Opportunity Liberal Individualism

Liberal individualism generally functioned as the essential model focusing on the American welfare by separating the difference between entitlement and opportunity liberalism. Opportunity liberalism give citizens the opportunity to work in order to earn an income based on the opportunities provided. However, entitlement liberalism is where citizens believe that they are owed an income just because they are part of the society. This method can only be true as long as everyone is provided the same equal rights. Davies’ “From Opportunity to Entitlement” accounts for the shift from opportunity liberalism to entitlement liberalism during President Johnson’s war on poverty. Davies gives careful consideration to the political battles of the 1960’s,

Chaotic confusion and the protests posed to the Johnson office by the black community would eventually cause President Johnson to succumb a big deal of support not only for his government, but precisely for his Great Society programs. The problematic individualistic advance of the Great Society between blacks was that it suggested that blacks indeed had an equal opportunity, the logical for a colorblind War on Poverty was tremendously enervated by the shifting character of the black battle for equal opportunity (Davies, p. 56). The problematic colorblind methodology was that opportunity for blacks was essentially parallel. Intrinsic bias and de-facto separation in urban places led to discouraged and keep urban black ghettos below poverty line. Since there was a very little chance of equal stability for blacks due to these wrongful social establishments, the idea of equal opportunity through individualistic development was discouraging. As Davies notes, “Johnson told the graduating class at Howard University that black poverty was after all unique” (Davies, p. 62). This confession statement by Johnson confirmed the misfortunes of the idea that equal opportunity being truthfully equal. Enormous level of race riots also happened throughout this period, mostly in New York on July, 1964, and most memorably in the Watts Riot in August of 1965. Davies indicates these growing instances of urban conflict enfeebled the Johnson office. According to Davies, “the cycle of violence combined with other problems to destroy public enthusiasm for the Great Society” (Davies, p80). The challenge arose from a deficit of a liberal agreement, as Democrats would openly pass judgment on and separate from Johnson to form the philosophy of the New