Podcast appearances and mentions of daniel geary

We're looking at the history of American presidential debates as we explore some of the worst mistakes and iconic quips candidates have made and debate whether they can be the making or the breaking of a future president.Featuring Dr Daniel Rowe of the University of Oxford, Dr Sandra Scanlon of UCD, Dr Daniel Geary of Trinity College Dublin, and Dr Lewis Defrates of Maynooth University.

Happy St Patrick's Day! In this episode, we chart the history of Taoisigh visiting the White House, how the tradition started and evolved, and why Ireland is the only country that gets this special treatment in the United States. Joining Patrick's panel is Marion R. Casey, Clinical Professor, Director of Undergraduate Studies and historian at New York University. She is the author of ‘The Green Space: The Transformation of the Irish Image' and co-editor of ‘Making The Irish American: History and Heritage of Irish in the United States'; Dr Catherine Healy, Historian-in-Residence, EPIC Irish Emigration Museum; Ted Smyth, president of the Advisory Board of Glucksman Ireland House NYU, Chair of the Clinton Institute for American Studies in University College Dublin, and former Irish diplomat; Dr Daniel Geary, Mark Pigott Associate Professor in American History, Trinity College Dublin; and Cian T. McMahon, Associate Professor at the Department of History & Honors College at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

In this episode of Talking History, we'll be looking at the challenges facing American Liberalism from the 1960s to the 1990s through the prism of the political career and presidency of Bill Clinton, and we'll be debating whether it should be viewed as a success or a failure. Joining host Patrick Geoghegan for this debate is: • Nelson Lichtenstein, Research Professor in History at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and his book A Fabulous Failure: The Clinton Presidency and the Transformation of American Capitalism will be published in September 2023 • Dr Daniel Geary, Mark Pigott Associate Professor of U.S. History at Trinity • Prof Patricia Sullivan, William Arthur Fairey II Professor of History at the University of South Carolina • and Prof Mary Ellen Curtin, Associate Professor at the American University in Washington DC, and historian of modern African-American and women's social and political history.

Marking the 21st anniversary of 9/11, Dr Patrick Geoghegan is joined by historians J Samuel Walker, author of 'The Day That Shook America - A Concise History of 9/11', Dr Daniel Geary, Mark Pigott Associate Professor in American History at Trinity College Dublin, and Professor Edward Spiers, Emeritus Professor of Strategic Studies at the University of Leeds.

This week Patrick and a panel of military and political historians discuss the origins and legacy of the Mexican-American war. Joining Patrick on the panel are: Dr Daniel Geary, Associate Professor, Department of History, Trinity College Dublin, Dr Peter Guardino, author of 'The Dead March: A History of the Mexican-American War', Dr Donald S. Frazier, Professor of History at Mc Murry University, Texas, Dr Amy S. Greenberg, George Winfree Professor of American History, Penn State University, Dr John C. Pinheiro, author of 'Manifest Ambition: James K Polk and Civil Military Relations during the Mexican War' and Dr Timothy J. Henderson, author of 'A Glorious Defeat: Mexico and It's War with the United States'.

Our latest Short Take is provided by Camilla Schofield, Senior Lecturer in Modern History at UEA. This year, in conjunction with her fellow editors Daniel Geary and Jennifer Sutton, Camilla has produced Global White Nationalism: From Apartheid to Trump, an important anthology of writing covering different historical examples and geographical regions. Camilla talks to us about this substantive contribution to the really urgent discussions about whiteness, and the kind of political and scholarly intervention that it represents.Speaker: Camilla Schofield, Senior Lecturer in Modern History at University of East AngliaImage: Global White Nationalism: From Apartheid to Trump (Manchester University Press, 2020)Executive producer: Paul GilroyProducer and Editor: Kaissa KarhuRead the transcript for this podcast See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

An online lecture as part of the Out of the Ashes Lecture Series, with David M Anderson Professor of African History University of Warwick. In April 2011, Foreign Secretary William Hague informed the British Parliament that a collection of some 25,000 historical files, that had been illegally held by his department for over 50 years, would be speedily transferred to The National Archive, at Kew. This vast collection of historical papers related to Britain's imperial past, and is now known as the Hanslope Disclosure. These were records that Britain had secretly removed from each of 37 of its colonies at the point of decolonization: these files were deemed too important or too damaging to leave behind, or potentially too useful to destroy. This lecture tells the story of how this so-called ‘Migrated Archive' came into being, what happened to it over the years in which it was secretly retained, and how it came to be ‘discovered' in the midst of a human rights trial at London's Supreme Court on The Strand. Nearly a decade after that ‘discovery', controversy still swirls around the question of who owns this ‘Migrated Archive' and what should be done with it. Whose history is this, and where does such an archive belong? The answers to these questions reveal much about Britain's unease in dealing with the history of its past empire, and about the culture of secrecy that still infects British public institutions – even those that are supposed to be the guardians of our national heritage. About David M.Anderson David M. Anderson is Professor of African History, in the Global History & Culture Centre at the University of Warwick. He has published widely on the history and politics of eastern Africa, including Histories of the Hanged (2005), The Khat Controversy (2007), The Routledge Handbook of African Politics (2013, ed), and Politics and Violence in Eastern Africa: The Struggles of Emerging States (2015, ed). Three projects will come to publication in the coming year: Allies at the End of Empire (ed), From Resistance to Rebellion, and Africa's New Authoritarians. He is now working on a volume of essays on the Mau Mau counter-insurgency in 1950s Kenya, drawing upon colonial documents released since 2012, and (with Michael Bollig) an edited volume of essays on Conservation in Africa. Anderson is editor of the African Studies Series at Cambridge University Press, would founding editor of the Journal of Eastern African Studies, and regularly contributes to the print and broadcast media on African politics. Dr Daniel Geary, Mark Pigott Associate Professor in American History at Trinity College Dublin, will also give a brief response to the lecture. Dr Geary's research focuses on the intellectual, political, and cultural history of the twentieth-century United States, and also includes the development of ideas about race and ethnicity; the transnational history of civil rights movements and of white nationalism; and the relationship of politics to popular culture. About the Out of the Ashes Lecture Series This three-year lecture series explores the theme of cultural loss and recovery across the centuries, from the destruction of the Library of Alexandria in antiquity to contemporary acts of cultural loss and destruction. A panel of world-leading experts reflects on how societies deal with cultural trauma through reconstruction and commemoration, and on how the international community should respond to cultural loss. The series is global in scope, pan-historical and multi-disciplinary in approach, and features international scholars and practitioners of the highest calibre. Find out more - https://www.tcd.ie/trinitylongroomhub/whats-on/details/2018/out-of-the-ashes.php The Out of the Ashes lecture series is generously supported by Sean and Sarah Reynolds.

Police murders of African Americans are deeply rooted in American history and society and token solutions will do little to prevent them.

Trinity Long Room Hub Visiting Research fellow Professor Julian Bourg joins us from Boston College in association with Trinity's School of Histories & Humanities. The focus of his research visit is a project on the conceptual history of terrorism since the eighteenth century. Dr. Daniel Geary, Mark Pigott Associate Professor in American History, will sit down with Professor Bourg to discusses his work on terrorism in this 'in conversation' event. About Professor Julian Bourg's Research How and why did we come to think about terrorism the way we do? When and where did this concept originate and develop? My interest is in the history of the idea of terrorism since the word first dramatically appeared during the French Revolution of the 1790s. Since then, slowly over the nineteenth century and quickening during the twentieth, the notion of terrorism was shaped by the intersecting forces of revolution, empire, law, and war—by Russian radicals and British colonial officials, Eastern European jurists and Western military strategists. Only in the 1970s did these accumulating dynamics culminate in a fully developed concept: illegal, barbaric violence attacking humanity as a whole, tied to communism and religion, and allegedly rising mainly from former European colonies. This story reveals a basic paradox of the modern democratic era: although violence is often justified “in the name of the people,” the belief that human beings should not be victimized by political violence continues to spread and take hold.

Donald Trump is the second American president to come from the world of celebrity and entertainment, with Ronald Reagan being the first. In this podcast, Dr. Melissa Milewski interviews Daniel Geary, an associate professor at Trinity College Dublin, to discuss how Reagan and Trump's different celebrity backgrounds influenced their elections and their actions as presidents. Geary argues that just as Reagan's career in Hollywood films impacted his presidency, Trump's previous experiences with both tabloid journalism and reality television have had significant effects on his presidency.

For this episode of The Future Is A Mixtape, Jesse & Matt have a discussion with Frantz Pierre--a community activist and organizer who's leading a revolutionary project to educate Los Angeles residents about the benefits of Universal Basic Income via a local, first-of-its-kind, pilot program. But how might Frantz Pierre and other fellow comrades create this program on a citywide scale when the mythology and romance of the “work ethic” and the sin of “laziness” are so indoctrinated in our communities and belief systems? How will we demand “wages” if such an enslaved chunk of our lives--going to jobs we hate--has been entirely automated, and work for the 99% no longer exists? And if and when the argument is truly won, where will the money come from? This podcast will aim to answer those questions. It will also detail why this utopian notion should be viewed as the “New Common Sense” in our global age of shafted, precarious employment, and why UBI is an essential spring-step toward human liberation. Mentioned In This Episode: Frantz Pierre's Twitter Account Information About Pierre's Grassroots Basic Income Project for Los Angeles: The Official Page for The Basic Income Project - Los AngelesThe Facebook Page for The Basic Income Project - Los Angeles To Find Basic Income LA on Twitter The Basic Income Project - Los Angeles Indiegogo Campaign The Millennials Are Killing Everything! Here Is a List of Links and Articles on the Subject of Their Zombie-Schemes to Dismember Everything in Their Blind Rampage-Path: The Millennials' Morbid Obsession with Avocado-Toast Instead of Saving for Their Own Homes, Millennial Couples Aren't Buying Diamonds, They're Killing Buffalo Wild Wings and Applebee's, the Napkins Industry, Breastaurants, and More. Do 80% of Small Businesses Really Fail Within the First 18 Months? Fugitive Pieces: The only website on the internet that mentions Jesse's first business: “Soapbox” in Bellingham, Washington: An Anarchist InfoShop (Started in 2005); Matt unearthed an old photo of the shop. Why Community Land Trusts (CLTs) Are Vital to Making Universal Basic Income (UBI) & Guaranteed Housing Work for the Long Term Fast Company: “Everyone in the World Hates Their Jobs--But Americans Hate Theirs the Most” David Graebers' Legendary Essay “On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs” Originally Published in Strike Magazine, but Reprinted as “Why Capitalism Creates Pointless Jobs” in Evoncomics Getting Two Workers for the Price of One: Domestic Workers (Often Women) Reproduce the Future Source of Labor Without Financial Reward; For Further Analyses, Here Are Some Fundamental Marxist Views on Domestic Work A Term Rarely Heard (or Felt) by Millennials: “Golden Handcuffs” The Los Angeles Magazine: “Mayor Garcetti Has His First Opponent, Apparently” (Discusses Frantz Pierre's Run for Mayor and His Idea for Dealing with the Drought) Here is Within Reason's YouTube Interview with LA Mayoral Candidate, Frantz Pierre: Part 1 & Part 2. (In the Race for LA's Mayor: 24 People Registered; 11 Made the Ballot with Pierre Coming in Eighth Place in Vote Tally.) Strange Currencies: The LA Chapter of The League of Women Voters Didn't Hold a Debate in 2017; And Corporate-Owned Media (Like the “Esteemed” LA Times) Didn't Bother to Make Visible the Opposition--Relegating Only a Minor Discussion of the Two Top Candidates, but No One Else: Duly Cited Here. Why Basic Income & Housing First Models for the Homeless Are Best When Put Together in the Mixing Pot. Case in Point: the city of Medicine Hat in Alberta, Canada; It's Homeless Population Has Stayed at Zero for Two Years Running. J.E. King & John Marangos: “Two Arguments for Basic Income: Thomas Paine (1737-1809) and Thomas Spence (1750-1814)” The Biography of Abu Bakr & His Visionary Idea for What We Know Call Universal Basic Income: “The first Muslim caliph, Abu Bakr, introduced a guaranteed minimum standard of income, granting each man, woman, and child ten dirhams annually; this was later increased to twenty dirhams.” Additionally, a wider purview of Bakr's influence in Pakistan and other Muslim nations can be found in Grace Clark's book. The Alaska Permanent Fund: America's Quiet Basic Income Tradition . . . When It Started 1982, Every Alaskan Citizen Got About $1000 a Year. The Modern World's First Experiment with Universal Basic Income Happened in Manitoba, Canada from 1974-79: A History of “Mincome” and Its Results. Scholar and Shaper on the Basic Income Debate, Evelyn L. Forget, Provided the First Breakthrough Study on the Positive Health Effects That Came as a Result of Canada's Mincome Experiment: “The Town With No Poverty.” During Nixon's Administration, When Daniel Patrick Moynihan Served as the Assistant Secretary for the Department of Labor, He Walked Away from America's Potential First Expansion with Basic Income (Called Family Assistance Aid) because of the Professor's Concern with Early Studies Showing Higher Divorce Rates and the Program's Potentially Adverse Effects on Children and the Nuclear Family. Daniel Geary in The Atlantic: “The Moynihan Report: An Annotated Edition” A History of Basic Income Satiric Film-Shorts from CollegeHumor: “How to Tell If You're a Basic Bitch” & “How to Tell If You're a Basic Bro” “Fair Enough” as a Uniquely Irish Phrase The Importance of Storytelling and Testimony for The Basic Income Project Here's Why Frantz and Other Comrades Are Doing an Education-Based Basic Income Campaign . . . A Promotional Trailer for The Basic Income Project - Los Angeles Scott Santen's Essay, “How to Reform Welfare and Taxes to Provide Every American Citizen with a Basic Income” The Guardian: “Stephen Hawking Blames Tory Politicians for Damaging NHS” Learning Why Deflation Benefits the 1%, While Inflation Is Great for the 99% in Novara Radio's Interview: “The Production of Money: In Conversation with Ann Pettifor.”BIEN (Basic Income Earth Network): “Will Basic Income Cause Inflation?” The New York Times: “Guaranteed Income for All? Switzerland's Voters Say No Thanks” (In Article: “About 77 percent of voters rejected a plan to give a basic monthly income of 2,500 Swiss francs, or about $2,560, to each adult, and 625 francs for each child under 18, regardless of employment status, to fight poverty and social inequality and guarantee a ‘dignified' life to everyone.”) Rutger Bregman's TEDTalk: “Poverty Isn't a Lack of Character; It's a Lack of Cash” The United States' Bureau of Labor and Statistics: Union Membership Rates in Private (6%) Versus Public (34%) Workplaces Spain's Largest & Most Legendary Worker Co-Op: Mondragon Corporation Business Insider: “8 High-Profile Entrepreneurs Who Have Endorsed Universal Basic Income” The Los Angeles Times: “Full Employment: Dangers in Good Times” The Los Angeles Times: “California Faces a Looming Teacher Shortage, and the Problem Is Getting Worse” National Public Radio (NPR): “Where Have All the Teachers Gone?” The Los Angeles Times: “If California's a 'Bad State for Business,' Why Is It Leading the Nation in Job and GDP growth?” Global Voices: “Are Employee Transportation Allowances the Cause of Japan's Commuter Hell?” The New Republic: “I'm Insanely Jealous of Sweden's Work-Family Policies. You Should Be, Too.” Heather Long in The Guardian (U.S. Edition): “Americans Love to Ask People ‘What Do You Do' It's a Habit We Should Break” Why Is It a Chinese Custom to Ask How Much You Make? ABCNews: “Research: Older adults are happiest Americans” The Guardian: “Does Early Retirement Mean an Early Death?” The Telegraph: “Find a Hobby and Get Happy, Danish Style”Martin Luther King's Speech Advocating for Guaranteed Income at Stanford University (1967) To Email with Queries About Frantz's Project or Get Involved In This Movement: BasicIncomeLA@gmail.comTwo Podcasts and Their Respective Episodes That Jesse & Matt Referenced as Sources Throughout Our Discussion with Frantz: The UPSTREAM Podcast: Universal Basic Income - “Part One: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?” The FREAKONOMICS Podcast: “Is the World Ready for a Guaranteed Basic Income? Other Links Exploring UBI (But Not Mentioned in the Podcast): Bootstraps: An In-Development Documentary in Support of Universal Basic Income From The Website's Concept Description: “Twenty Americans from all walks of life have just won a lottery: a guaranteed check every week that's big enough to cover basic living expenses. What will they do with this opportunity?” Scott Santens in Medium: “The BIG Library: Books About Basic Income” The Huffington Post: “A Universal Basic Income is the Future”  The Boston Review: “No Racial Justice Without Basic Income”    Feel Free to Contact Jesse & Matt on the Following Spaces & Places: Email Us: thefutureisamixtape@gmail.com Find Us Via Our Website: The Future Is A Mixtape Or Lollygagging on Social Networks: Facebook Twitter Instagram

Season 1 Episode 7 of Toby with... An introspective look at the Psychology Society with its' President, Daniel Geary and how he forged the legacy of the "Symposium". rdcpsycsociety14@gmail.com | For more details: www.facebook.com/Toby4WARD

Daniel Geary is the Mark Pigott Associate Professor in U.S. History at Trinity College Dublin. His book Beyond Civil Rights: The Moynihan Report and Its Legacy (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) is a detail and illuminating analysis of the reception of Patrick Moynihan’s 1965 report The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Geary argues that the report was neither a conservative or a liberal document but rather a conflicted one whose internal contradictions reflected the breakup of the liberal consensus and its legacy. The ambiguities of the report allowed multiple interpretations, from both the left and the right, and marked the emergence of neoconservatism. Conservatives used the report to rally against the liberal welfare state and promote African Americans self-help. Liberals saw in the document the need to go beyond legal equality to aggressive economic intervention through training programs, job creation and the family wage. The extensive and long debate over the report involved the issues of family structure, the source of “social pathology” and the “culture of poverty.” African American civil rights leader split over the report. The Black Power representatives attacked its white sociological perspective that failed to take into account how black people saw the situation. Black feminists protested the portrayal of black women as domineering matriarchs and the male breadwinner model. By the time of the Nixon administration, fatigue over the debates had Moynihan arguing for “benign neglect” rather than national action, believing in an unfolding of progress evident in the black middle-classes. After fifty years, the reverberation from the Moynihan report continues as Americans wrestle with the relationship between race and economic inequality and the unfinished business of social equality that moves beyond civil rights. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Daniel Geary is the Mark Pigott Associate Professor in U.S. History at Trinity College Dublin. His book Beyond Civil Rights: The Moynihan Report and Its Legacy (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) is a detail and illuminating analysis of the reception of Patrick Moynihan’s 1965 report The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Geary argues that the report was neither a conservative or a liberal document but rather a conflicted one whose internal contradictions reflected the breakup of the liberal consensus and its legacy. The ambiguities of the report allowed multiple interpretations, from both the left and the right, and marked the emergence of neoconservatism. Conservatives used the report to rally against the liberal welfare state and promote African Americans self-help. Liberals saw in the document the need to go beyond legal equality to aggressive economic intervention through training programs, job creation and the family wage. The extensive and long debate over the report involved the issues of family structure, the source of “social pathology” and the “culture of poverty.” African American civil rights leader split over the report. The Black Power representatives attacked its white sociological perspective that failed to take into account how black people saw the situation. Black feminists protested the portrayal of black women as domineering matriarchs and the male breadwinner model. By the time of the Nixon administration, fatigue over the debates had Moynihan arguing for “benign neglect” rather than national action, believing in an unfolding of progress evident in the black middle-classes. After fifty years, the reverberation from the Moynihan report continues as Americans wrestle with the relationship between race and economic inequality and the unfinished business of social equality that moves beyond civil rights. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Daniel Geary is the Mark Pigott Associate Professor in U.S. History at Trinity College Dublin. His book Beyond Civil Rights: The Moynihan Report and Its Legacy (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) is a detail and illuminating analysis of the reception of Patrick Moynihan's 1965 report The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Geary argues that the report was neither a conservative or a liberal document but rather a conflicted one whose internal contradictions reflected the breakup of the liberal consensus and its legacy. The ambiguities of the report allowed multiple interpretations, from both the left and the right, and marked the emergence of neoconservatism. Conservatives used the report to rally against the liberal welfare state and promote African Americans self-help. Liberals saw in the document the need to go beyond legal equality to aggressive economic intervention through training programs, job creation and the family wage. The extensive and long debate over the report involved the issues of family structure, the source of “social pathology” and the “culture of poverty.” African American civil rights leader split over the report. The Black Power representatives attacked its white sociological perspective that failed to take into account how black people saw the situation. Black feminists protested the portrayal of black women as domineering matriarchs and the male breadwinner model. By the time of the Nixon administration, fatigue over the debates had Moynihan arguing for “benign neglect” rather than national action, believing in an unfolding of progress evident in the black middle-classes. After fifty years, the reverberation from the Moynihan report continues as Americans wrestle with the relationship between race and economic inequality and the unfinished business of social equality that moves beyond civil rights. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies

Daniel Geary is the Mark Pigott Associate Professor in U.S. History at Trinity College Dublin. His book Beyond Civil Rights: The Moynihan Report and Its Legacy (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) is a detail and illuminating analysis of the reception of Patrick Moynihan’s 1965 report The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Geary argues that the report was neither a conservative or a liberal document but rather a conflicted one whose internal contradictions reflected the breakup of the liberal consensus and its legacy. The ambiguities of the report allowed multiple interpretations, from both the left and the right, and marked the emergence of neoconservatism. Conservatives used the report to rally against the liberal welfare state and promote African Americans self-help. Liberals saw in the document the need to go beyond legal equality to aggressive economic intervention through training programs, job creation and the family wage. The extensive and long debate over the report involved the issues of family structure, the source of “social pathology” and the “culture of poverty.” African American civil rights leader split over the report. The Black Power representatives attacked its white sociological perspective that failed to take into account how black people saw the situation. Black feminists protested the portrayal of black women as domineering matriarchs and the male breadwinner model. By the time of the Nixon administration, fatigue over the debates had Moynihan arguing for “benign neglect” rather than national action, believing in an unfolding of progress evident in the black middle-classes. After fifty years, the reverberation from the Moynihan report continues as Americans wrestle with the relationship between race and economic inequality and the unfinished business of social equality that moves beyond civil rights. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Daniel Geary is the Mark Pigott Associate Professor in U.S. History at Trinity College Dublin. His book Beyond Civil Rights: The Moynihan Report and Its Legacy (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) is a detail and illuminating analysis of the reception of Patrick Moynihan’s 1965 report The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Geary argues that the report was neither a conservative or a liberal document but rather a conflicted one whose internal contradictions reflected the breakup of the liberal consensus and its legacy. The ambiguities of the report allowed multiple interpretations, from both the left and the right, and marked the emergence of neoconservatism. Conservatives used the report to rally against the liberal welfare state and promote African Americans self-help. Liberals saw in the document the need to go beyond legal equality to aggressive economic intervention through training programs, job creation and the family wage. The extensive and long debate over the report involved the issues of family structure, the source of “social pathology” and the “culture of poverty.” African American civil rights leader split over the report. The Black Power representatives attacked its white sociological perspective that failed to take into account how black people saw the situation. Black feminists protested the portrayal of black women as domineering matriarchs and the male breadwinner model. By the time of the Nixon administration, fatigue over the debates had Moynihan arguing for “benign neglect” rather than national action, believing in an unfolding of progress evident in the black middle-classes. After fifty years, the reverberation from the Moynihan report continues as Americans wrestle with the relationship between race and economic inequality and the unfinished business of social equality that moves beyond civil rights. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Daniel Geary is the Mark Pigott Associate Professor in U.S. History at Trinity College Dublin. His book Beyond Civil Rights: The Moynihan Report and Its Legacy (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) is a detail and illuminating analysis of the reception of Patrick Moynihan’s 1965 report The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Geary argues that the report was neither a conservative or a liberal document but rather a conflicted one whose internal contradictions reflected the breakup of the liberal consensus and its legacy. The ambiguities of the report allowed multiple interpretations, from both the left and the right, and marked the emergence of neoconservatism. Conservatives used the report to rally against the liberal welfare state and promote African Americans self-help. Liberals saw in the document the need to go beyond legal equality to aggressive economic intervention through training programs, job creation and the family wage. The extensive and long debate over the report involved the issues of family structure, the source of “social pathology” and the “culture of poverty.” African American civil rights leader split over the report. The Black Power representatives attacked its white sociological perspective that failed to take into account how black people saw the situation. Black feminists protested the portrayal of black women as domineering matriarchs and the male breadwinner model. By the time of the Nixon administration, fatigue over the debates had Moynihan arguing for “benign neglect” rather than national action, believing in an unfolding of progress evident in the black middle-classes. After fifty years, the reverberation from the Moynihan report continues as Americans wrestle with the relationship between race and economic inequality and the unfinished business of social equality that moves beyond civil rights. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices