Historiography Of The 1940s

In this essay, the author will examine the position of the Kennedy Administration with regard to its ability to respond flexibly to communist expansion, especially to guerrilla warfare. Historians generally think of John F. Kennedy's policies with regard to Vietnam. However, Vietnam was a secondary issue for Kennedy, at least in the public eye. The administration’s prestige was riding on success or failure in Cuba. Unfortunately for Kennedy, the Bay of Pigs incident turned out to be a disaster, leaving Fidel Castro firmly ensconced in power. In its wake, the administration maintained its anti-Castro options by continuing undeclared guerrilla war against Castro. While the administration refused to go ahead with more aggressive plans

The late 1940′s were a time when much change happened to the American society. As a result to the expanding threat of the Soviet Union, or its Communistic ideals, America took a stand that lead it to the Cold War.  Although the war didn’t involve fighting directly with Russia, it still affected the American society and domestic policy. The war affected America so much that it lead to a fear of livelihood; precisely when Joseph McCarthy began his “witch hunt”. The Cold war lead to an enlarged fear of nuclear war; as well, it affected many of the domestic policies.

In “The Essential Historiography Reader” by Caroline Hoefferle, and “The Penguin History of Europe” by J.M. Roberts, both authors write about what “modern history” is. Hoefferle, breaks down the evolution of history and how its recorded into three different periods of time. She starts with ancient history, then moves into medieval and finishes with modern history. Roberts, believes that modern history was shaped in three centuries. Both authors agree on what modern history is, but only Hoefferle really goes into detail about the transition from how history was recorded in the ancient world up until the evolution of modern history.

The 1950s and 1960’s were completely changed due to the effects of both the Cold War and World War II. This can be seen during the 1950s where many people were glad that World War II was finished and hoped that there was going to be no wars in the future. These people were glad that they had things like a house, a steady job, and a car. This can definitely be seen in Document A where people are moving into their new suburban houses and finally living a world without war once again. While during the 1960s, we can see that the Cold War was beginning to erupt and cause a fear of atomic

The Enlightened Archaeologist – an article authored by Jeffrey Hantman and Gary Dunham chronicles Thomas Jefferson’s investigation of the Indian burial mound located on the South Fork of the Rivanna River in the 18th century. The site excavated by Jefferson, however, is no longer visible, most likely due to dissipation by inevitable natural occurrences (I.E. excessive rainfall, flooding rivers, etc.) or human activity such as farming. The “Father of American Archaeology” correctly predicts the latter in his book, Notes on the State of Virginia, in which he states, mounds “…put under cultivation are much reduced in their height, and spread in width, by the plough, and will probably disappear in time” (1787). Fortunately for Archaeologists of the late 20th century (1988) an Indian burial mound identical to that of the one Jefferson described in his book was uncovered just 14 miles from the South Fork of the Rivanna River.

During the past years of the 1900s many factors have happened that resulted in the change of the United States history and future. It changed the everyday lives of Americans of how they survived and supported themselves and their family, in both positive and negative ways that affected them daily. For instance, the political affairs of the government and the election of candidates for certain parties like democratic or republican can affect the history of the country, on how the government or Congress passed laws that were of equal protection to its people and how it helps benefit both civilians and the nation itself. On social occasions this could affect the United States

Historians tend to portray the 1950’s as a decade of prosperity, conformity, and consensus, and the 1960’s as a decade of turbulence, protest, and disillusionment. Do you agree or disagree with this view? Show evidence to support your argument.

Although, their conclusions can still be questioned, they have applied intensive and through analysis to their material, widening their subjects and have given legitimate reasoning for their views. While Brown has proven how terms such as War Hawks can be misleading, Horsman has provided enough evidence to prove that the War Hawks did exist and has successfully defined the term War Hawk with greater accuracy than other historians. Both the essays exhibit how historians should be aware of the material they use and careful about their generalizations when explaining such broad

Onwards to the more historical side of the 1940’s and how Americans of that time reacted to it.

Historians tend to portray the 1950s as a decade of prosperity, conformity, and consensus, and the 1960s as a decade of turbulence, protest, and disillusionment. These stereotypes are largely true, though, as with everything in life, there are exceptions to this perspective. Therefore, the historians’ portrayal of the 1950s and 1960s is accurate for the majority of Americans, though some groups were clearly exceptions.

     These trends were exacerbated by the unleashing of the atomic bomb. As the cold war took hold of the nation's consciousness, domestic containment mushroomed into a full-blown ideology that hovered over the cultural landscape for two decades.(May p.91) It is in this portion of her argument that May makes some of her most fascinating claims. Using the Kitchen Debate between Nixon and Khrushchev to underscore the connections between domesticity and containment, May explains how the home became the site at which such dangerous and destabilizing social forces as atomic

Schlesinger’s first argument provides reasoning for some of the questionable actions of the US leading to the outbreak of the cold war that other schools of though have picked up on. He argues when summarising the period ‘none showed great tactical consistency, or cared much about it’, which implies the actions of the US could be characterised as aggressive, for example. Schlesinger is conveying that there was merely a lack of forward planning and strategic thinking rather than more selfish motives movies expressed in the revisionist argument.

The latter half of the twentieth century is full of many remarkable events, some of which have made changes in history, and will stand out for generations to come. Throughout the most of the last half of the century, the United States was fighting a Cold War with the Soviet Union. Americans, afraid that communists were everywhere, even within their own government, conducted what were in essence, witch hunts for communists. American astronauts were the first to ever walk on the moon. An American President, for fear of impeachment, resigned. Another President's integrity was called into question for illegal arms deals. America also freed a country from the hands of a tyrant. This paper will touch on one major

No one anticipated the international chaos that would emerge during the twentieth century, especially the devastation caused by World War I, World War II, and the Cold War. World War II was the most destructive war in human history and changed the history of the world forever, engaging the world’s most influential superpowers in the largest international event of the era. World War II was fought not only by the armed forces, but also by the home fronts of every belligerent nation, exhausting the economy, the industry, and the morale of those living at home, escalating the conflict into a total war that was larger and fought more expansively than any other conflict in history. The use of American propaganda in the World War II war effort

While this may be the case for the more information-limited Soviet historians, the more modern, revisionist historians such as Edward Acton, Robert Service, Harold Shukman and Steven Smith have had great exposure to much of the confidential literature, kept secret by the many Soviet Purges and the prolific ‘Iron Curtain’. In the view of Acton “Russia’s workers were