression in Canada agreed that it hit the country so hard that weaker firms started closing, but stronger ones got stronger in the long term. This widely opened the federal government's eyes and its power and strength increased as well a lot with the Depression because they had a very challenging time
ReplyDeleteAll of the historians discussed in the reading brought a different variety of new and old proposals to the table. All being in aid of the federal government, they were all big changes and with big changes often comes big risk. One of the problems that arose, was Bennett thinking that he could save the government by aiding it out of his own pocket, which did allow Canada to recover, but it also created a false safety net.
ReplyDeleteBumstead, Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag were all on the same page when it came to why the government was strong. The government became strong because people of Canada realized that they needed the government to help make life suitable for all no have it be survival of the fittest. Going back to Bennet giving his own money out, this was frowned upon by most historians. The main reason for this was because eventually the money was going to run out so the government had to become stronger and help out its people.
ReplyDeleteThe government was became strong from the depression because of the lessons learned, and this can be agreed on by Bumstead, Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag. The government became strong because the will to have a better living increased. I think Boyko would agree that Bennett giving his own money to the government, yet admirable, shows the weakness of the government. For he to have to dip into his own savings just to keep the government running and running more effectively represents the type of job he was doing in office because there clearly was not enough money flow. The economy will not be able to survive off one man's savings, and this was pretty obvious.
ReplyDeleteAs many have previously said John Boyko believed Bennett's conversion was genuine, although he did not believe that they were his own. John Boyko almost mimicked ideas of those from Roosevelt's recent policies that were put into place in America, making them unoriginal. The historians Bumstead, Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag addressed the depression with very different opinions, although they all seemed to agree on the fact that the federal government had no choice but to get involved. Many also believed that this was Canada's way of going through "natural selection," the weaker ones could not always survive the circumstances. This also proved that Canada's government had to be changed.
ReplyDeleteBoyko is this historian guy who has an unique idea compare to most of other historian. He agreed with what Bennett was doing but he thought that Bennett's conversion was not quickly enough. On the other side, there is this group of historian including J.M., Bannon saying that King and Bennett did very little in terms of helping the economy. It was WWII that got them out of the depression. And most historians agree with it. However, Finkle, Conrad, and Strong-Boag thought that all the policy and the New Deals from both bennett and King increase the influence of federal government and centralized the economy system. And that made the economy run smoothly and get back to the "norm" with the push of WWII.
ReplyDeleteJohn Boyko believed that Bennett’s conversion to the New Deal policies was genuine. thorough out the reading it points to the fact that Bennett didn’t have many original ideas. and needed the federal government to step in. The Depression led to the growth of a strong federal government in Canada because many realized, that in order for Canada to prosper the federal government would have to get involved. the government knew that Bennett had no answers and therefor had to intervene in the economy.
ReplyDeleteHistorians like John Boyko considered Bennett's conversion to New Deal policies as genuine and useful, while Findlay's perspective on Canada and Keynsian economics showed that the government shouldn't expand spending in order to stimulate economy. Historians such as Bumstead, Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag were more tend to say that the Depression gave a harsh lesson to Canada and woke it up, and it stimulated more actions in restoring economy, especially involving more policies such social security and production market, which gave more chances for the Federal government to participate and grew stronger.
ReplyDeleteThere are always more than one views on one issue. While Canadians were shocked by Bennett's bold policy changes, historians find his motivation genuine. Neverhetless, they still think Bennett switched to his New Deal too late. Findlay argued that the Keynsian experiment was already used before Bennet's conversion. Historians gave most of the credits to the 2nd world war instead of Bennett or King. They believe the reason that Canada's economy eventually recovered is because of the impact of the war and people preceded the federal government in 1930th.
ReplyDeleteJohn Boyko believed that the New Deal policies that Bennett proposed were genuine and could help Canada's economy. However, the article goes on to say that Canada was already thinking about this idea before Bennett actually converted. I believe that Bennett indeed converted to the New Deal too late and his mistakes led to his loss at the next elections. All the historians, Finkle, Bumstead, Conrad, and Strong-Boag all agree that the depression led to the growth of a strong federal government because after all the struggling and the uninvolvement of the government, people realized that the only way to get things back to "normal" was for the government to take action.
ReplyDeleteJohn Boyko said Bennetts conversion to a more hands on government was genuine although he said it did not come quickly enough. Findlay argued that the ideas of Keynes that a growth in government spending to stimulate demand supply, thereby expanding the economy was already taken up in Canada before Bennetts conversion. Historians such as Bumstead, Finkel, Conrad, and Strong-Boag agreed that the Depression hit Canada particularly bad and that it needed extensive measures. Most Canadians didnt believe survival of the fittest is a suitable tenet for a modern democracy and that the government should provide the means of survival for all. This led to a growth in Social Security and the Rowell-Sirois Committee
ReplyDeleteJohn Boyko believed Bennetts New Deal ideas were genuine and made to help Canada but that he did not react fast enough. He believes that Canada needed more immediate action which would make sense considering Bennett waited long into his career as Prime Minister to enforce these new policies (taken from FDR). The other historians believe however, that the depression helped strengthen federal government because it pushed them into action, since the problem could not solve itself.
ReplyDelete