British Society During 1951-1975

After World War II the next threat was the Soviet Union and the growing amount of communism. The fear of communism breed the conformist 1950’s, which created suburbs, consumerism, “organization men”, domesticated women, car culture, and explicit gender rules (I&J, 43-58). Communism engulfed everyone so much that people were afraid to be different. The culture of the 1950’s was not only seen in their everyday lives but shown through advertisements.

Second, the development of new public transit systems, was important in shaping the design of our cities and the growth of our cities by enabling people to move further away from the inner city. Early on, large cities didn’t really have public transportation. Their main source of transportation were horse drawn wagons and walking. In conclusion, most people lived near on in the downtown area, where most of the working establishments were located. Because of this, it made big cites crowed and congested. With the breakthrough of the “el”, electric streetcars, and subways, around 1867, cities began expand more. Those who were fortunate enough to move out of the dirty cities and into better neighborhoods surrounded outside the city, did so. The new transit systems in most cities allowed people to escape the chaos of urban life and provided potential for growth of our cities.

As World War Two came to a close, a new American culture was developing all across the United States. Families were moving away from crowded cities into spacious suburban towns to help create a better life for them during and after the baby boom of the post-war era. Teenagers were starting to become independent by listing to their own music and not wearing the same style of clothing as their parents. Aside from the progress of society that was made during this time period, many people still did not discuss controversial issues such as divorce and sexual relations between young people. While many historians regard the 1950s as a time of true conservatism at its finest, it could really be considered a time of true progression in the

Second, the development of new public transit systems, was important in shaping the design of our cities and the growth of our cities by enabling people to move further away from the inner city. Early on, large cities had very little and inadequate transportation. Their main source of transportation were horse drawn wagons and walking. As a result, most people lived or took housing near downtown, which was where most of the working establishments were located. This made the big cities very congested. However with the breakthrough of the “el”, electric streetcars, and subways, around 1867, cities began to open up more. Those who were fortunate enough to move out of the slums and into better surrounding neighborhoods, did so. The more affluent of the white-collar classes moved into the suburban areas. In contrast, many of the very wealthy continued to live in city mansions. The new transit systems in most cities allowed people to escape the chaos of urban life and provided potential for growth of our cities.

The post WWII era lives up to its reputation of conformity through its cultural, social and political aspects. Communism and McCarthyism became a major

During the 1950’ many public and social booms happened. For instance the Baby Boom was huge in the 1950’s. In 1957 it was estimated that 1 baby was born every 7 seconds. (Silverman 1) Also suburban living was expanding and becoming very common. Starting in

Coontz analyses both the weakness and strengths of the period and takes a ‘sarcastic’ approach. She is able to indicate the ideal time for the Americans pointing positive outlooks such as education, birthrate, economic expansion, jobs, family oriented culture and social environment. Her weakness about the myth of the 1950s includes teen pregnancies, poverty, marital problems, discrimination, racial and gender inequalities. She attacks the political system who continues states the goods of the 1950s but the politicians have not created and advanced the ideals and optimism of the 1950s. She categorically attacks the perceptions of people saying the 1950s was good even though when compared to the freedoms and engagements of these days, the 1950s’ thinkers are misplaced. The following quote summarizes her perspective, “This confidence that almost everyone could look forward to a better future stands in sharp contrast to how most contemporary Americans feel, and it explains why a period which many people were much worse off than today sometimes still looks like a better period for families than our own” (p. 40). Based on the historical and available information, Coontz argument may suffice because currently, nobody thinks about the future since the economic and social challenges are immense. The optimism is absent while challenges of discrimination, prejudice are fading. Hence, the article cleverly covers the

Back in 1950, most people lived in an urban city. Now, more than half of the United States population lives in the suburbs. (Doc. 2) People aren’t as friendly and outgoing as they were back then. In the 1950’s, everyone was friends with everyone. We don’t have as many neighborhood shops today. They can’t compete with the big chain stores and restaurants. (Doc. 3)

With the overwhelming amount of Levittown houses, the obsession to obtain the perfect American “ideal family” as seen on TV and the unspoken agreement to fear any and all foreign ideas and values, the 1950s were revealed to be a decade of prosperity, conformity and consensus. Just ten years later the atmosphere in America was shockingly different; the 1960s were a decade of turbulence, protest and disillusionment due to the ongoing struggle for civil rights, arising feminism, and the Vietnam War.

America in the 1950s had many social norms that everyone was expected to follow. If

This statement is asking whether all forms of conservatism’s values and actions in the past are because they wish to reflect the interests of those in society who are better off, sacrificing the interests of the less well off in doing so. The current debate is very unclear as opinion on this does, and always has varied greatly. Generally, left-wing labour supporters believe this statement is true whereas the rest of society do not agree. Conservatives have strenuously denied this claim over the years. This essay will argue that Conservatism does in fact merely reflect the interests of the privileged and prosperous, despite this claim being

The seventies is often seen as a lost decade, merged between the optimistic sixties and the opportunistic eighties. Bruce J. Schulman argues, in his book titled, “The Seventies: The Great Shift in American Culture”, that this period ignores changes brought by the 1970s. This period brought changes in the economy, shifts in culture, politics, race, family and religious values. The United States faced many transformations that helped shape our country to this day. Schulman begins to explain his thesis, “The Seventies transformed American economic and cultural life as much as, if not more than, the revolutions in manners and morals of the 1920s and the 1960s.” The information that I will present will summarize the changes that affected the United

As the economy began to boom, a change in the way society lived had also changed. Instead of living in large cities, citizens began moving outward in the urban areas further away. Although most of the urbanization movement can be contributed to the raise in population, there were also many other changes that were occurring. Stagecoaches began having more frequent routes to all of the major cities and also most of the smaller outlying cities.

1979 is said to be a point in history in which one era ended and another was born. Globally, 1979 is said to be a turning point with Deng Xiaoping liberalising the Chinese economy, Ayatollah Khomeini establishing an Islamic Republic and the Afghanistan mujahedeen revolting against Soviet Rule with support from America. However, Britain also had its own turning point with Margaret Thatcher becoming the first female prime minister and with it came the dismantling of Britain’s nationalised industries, trade unions and a huge focus on self-sufficiency and free enterprise. Due to Thatcher’s rule, we the emergence of the movement of the left, the LGBT+ movement, and the feminist movement. Also,

In applying Hofstede’s value orientations, 1950’s England was an entirely different cultural experience than can be found in contemporary society today. Equality was uncommon in England’s cultural landscape; there was a hierarchical order in which the higher and lower classes lived their lives with little to no need for any justification (Waisfisz, 2015). It was also a society in which gender roles were significantly dissimilar. “Women, once married would stay home to raise and look after the children, whilst it was the man’s job to provide an income that could allow this to happen” (Collier, 2015). Contemporary England holds altered cultural insights that are very similar to those in New Zealand. Both countries believe in a minimized power distance amongst the population, resulting in a culture based on equality rather than hierarchy. Contemporary