Leo T. reviewed That's Not What We Meant to Do: Reform and Its Unintended Consequences in the Twentieth Century on + 1775 more book reviews
Obtained as an add-on kindly supplied by Katherine Coventry and I will leave it at the VA Clinic tomorrow where a good nonfiction read is in demand. Postscript: I left at 7:10 AM and it was gone when I left at 7:50 AM! Dr. Gillon begins with a scholarly 'lecture' (the Introduction) but he did originally address this subject in George magazine.
Considering US History in the 1960s, for example, Professor became interested in decent policies had unexpected results. These could be good as with the GI Bill of 1944 or as bad as the Community Mental Health Act of 1963.
"...(O)ne of the most immutable rules of nature, the law of unintended consequences, which states you cannot always predict the results of purposeful action. Life is frequently too complicated and unpredictable, the universe too random, to bend to the will of any individual or group of individuals." As a scholar, he lays the groundwork by citing Edward Tenner, Gordon S. Wood, and Robert K. Merton and then moves into 1960s lawmaking. "The unintended consequences of liberal social legislation in the 1960s have contributed to a souring of the public mood about the possibility of achieving change through politics." Likewise, he predicts that the laws recently passed by Newt Gingrich (as this book was going to press) will also prove problematical.
Dr. Gillon's first chapter is timely (Covid-19 infection is increasing as I type this review 3/28/2020) as it deals with the origins of federal welfare programs in the 1935. People who are complaining in 2020 forget that it was the job of dogooders, local government, and state government do deal with disasters as late as the great floods of the Mississippi Valley in the 1920s. Post Watergate campaign finance reform, closure of insane asylums, and the CR Act of 1965 are treated in their own chapters, as is the Immigration Act of 1965.
I took a star off my evaluation because of weaknesses in Dr. Gillon's discussion of the Act of 1965, in which he starts by failing to note that commerce and industry felt they had plenty of labor when the Immigration Act of 1924 was passed. We all knew of Manny Celler in 1965, but until Gillon here lays it out for readers, I did not know how hard JFK worked to influence Michael Feighan of Ohio when then reform was in the House. The analysis of the 'unintended consequences' that have arisen is thorough, but he includes all the beliefs embraced by professors. I was eighteen in 1965. had been worried about JFK leading us into VN to protect the interests of the Catholic rulers, and felt that the numbers immigrating should equal those emigrating from the USA. Employers should offer fair treatment and wages sufficient to attract their workforce or let the work go undone, the store close at 9PM and on Sundays/Holidays, etc.
However, on the Coast where my family has lived for generations and people (mostly) worked beside whoever came here willing to work, too many of the arrivals since 1965 have wanted to work only with 'their own' and embraced lousy employers who provide that type of workplace. While there are people of all descents living on the streets this afternoon, too many are veterans and Black folk who were first squeezed by the crowding in the job market and then forced out by rising shelter costs. People down on their luck who arrived in Los Angeles never used to sleep rough for more than a day or two, and now it has gone on for years. Sadly this is never mentioned on public radio, etc.
Extensive endnotes, index.
Considering US History in the 1960s, for example, Professor became interested in decent policies had unexpected results. These could be good as with the GI Bill of 1944 or as bad as the Community Mental Health Act of 1963.
"...(O)ne of the most immutable rules of nature, the law of unintended consequences, which states you cannot always predict the results of purposeful action. Life is frequently too complicated and unpredictable, the universe too random, to bend to the will of any individual or group of individuals." As a scholar, he lays the groundwork by citing Edward Tenner, Gordon S. Wood, and Robert K. Merton and then moves into 1960s lawmaking. "The unintended consequences of liberal social legislation in the 1960s have contributed to a souring of the public mood about the possibility of achieving change through politics." Likewise, he predicts that the laws recently passed by Newt Gingrich (as this book was going to press) will also prove problematical.
Dr. Gillon's first chapter is timely (Covid-19 infection is increasing as I type this review 3/28/2020) as it deals with the origins of federal welfare programs in the 1935. People who are complaining in 2020 forget that it was the job of dogooders, local government, and state government do deal with disasters as late as the great floods of the Mississippi Valley in the 1920s. Post Watergate campaign finance reform, closure of insane asylums, and the CR Act of 1965 are treated in their own chapters, as is the Immigration Act of 1965.
I took a star off my evaluation because of weaknesses in Dr. Gillon's discussion of the Act of 1965, in which he starts by failing to note that commerce and industry felt they had plenty of labor when the Immigration Act of 1924 was passed. We all knew of Manny Celler in 1965, but until Gillon here lays it out for readers, I did not know how hard JFK worked to influence Michael Feighan of Ohio when then reform was in the House. The analysis of the 'unintended consequences' that have arisen is thorough, but he includes all the beliefs embraced by professors. I was eighteen in 1965. had been worried about JFK leading us into VN to protect the interests of the Catholic rulers, and felt that the numbers immigrating should equal those emigrating from the USA. Employers should offer fair treatment and wages sufficient to attract their workforce or let the work go undone, the store close at 9PM and on Sundays/Holidays, etc.
However, on the Coast where my family has lived for generations and people (mostly) worked beside whoever came here willing to work, too many of the arrivals since 1965 have wanted to work only with 'their own' and embraced lousy employers who provide that type of workplace. While there are people of all descents living on the streets this afternoon, too many are veterans and Black folk who were first squeezed by the crowding in the job market and then forced out by rising shelter costs. People down on their luck who arrived in Los Angeles never used to sleep rough for more than a day or two, and now it has gone on for years. Sadly this is never mentioned on public radio, etc.
Extensive endnotes, index.
