The New Deal has never not been controversial, from proposal to present day. I imagine its effects will be argued about until the heat death of the universe.
The parent post should not be downvoted. It's perfectly possible that the effect of the New Deal is controversial (or even dubious) amongst historians and that most schools teach it as a resounding success. In that case, it's interesting to hear both what historians think and what people are actually taught.
Nearly all histories of the Great Depression are agenda driven, rather than an honest attempt at fact finding.
Most paint it as a failure of capitalism, the rest as a direct result of government manipulation of the banking system, trade disruption caused by Smoot-Hawley, and huge tax increases.
Virtually all credible historians agree that the New Deal itself was largely ineffective in solving the Great Depression. It started in 1933 with unemployment rate of 25%. Half a decade and many millions of dollars later, unemployment was 19%. [1] The Great Depression ended only when Europe went to war in 1939 and financed the American economy.
Depending on who you ask, the New Deal was either ineffective because it was fundamentally flawed, or ineffective because it wasn't big enough and didn't raise enough debt. [2]
By your own source, a majority (51%) of "economic historians" working in economics departments and a strong majority (74%) of "economic historians" working in history departments disagree outright with the statement: "Taken as a whole, government policies of the New Deal served to lengthen and deepen the Great Depression."
It seems unlikely that some huge portion (say, > 90%) of those historians further believe that New Deal policies had no or little positive effect on the Great Depression. Are the "credible historians" just the ones who happen to agree with you on this topic?
I've never read any modern historian to say that the New Deal effectively fixed the Great Depression.
So yes, I believe that most of those 51% and 74% believe the effect was nonexistant or small. Typically, something like "if FDR had spent as much on the New Deal as he did during the War, it would have ended the Depression". [1] (I.e., it was too little, as in my previous comment.)
I welcome any references to historians claiming the New Deal largely fixed the Great Depression. (Or really, any option from a historian more positive than the quoted article.)
Or...you know, just silently downvote this comment :)
> It started in 1933 with unemployment rate of 25%. Half a decade and many millions of dollars later, unemployment was 19%.
Absolute numbers are important, but the rate of change more so. Were unemployment raising to 25% or already going down? It's the difference between those 19% being a meager improvement and staving off absolute disaster.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#Historiography_and_ev...