Is there any gain in dividing American political development into phases? If so, how should lines be drawn? Does the resulting framework illuminate political conflicts in the 1930s and 1940s?

American political development has occurred in a series of distinct political orders. The Democratic order defined one major period, marked by a greatly increased role for the federal government in economic regulation and social provision, and by a substantial growth of presidential power. There was a wide expansion of opportunities for political and social action among groups who were politically marginal or excluded from the preceding regimes, from labor in the 1930s to the civil rights movement three decades later.

The Democratic order was liberal in its commitments to individual rights and to representative political institutions. But its liberalism, full of progressive and democratic themes, differed considerably from the main discourses of the preceding political order. “Progressive” meant modernizing reforms, with national coordination of programmatic and administrative efforts. “Democratic” meant broadening the range of groups and individuals actively engaged with politics, and extending basic forms of social and economic security. Combining progressive and democratic themes within a liberal framework was powerful and dynamic.

The preceding claims about the Democratic order rely on concepts of political order and period.