Linda Gordon, "Seven Social Movements That Changed America" (LIveright, 2025)

Recently, historians have shown that the modern conservative movement is older and more complex than has often been assumed by either liberals or historians. Michelle Nickerson‘s book, Mothers of Conservatism: Women and the Postwar Right (Princeton University Press, 2012) expands that literature even further, demonstrating not only the longer roots of conservative interest in family issues, such as education, but also the important role women played in shaping the early movement. Mothers of Conservatism does this by examining the role of women in the rise of grassroots conservatism during the 1950s. Nickerson explains how women in Southern California became politicized during the height of the Cold War, coming to see communist threats in numerous, mostly local, battles. These women, who were primarily homemakers, argued that they had a special political role as mothers and wives, translating their domestic identities into political activism. Nickerson traces their activism in battles over education and mental health issues among others. She further explains the ideology behind their activism and demonstrates how important these women were to shaping the coming conservative movement and in the long-term, the Republican Party. Mothers of Conservatism draws on rich archival material as well as on oral history interviews conducted by the author. With these archival sources and interviews, Nickerson brings the activists’ stories, politics, and humanity to life. In this interview, we discuss the ideology, activism, and legacy of the women as well as Nickerson’s experience interviewing her sources. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

18 Maalis 201554min

Doug McAdam and Karina Kloos are the authors of Deeply Divided: Racial Politics and Social Movements in Postwar America (Oxford University Press, 2014). McAdam is The Ray Lyman Wilbur Professor of Sociology at Stanford University and the former Director of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. Kloos is a scholar of political sociology and social movements at Stanford University, where she is a PhD candidate. What has gotten us to this point of high political polarization and high income inequality? McAdam and Kloos offer a novel answer to what divides us as a country that focuses on the role social movements have in pulling parties to the extremes or pushing parties to the middle. They argue that the post-World War II period was unusual for its low levels of social movement activities and the resulting political centrism of the 1950s. The Civil Rights movement that followed – and the related backlash politics of the Southern Democrats – pushed the parties away from the center and toward regional realignment. Along the way, activists re-wrote party voting procedures that reinforced the power of vocal minorities within each party, thereby entrenching political polarization for the decades to come. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

15 Maalis 201525min

This year we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, a legal revolution with far-reaching cultural, political, and economic import. But as J. Douglas Smith argues in On Democracy’s Doorstep: The Inside Story of How the Supreme Court Brought “One Person, One Vote” to the United States (Hill and Wang, 2014),the early 1960s witnessed a comparable sea change in voting law that deserves far more attention. Indeed, when journalists asked Earl Warren what he regarded as the Supreme Court’s most important accomplishment under his tenure, the Chief Justice — who oversaw a series of landmark cases, from Brown to Miranda –– did not hesitate to answer: Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims. Few Americans today could identify and explain what these rulings did. But as Smith explains, they represented a dramatic break with a long-reigning electoral system that now feels almost unimaginable. America is exceptional among modern democracies for elevating the idea of unequal representation to a theory of”checks and balances;” the Senate being the most obvious example (California, with more people than the twenty-one least-populous states combined, has as tiny a fraction of the power in Congress). Yet the situation was far worse before the Court’s forgotten revolution, with state legislatures across the country effectively disfranchising voters on a mass scale. Los Angeles County, with more than 6 million residents in 1960, had just one state senator. Three nearby counties, with less than 15,000 voters, each had the same. Many have argued that these facts have been inconsequential to U.S. political history, a very counterintuitive notion if so. But the early twentieth century politicians who relied on the inflation of rural and small-town districts — some of whom numbered among the most powerful arbiters of legislation and debate in Washington — certainly did not share this view. In reaction to the Court’s decisions, Everett Dirksen, the Republican Minority Leader in the legendary 89th Congress, hired the consulting firm Whitaker and Baxter, widely thought to have pioneered modern campaigning, to repeal or roll back the rulings. Dozens of states lined up, with enormous funding from the nation’s biggest corporations. The group even considered a Constitutional Convention, what would have been the first since 1789. Those efforts failed. But in the wake of this half-realized democratization, legislatures underwent dramatic political change. Notably, they also turned to gerrymandering and increasing reliance on the filibuster. Dubbed by the Washington Post one of the notable works of the year, Smith’s book is well worth your read. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

20 Helmi 20151h 8min

Many Americans know about the military side of the Civil War, and the private, official diplomacy of the Civil War is also well documented. The Cause of All Nations: An International History of the American Civil War (Basic Books, 2015), though, focuses on public diplomacy — on the battle for public opinion in Europe (primarily) waged by Union and Confederate officials, private citizens, and their European supporters. White northerners were slower to realize what American blacks and European republicans recognized instinctively — that what was at stake in the American Civil War was not the political and territorial integrity of the United States, but the causes of progress and self-government. In The Cause of All Nations, Don H. Doyle has done the impossible — found a hitherto unappreciated feature of the American Civil War that forces us to reevaluate how we understand it. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

16 Helmi 20151h 5min

Deana A. Rohlinger has just written Abortion Politics, Mass Media, and Social Movements in America (Cambridge University Press, 2015). Rohlinger is associate professor of sociology at Florida State University. In the last several weeks, the podcast has featured a variety of political scientists who study interest groups and social movements. This week, Deana Rohlinger brings her perspective as a sociologist to the subject. She examines the way four policy organizations with an interest in abortion policy (National Right to Life Committee, National Organization of Women, Planned Parenthood Federation, and Concerned Women for America) interact with the media. Rohlinger finds quite different strategies for how to court the media, but also in how each organization responds to crises. She uses interviews with organizational leaders to deepen what we know about how social movements and interest groups employ a media strategy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

16 Helmi 201517min

Thomas F. Schaller is the author of The Stronghold: How Republicans Captured Congress but Surrendered the White House (Yale University Press, 2015). Schaller is professor of political science at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. With a new Congress up and running, Republican control of Capitol Hill is back. But has the Republican Party sacrificed presidential aspirations as it pursues a strategy to control Congress? That’s the subject and thesis of Schaller’s new book. He traces the political history of the GOP from 1989 through the 2000s, as the party develops a new political strategy in Washington. Schaller’s original interviews with key Republican leaders shapes his narrative of retrenchment over the last 25 years, highlighting the two Bush presidencies, the Contract with America, and the emergence of a new cadre of conservative Republican leaders. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

29 Tammi 201522min

Frank R. Baumgartner and Bryan D. Jones are the authors of The Politics of Information: Problem Definition and the Course of Public Policy in America (University of Chicago Press, 2014). Baumgartner is the Richard J. Richardson Distinguished Professor of Political Science at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill and Jones is the J. J. “Jake” Pickle Regents Chair in Congressional Studies and Professor of Government at the University of Texas at Austin. The Politics of Information picks up where the authors’ last book, The Politics of Attention, leaves off. They explore how information enters into the policy process and how that has evolved over time, focusing on what they call the “paradox of search”. They make extensive use of the publicly available data that they have collected over the last decade called the Policy Agendas Project. They argue that: “Information determines priorities, and priorities determine action” (p. 40). They discover is that the policy process is replete with information – not all high quality – and that different policy problems integrate information in different ways. They also find that the government has “broadened” – addressing an ever growing array of issues – rather than just “thickening” – through growth in the overall size of government. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

19 Tammi 201521min

Michael Heaney and Fabio Rojas are the authors of Party in the Street: The Antiwar Movement and the Democratic Party after 9/11 (Cambridge University Press 2015). Heaney is assistant professor organizational studies and political science at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and Rojas is associate professor of sociology at Indiana University, Bloomington. Heaney and Rojas take on the interdisciplinary challenge at the heart of studies of political parties and social movements, two related subjects that political scientists and sociologists have tended to examine separately from one another. What results is a needed effort to synthesize the two social science traditions and advance a common interest in studying how people come together to influence policy outcomes. The particular focus of this work is on how the antiwar movement that grew in the mid-2000s interacted with the Democratic Party. They ponder a paradox of activism that just as activists are most successful – in this case supporting a new Democrat controlled House and Senate in 2006 – the energy and dynamism of the movement often fades away. Heaney and Rojas look to the relationship between antiwar activists and the Democratic Party for answers. They find that in a highly polarized partisan environment, party affiliations come first and social movement affiliations second, thereby slowing the momentum movements generate in their ascendency. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

7 Tammi 201522min