Category: Cold War

Introduction

In the 1950s the United States involvement in Southeast Asia became more vigorous as the country offered military, financial and moral supports for different groups and countries in the region. As expected, the support offered by the United States generated repercussions in the country’s politics as various anti-war groups were formed in the country to discourage the country’s involvement.

Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia is a vast region covering an area of around a 4.1million square kilometers and is made up of several countries including Thailand, Burma, the Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore, Vietnam and Laos among others. It is part of the larger Asian region.

Vietnam

Vietnam is located in Southeast Asia and its stretch covers one area of Indochina. It is bordered by the South China Sea, China, Cambodia and Laos. The country is made up of two regions, which is the north and south, and was ruled by the French until the end of the Second World War which paved way for the French Indochina war involving the French and the Vietnamese, among other countries which were supporting different groups depending on their underlying agenda.

Following the end of the war and the failure of communism around 1991, most western countries, including those involved in the war such as the United States, restored trade and diplomatic associations with the country.

Why and How the United States became involved in the Politics of Southeast Asia in the 1950s

Vietnam is one of the countries in Southeast Asia that experienced the United States involvement in its politics in the 1950s

Some of the reasons that have been fronted as having led to the involvement of the United States in the country’s politics include the fight against communism and the need to support the United States’ long-time ally, the French, who were engaged in war with Vietnam.

According to Errington and McKercher (1990, p. 59), the United States had asserted its support for the French in their rule over Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam and when it came time to show their support they did so by offering both military and financial support.

In the years 1950-1954, the United States had provided financial support to France of more than 2.6 billion US Dollars in the form of military aid (.Hubbard, 2005. p. 104)

The Domino Theory in the 1950s

As part of the war against communism in Vietnam, the United States came up with a theory known as the Domino theory to show why they were against communism. According to the theory, if a country was allowed to be taken over by communists, then the next country would also be easily taken over and in no time, the whole region would be taken over and would be subject to the communist rule (Donaldson, 1996, p. 79).

The military support offered by the United States was not only in the form of armed soldiers, but also in the form of air support, tankers and other ground forces.

The United states involvement in the country’s politics was portrayed when they supported one of the leaders, Bao Dai, who was against communism, to fight against Ho Chi Minh, who even though was supported by communists, did not adhere to their form of rule.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. (2005-2008). Map of Vietnam.

Thailand and the Philippines during the Indochina War

Thailand’s politics also experienced influence from the United States especially when it became evident that it would prove beneficial to the United States as far as the war in Vietnam was concerned.

Thailand thus became among the first Asian countries to offer their support to the westerners in their quest against communism. In return the country received military, technical and economic support from the United States.

The Philippines ‘ involvement in the Vietnam War was largely influenced by the United States thereby strengthening ties between the two countries. This association was by and large influenced by the Philippines ‘ strategic location, after which the country also received military and economic support from America.

With time, the Philippines association with the United States faded, especially at the end of the cold war.

Political Implications in the United States Resulting from its participation in Southeast Asia and cold War

The Resulting Political Climate in the United States During Its Involvement in the Southeast Asia and Cold War in the 1950s was that of dissatisfaction especially from the public following the large financial support that progressive governments had continued to invest in the wars yet there was continued defeat.

The United States also started experiencing economic problems as a direct result of the large financial investments it had made in the Vietnam war. The country had invested close to thirty billion US Dollars in the war and had sent more than five hundred thousand war military men to the region for the fifteen years during which the war lasted.

The politics of the foreign policy in the United States also changed shape, affecting areas such as anti-communist consensus that was previously held domestically, presidential powers which saw a decline as well as the national security infrastructure which also experienced declined support (Rosati, Hagan & Sampson, 1994, p. 248).

Conclusion

The Indochina French and Cold Wars had their implications in all the countries involved and while in some the wars led to close associations, in others it drove them further apart. The most affected areas in these countries were the political ties, economic associations and military support forums.

After the two wars, the different countries resorted to different means to recover and at some point, the ties between the different countries were renewed, such as was the case between the United States and Vietnam, and the Philippines and the rest of the Asian countries.

Reference List

1. Bowie, A. & Unger, D. (1997). The Politics of Open Economies: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Bradley, M. (2000). Imagining Vietnam and America: The Making of Post Colonial Vietnam, 1919-1950. North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press.
3. Chaloemtiarana, T. (2007). Thailand: The Politics of Despotic Paternalism. New York: Cornell Southeast Asia program Publications.
4. Donaldson, G.A. (1996). America at War since 1945: Politics and Diplomacy in Korea, Vietnam and the Gulf War. Connecticut: praeger Publishers.
5. Errington, J. E. & McKercher, J. C. (1990). The Vietnam War as History. New York: Praeger Publishers.
6. Howard, A. (2007). Southeast Asia.
7. Hubbard, C. (2005). Australian and US Military Cooperation: Fighting Common Enemies. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
8. European Centre for disease Prevention and Control. (2005-2008). Map of Vietnam.
9. Rosati, J. A. Hagan, J. D. & Sampson, M. W. (1994). Foreign Policy Restructuring: How Governments respond to Global Change. South Carolina: The University of south Carolina press.
10. Yahuda, M. B. (2004). The International Politics of the Asia-Pacific. Oxford: Routledge Curzon Publishers.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1980s was unexpected yet unavoidable due to several reasons including its structural weaknesses, the Containment Policy, and national forces. First of all, the very structure of the Soviet Union was fundamentally leading to failure. Regarding the authoritarian nature of the Soviet power, the following issues significantly affected its collapse: the persecution of the Church and dissidents, forced collectivism, the domination of single ideology, the prohibition of communication with other countries, censorship, and the lack of free discussion of alternatives (Brower 240). A series of unsuccessful attempts to reform the Soviet system led to stagnation and then collapse of the economy and political system.

Speaking of the Containment Policy, it was considered as a way to prevent war and was not aimed at inflicting a military defeat of the USSR. This US policy was oriented to the limitation of the spread of communist ideology in the countries of Western Europe and the Soviet-backed communist movements (Brower 241). Also, national forces appeared around the Soviet Union as a result of the USSR’s leadership failure to address developmental challenges manifested in the form of inter-ethnic conflicts and the struggle of individual nations to expand their own culture and economy.

However, the key factor of collapse is the Soviet Union’s structure that led to the discontent of people and the establishment of strong opposition. It is still impossible to affirm whether the world became safer or not yet nowadays it is more open and free. The world became unipolar, and the United States remain a single superpower. Due to expanding globalization processes, the world turned into a single political, informational, and economic system.

According to Friedman, nationalism and the global economy can co-exist yet have to encounter some difficulties (par. 3). The author emphasizes that “nationalism is the belief that your fate is bound up with your nation and your fellow citizens” (Friedman par. 18). Moreover, it is stated that European nationalism is represented not only by people’s feelings towards their own country but also by resentment of others.

In particular, the case of Germany and Greek each of which has corresponding historical events proving the above statement. Without going into details, it is possible to claim that many European countries have a history of social and economic catastrophes that occurred as a result of nationalism. At this point, Friedman states that only the appropriate interpretation of each other can integrate these countries into the effective union (par. 21).

The examples of negative aspects of strong nationalism feelings in connection with the global economy involve such examples as fascist Germany and its regime and the conflict between Greeks and Germans regarding their value systems’ difference. In their turn, the positive aspects contain the inclination towards global trade and economic power. Considering that geopolitical borders are eliminated, countries and their citizens are likely to aspire to unite to achieve better results.

Within the context of a global economy, one can note such advantages of nationalism as great resources, economic prosperity, and unified military power, suggesting collective defense. Also, the organizational capabilities along with intellectual capital seem to be rather significant aspects promoting the successful collaboration of nationalism and the global economy. At the same time, nationalism in the framework of the global economy imposes the following disadvantages: internal psychosis when one country wants to dominate over others, difficulties in establishing free trade zones, and others.

Works Cited

Brower, Daniel R. The World Since 1945: A Brief History. 2nd ed., Pearson, 2005.

Friedman, George. “The Crisis of Europe and European Nationalism.” Stratfor. 2011. Web.

The annual discussion held in Munich this year mainly concentrated on the Syrian civil war. The issue is pressing since the flow of Syrian refugees exacerbates the political situation in Europe as well as in the Middle East. In his speech, Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev shared his concerns about the world entering a new Cold War (Munich Security Conference, 2016). That Dmitri Medvedev’s enigmatic reference to the Cold War was a mere figure of speech seems doubtful.

One has to remember that the Cold War, albeit off-the-record, was a struggle for influence conducted surreptitiously (Keylor, 2011). Be it economic pressures, diplomacy maneuvers, or acts of war in third countries, it has tried to escape a head-to-head confrontation. Both sides realized such collision would cause a nuclear war – although there were occasions when the Apocalypse seemed unavoidable (Keylor, 2011).

The current situation invokes reasonable questions on the nature of the so-called “New Cold War”: whether it is worth recollecting the 20^th-century conflict to understand the emerging one, and whether it is the long-standing political quarrel springing back into existence or something new. It appears, however, that the reference to the “Cold War”, although historically educational, can provide only an analogized understanding of the current situation and hardly derives a more or less adequate prognosis.

It is worth remembering that the Cold War has always unfolded inconspicuously. The US and Russia never attacked each other officially; nevertheless, the number of proxy wars, the arms race, and the ideological crackdowns in third countries indicates the struggle for influence was present. Among the causes urging the US to take action was the so-called Brezhnev Doctrine. The policy presupposed communist countries to assist each other in spreading communism over the world. Such conflicts as the Korean one brought forth the anticipation of World War III, with the US forced to curb the communist ideology by military force (Keylor 2011).

Not more than a decade after the Korean conflict, the USSR established their missiles in Cuba that has only just turned to communism. The threat of a nuclear holocaust was tangible, when the states came to a mutual agreement and withdrew their missiles from Cuba and Turkey, respectively (Keylor 2011). Nevertheless, the posture of Russia and the actions towards former Soviets have been still regarded in terms of the Cold War after the USSR has dissolved and the Cold War was Over.

The conflicts in Georgia and Ukraine were met with contempt, and talks about the new Cold War were raised but there is a major point of divergence that makes the analogy somewhat inconsistent. Russia’s actions in the third countries were not initially aimed at pecking the US or the EU; in addition, no actions from the latter were taken to prevent the conflicts (Harasymiw, 2010).

In his search for either a confirmation or contradiction to the idea of a new Cold War, Harasymiw (2010) discusses the missiles initiatives of both powers, emphasizing the “deep suspicion” that the Russian military still meet every US’s action (p. 12). The stagnated cold-war-style mentality of the Russian government, the author states, had resulted in a tension of relationships that was not reset until Dmitry Medvedev’s presidential term. President Obama and resident Medvedev have managed to overpower the reciprocal distrust – or so it seemed – replacing it with a civilized dialog that eased the flow of references to the Cold War (Harasymiw, 2010).

After Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, the analysts and media commentators started to press the topic of the New Cold War, or the Cold War II (Kalb, 2015). The issues of President Putin’s autocracy, his motivations, and the relationships of Russia and the US were raised. Such discourse created a twofold picture: Russia had to be either appeased or countered. The world’s suspicion towards Russia’s actions in Syria might or might not be justified, although Prime Minister Medvedev advocates for Russia’s struggle for global security just as any other state would do (Munich Security Conference, 2016).

The threats put before the US, EU, NATO, and the New World Order are multiple, the major one being terrorism – the one that cannot be tackled without cooperation and enhancement of security. The post-Cold War era implies thinking in post-Cold War terms. The images of Russia emerging a new Cold War do not make its policies and motivations more understandable; instead, they assume that Russia has not developed its strategies or arms since the USSR downfall – an assumption that can be disastrous if accepted as true.

Thus, thinking analogically and parallelizing the current situation with history does not account for the full picture. Instead of merely assuming a second Cold War, it is from the position of new policies and enhanced capabilities that the Russian annexations and suspicious actions in Syria should be regarded. But still, although analogizing the policies and implications with a historical period and legacy is hardly efficient, the question of what is it that Russia wants remains pressing.

References

Harasymiw, B. (2010). Russia, the United States, and the New Cold War. Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, 12(2), 1-31.

Kalb, M. (2015). Imperial Gamble: Putin, Ukraine, and the New Cold War. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

Keylor, W. R. (2011). The Twentieth-century World and Beyond: An International History Since 1900, 6^th ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Munich Security Conference. (2016). Web.

Civilization in Notes from Underground by Dostoevsky

In his Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky depicts an unknown Underground man, who describes the rise of civilization as the primary cause of becoming cruel and thirsty for blood. Even though it might appear to be nonsense, the fact of the matter is that there is more truth in the words of this unknown man than we, people living in the twenty-first century, might want to admit, and history proves it.

First of all, it should be noted that the concept of bloodshed could be adapted to correspond with historical events. Thinking of bloodthirsty people, the first image, which comes to mind, is war. However, there is also another aspect of this issue. Why not interpret this word as the desire to own more lands and resources, however, without respect to human life? It is exactly what happened to Africa in the process of colonization during the third quarter of the nineteenth century.

The most civilized gentlemen, i.e. the European countries, were so thirsty in their desire to drive the economies with more raw materials that they decided to step over dignity and destroyed African political and economic systems. The same happened to Malay Peninsula, India, Burma, and some other Asian states as well as Latin America.

As the situation worsened, the gentlemen started opposing each other. The reason for their bloodthirsty behavior was the struggle for the spheres of influence and boosting the power of foreign policy. The Spanish-American War of 1898, the Russo-Japanese War of 1904, two Moroccan crises, and, finally, Two World Wars. The wave of colonization and the conflicts mentioned above are just some instances, which prove that Dostoevsky’s unknown man was right.

At first, it might be complicated to draw the connection between civilization, i.e. industrial revolution and its consequences, and increasing bloodshed. However, taking a closer look at the causes of the mentioned events, it all comes down to the need for driving the economies with raw materials, and this necessity derives from the industrial revolution.

What were the major events in the development of the Cold War?

The beginning of the Cold War was put after the United States declared the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe after the end of World War II. It was a strategic decision focusing on growing influence in the region and opposing the Soviet Union because both the US and the USSR grew stronger during the war. The major events in the development of the Cold War were imposing communist regimes in Eastern Europe (Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Poland, and Czechoslovakia), the division of Germany, forming the NATO and establishing the Warsaw Pact, and numerous regional conflicts such as Arab-Israeli, the Korean, and the Vietnam wars, and the Cuban Missile Crisis.

One of the other major events is the decolonization of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, which followed the war immediately. The reasons for the successful and fast decolonization can be seen in the weakening of the European countries’ military power after World War II. As a fact of the matter, it can be said that it was the Cold War that contributed to decolonization. The justification for this statement is the existence of only two superpowers in the world, the United States and the Soviet Union, which were not interested in supporting European countries in their desire to renew imperialist rule. The real results of decolonization were granting independence to all states, which were under the reign of colonists, and letting them choose their ways of further development.

Reagan’s policies may have contributed to the fall of communism, but it is more likely that the internal changes in the Soviet Union and the countries it ruled contributed more to the end of the Cold War. Internal changes in the Soviet Union and the countries it ruled were the leading causes of the Cold War’s end. Reagan’s measures may have accelerated the end of the Cold War, but they were not the main factor.

There was internal unrest in the Soviet Bloc due to the failure of many foreign leaders to provide the outcomes that communism promised. Rationing was necessary since there was not enough food for everyone. The Soviet Union’s citizens became disillusioned due to Western media and communication because capitalism and excesses seemed superior to rationing and starvation. Many of the nations that the Soviet Union ruled over disapproved of Moscow’s leadership as well. In internal strife in the Soviet Bloc, the Soviet Union sponsored Afghanistan’s wars and ignored several domestic problems. The Baltic States and Ukraine both had independence-related revolutions. Ultimately, the USSR’s internal unrest and the pressure the West put on it from the outside resulted in Gorbachev and Bush Sr. meeting in Malta and announcing.

The ideological gap between the United States and the Soviet Union led to the Cold War. Following World War II, the two countries competed for supremacy; as a result, there was an arms race and a space race. However, the end of the Cold War was primarily a result of internal changes in the Soviet Union and the countries it ruled. When the Soviet Union fell apart in 1991, the United States and its allies stepped in to fill the following power vacuum.

Reference

Course hero. Boundless US History | | Course Hero. (n.d.). Web.

The Cold War is among the brightest examples of inter-state tensions in the twentieth century. A few decades of the war became the period of global changes related to political affairs. The competition between the USSR and the USA, the dissolution of the former, and major armed conflicts in Korea and Vietnam are among the events that still impact the world.

The superpowers involved in the Cold War needed to mobilize all resources to prove their superiority. Unlike the nuclear arms race increasing the risks of global wars, competition related to space exploration caused the development of science and technology (Holland and Burns 9). As for the impact of these events, modern achievements, including satellite communication, would not be possible without the scientific discoveries made during the Cold War. The arms race led to increases in the production of weapons, and nowadays, multiple countries possess nuclear warheads (Bell and Miller 74). It requires the global community to implement new measures for arms control.

The dissolution of the USSR, the Vietnam War, and the Korean War are also among the political events influencing the world. The end of the USSR changed the geopolitical situation due to the formation of new states and conflicts between its former members (Rezaev 1). As for its long-term impact, this event significantly decreased the popularity of socialism. The Korean War changed the world by causing further division of Korea and the emergence of two drastically different political regimes (Cumings 330).

The war has a variety of consequences impacting modern people’s lives. For instance, the approach to development and censorship chosen by North Korea affects the country’s foreign relations with modern economic superpowers (Cumings 330). In the twentieth century, the Vietnam War changed the lives of millions of families leading to the country’s reunification and the growth of socialism. Apart from its long-term political effects, the war still impacts veterans and injures people’s health (Schlenger et al. 543). Thus, during the Cold War, there have been numerous events contributing to political changes.

To sum up, the discussed events that took place during the Cold War significantly changed the world. Their key effects include the continuous conflict between the capitalist and the socialist states, casualties of war, and progress in science. These consequences still impact people in many countries, mostly in a negative way.

Works Cited

Bell, Mark S., and Nicholas L. Miller. “Questioning the Effect of Nuclear Weapons on Conflict.” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 59, no. 1, 2015, pp. 74-92.

Cumings, Bruce. “Imagining the Korean War.” Reviews in American History, vol. 45, no. 2, 2017, pp. 330-336.

Holland, Dora, and Jack O. Burns. “The American Space Exploration Narrative from the Cold War through the Obama Administration.” Space Policy, vol. 46, 2018, pp. 9-17.

Rezaev, Andrey V. “25 Years after the USSR: Comparative Sociological Accounts: Introduction to a Special Issue of Comparative Sociology.” Comparative Sociology, vol. 16, no. 1, 2017, pp. 1-12.

Schlenger, William E., et al. “PTSD and Use of Outpatient General Medical Services among Veterans of the Vietnam War.” Psychiatric Services, vol. 67, no. 5, 2016, pp. 543-550.

The relationship between the U.S. and the Soviets was shaped by an intricate interplay of economic, political, and ideological factors, which resulted in the change between vigilant collaboration and often vicious superpower competition. Diverse variances in the political structures exhibited in the two nations averted them from striking a common understanding on key policy matters as demonstrated in the Cuban missile crisis that almost lead to conflict.

The foundation of U.S. fears began when the Soviet leaders took out Russia from First World War while being opposed to their communist ideologies. Moreover, the U.S. had long been cautious of the Soviet’s practice of communism as well as reservation about Joseph Stalin’s dictatorial rule (Library of Congress Para 2). Contrarily, the Soviets begrudged the United States’ decade-long negation to recognize the Soviet Union as an authentic part of the global community. The U.S. government and residents alike feared nuclear confrontation with the Soviets, making the U.S. anxious that Soviet espionage was working within their administration.

Major cultural products of the Cold War were portrayed in movies, music, television, and books as well as other events such as sports. The key elements of the war encompassed espionage, annihilation, and the assumed risk of nuclear conflict. The various cultural products captured the theme of polarization in various ways such as creating us-versus-them. For example, Cloak and dagger fictional narratives formed part of the pop culture in the Cold War era. Movies and novels demonstrated polarization by displaying how the world was unsafe.

The theme of us-versus-them is still visible in many spheres of contemporary society. Two theories relating to competition and self-identity have been used to explain us-versus-them stories. For instance, us-versus-them approach is observable in sporting activities, team-based events, and other extents in life such as polarizing political rhetoric (Emamzadeh Para 2). Regarding popular culture, Americans’ can for instance, view their music as the best compared to others across the world.

In conclusion, the nature of the relationship that existed between the Soviets and the U.S was that of West-East polarization. Following the end of the Second World War, the U.S. and the Soviets emerged as superpowers with different global and ideological interests. The period began from rivalry and mutual distrust and lead to ideological differences, threats of conflict, an arms race, and occasional misunderstandings dubbed the Cold War.

Works Cited

Emamzadeh, Arash. “The Psychology of Us-vs-Them” Psychology Today. 2019. Web.

Library of Congress. “Revelations from the Russian Archives: The Soviet Union and the United States” Library of Congress, n.d. Web.

Introduction

The end of the Second World War brought incomparable changes to American society. The government started working on an economic boom which made people prosperous. The government expenditure on ammunition and the hiring of soldiers was redirected to growing the economy. Consequently, there were numerous employment opportunities, and most Americans were absorbed into the service and production industry. As the economic boom progressed in the USA, different dogmas started spreading and changed the way people lived and interacted. Ideologies function as organized systems that educate and motivate people to accept given world opinions and change their ways of life. It is imperative to note that any given ideology governs human relationships, influencing societal change. This essay analyzes how the cold war ideologies shaped and reflected American society after the Second World War. The cold war ideologies negatively impacted American society as capitalism led to the rise of poverty and inequality levels.

Cold War Ideologies

The key powers involved in the cold war were the United States of America and the Soviet Union. While the Americans believed in a capitalist economy and a democratic leadership system, the Soviet Union believed in communism and dictatorship leadership. The ideological clashes between the two world powers caused significant impacts on the citizen’s way of life. The wars experienced in Korea and Vietnam resulted from the Soviet Union trying to spread communism. On the other hand, America worked hard to stop the spread of communist ideology by monitoring all efforts by the Soviet Union to increase its arms. The Soviet Union advocated for communism because it worked to lower unhealthy competition, made people equal, and ensured an efficient distribution of resources. The Americans, on the other hand, believed in capitalism and individualism because they helped people work harder and to improve their economy.

How the Cold War Ideologies Shaped the American History

The capitalist ideology advocated by the Americans significantly impacted their economy and ways of life in the affluent society. As the Americans adopted capitalism while building the economy, the society was divided into two classes, the rich investors and the poor (Sitkoff 18). Further, democratic ideologies gave people the right to revolt and fight for their rights. The cold war ideologies shaped American history as they engineered inequality, economic expansion, environmental degradation, and increased revolutions leading to deaths.

Inequality

The capitalist economy made fewer people accrue huge wealth at the expense of the workers. The capitalists had full control of their investment, so they offered poor wages, and the workers languished in poverty. Despite the growing economy, only a small percentage of Americans enjoyed the wealth created. Although the demand for luxurious goods increased in post-war America, they were purchased by a small percentage of Americans (Chafe 71).

The gap between the rich and the poor grew, and the formation of slums and other informal settlements emerged. As the industries demanded more labor, most people migrated to urban areas for employment as a way to improve their quality of life. The industrialized urban centers were regions where race, poverty, and labor intersected (Sitkoff 27). If the Americans had adopted communism, all people would have been treated equally, and the poverty rate could have been reduced. By 1957 the USA had increased the economy by 35%. However, one-third of Americans lived in abject poverty (Chafe et al. 64). The dogma promoted increased poverty levels and low quality of life among middle-class workers.

The increase in the slums in the USA significantly impacted the citizens’ day-to-day lives. The slums were viewed as places of crime, disease, and poor living conditions. History was shaped when the California industrial relation formed a law in 1950 to identify housing status and implemented laws requiring all prominent farmers who hired workers on their farms would offer housing services (Chafe 34). Enumeration of the house services was made possible, and slum upgrade services were initiated. The housing act formulated by the American government was in response to the poverty levels induced by capitalist societies. The economic inequality led to the deteriorating quality of life for the lower economic class.

Economic Expansion

Capitalism is undoubtedly the major cause of exponential economic growth worldwide. The United States of America supported crony capitalism by giving tax holidays to investors who created employment opportunities for the citizens. As a result of the government support for cronies and increased employment levels in the country, infrastructural development increased as the industries required roads to access the raw material. Further, corporate social responsibility by the companies increased health quality, as the companies gave back to society by building schools and empowering students to perform better (Chafe et al. 33).

Consequently, the quality of education increased, and more qualified graduates were released to the booming economy. As the middle class expanded and industries flourished, it allowed Americans to work without being forced by areas where they were unhappy. The freedom to own property improved the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) and increased the competition level. As products competed against each other, the final products improved, and the customers enjoyed higher quality goods and services.

As the government diverted war funds into economic recovery systems, most industries grew, and the excess goods were available for exports. As the investors competed for the American market, a surplus was generated, and the value of foreign exchange increased exponentially. In 1959, the USA was a major exporter of food and manufactured goods to other parts of the world (Sitkoff 13). The USA exports were higher than the Soviet Union because the communist ideology did not expand the production capacity (Chafe 32). Capitalism enabled the working class to access loans and build semi-permanent settlements known as the suburbs. The development of infrastructure and an increase in the number of personal cars was the prerequisite for GDP growth.

Pollution and Inhumane Treatment of Workers

Pollution and global climate change became an issue of concern in the 1950s as the number of industries emitting greenhouse gases increased. As capitalists competed to expand their economic empires, they caused environmental degradation, which increased the levels of global warming. The impacts of global warming are still being felt to date. The people in the nation were more concerned about improving the economy, and little effort was made to the climate change. The significant temperature rise in the 1950s indicated that capitalism led to the pressure toward industrialization and consequently affected society (Chafe 21). The rise in pollution levels impacted the increase of diseases such as cancer, respiratory diseases, and stroke in the flourishing American economy and the need for healthcare services. However, the poverty-stricken workers could not afford medical expenses because of the inequality that has spread in society, increasing the mortality rate.

As capitalism grew, the factory and machinery owners, whose main income was profit, misused the workers and treated them as tools to maximize their income. When the investors compete to increase profits, they lower the wages while increasing the number of hours worked (Chafe 12). The increase in the number of working hours and the reduction of wages led to miserable lives among the working class, and they could not afford decent means of life and revolts started being witnessed. The rise of social work increased at that time as the workers wanted to have a common ground for expressing their grievances. Since one of the cold war ideologies was democracy, Americans were free to stage peaceful demonstrations to reject the inhumane treatment. Most civil rights protests were witnessed between 1950 and 1960 because of the ideologies. Such protests were not witnessed in the Soviet Union because the dictatorship did not allow the subjects to question authority.

Conclusion

Post-war America witnessed a booming economy and an exponential rise in GDP as the government redirected the war budget to develop the economy. However, the spread of the cold war ideologies shaped how people behaved and carried out their day-to-day activities. Capitalism was the main cold war ideology in the USA and had both positive and negative impacts. Although it led to the exponential growth of the economy, it had numerous negative impacts, such as inequality, pollution, and increased civil rights riots. The spread of the ideology shaped American history through the rise of suburbs, unequal societies, increased pollution, and numerous revolts that claimed innocent people’s lives. Capitalism is an effective economic system but must be controlled to ensure sustainability.

Works Cited

Chafe, William H, et al. A History of Our Time: Readings on Postwar America. 8th ed., Oxford University Press, 2012.

Chafe, William H. “The Liberal Consensus Reconsidered: American Politics and Society in the Postwar Era.” (2018): 1070-1071.

Chafe, William Henry. The unfinished journey: America since World War II. Oxford University Press, USA, 2003.

Sitkoff, Harvard, and William Henry Chafe, eds. A History of Our Time: Readings on Postwar America. Oxford University Press, 1983.

The United States has always been a prominent actor in the global political scene throughout history. However, political successes are often of a wave-like nature, and the 20^th century became a time of power decline for America. Therefore, the strategy of the U.S., represented by striving to keep a balance between foreign and domestic policies and attempting to expand its influence, did not manage to end the Cold War.

Whether America was frightened by the rapid expansion of the Socialist influence is one of the main questions related to the period of the Cold War. The first statement at the beginning of the chapter is that the Vietnam War is a consequence of the Cold War. Vietnam became a Southeast Asian hot spot long before American troops arrived. China, the Soviet Union, and other communist allies supported the North Vietnamese army. As Lindon Johnson said in his address, Communist China had “the deepening shadow” that made Asian realities an American concern (Chafe et al., 137). In contrast, the United States, the Philippines, and other anti-communist states supported the South Vietnamese army. Given the size of the territories of the two main Communist countries, one can assume that the U.S. seemed to fear the loss of control in the political arena.

Another essential question is whether it was possible for the U.S. to find a strategy that could prevent millions of deaths. Thus, the Vietnam War is considered one of the “indirect” battles of the Cold War before the intervention. The year 1965 was the time when America intervened in “obscure and distant Vietnam”, as Harold G. Moore and Joseph L. Galloway recalled (Chafe et al., 141). The Communists fought to subjugate the entire country to their power. However, propaganda portrayed the conflict as a war “against the colonizers,” a continuation of the Indochina War against France. In his inaugural address, John F. Kennedy saw the intervention as a way to prevent the communist takeover of South Vietnam, part of a “containment policy” to stop the spread of communism for “any price” and “any burden” (Chafe et al., 133). However, the survey in 1971 showed that 61 percent of American citizens saw the U.S. invasion to Vietnam as a “mistake” (Chafe et al., 134). Thus, this U.S. policy showed its shortcomings precisely through the Vietnam War.

In the Korean War, the leading world powers — the U.S., China, and the Soviet Union — were drawn into the conflict. This conflict is the first large-scale clash between the capitalist countries and the socialist camp states in the Cold War era. On April 50, Truman, believing that enough nuclear weapons had already been made to support “national security,” decided to tighten the policy toward the Soviet Union, which involved taking a position of force. This decision is better known as NSC Directive 68 or the “Acheson Memorandum.” These moves convincingly illustrated the gap between U.S. diplomacy’s goals and real objectives. Truman pressed the government and Congress with increasing determination, finally achieving additional investment in military companies. It also enabled an increase in the atomic arms race.

To conclude, the discussed issues are important for work this semester because they help to trace the mistakes made by the American authorities and reflect on the possible developments in the U.S. in the future. Although this giant country remains one of the leaders in the modern world, this fact cannot insure it against potentially inappropriate decisions. In view of the decisions of the former presidents and their administrations, the observed problems provide an implication regarding American society and whom it elects to follow.

Works Cited

Chafe, William H., Sitkoff, Harvard, and Bailey Beth, editors. A History of Our Time: Readings on Postwar America. 8th ed., Oxford University Press, 2011.

Abstract

Evaluating the situation, it appears that the major motivation behind the actions of the major players in this conflict was the distribution of authority in the world which started after the capitulation of Germany. As a response to the actions of the United States and the capitalist world, the Soviet Union along with its supporters engaged in the unprecedented rush of armaments.

Introduction

After World War II the spheres of influence in the world were under great changes which caused serious tension between the major political players in the world and their adherents. As a result, in the 1950s and 1960s, the world became bipolar with the two openly antagonistic camps of the capitalistic and communistic world. Evaluating the situation, it appears that the major motivation behind the actions of the major players in this conflict was the distribution of authority in the world which started after the capitulation of Germany. As a response to the actions of the United States and the capitalist world, the Soviet Union along with its supporters engaged in the unprecedented rush of armaments.

Main body

In 1946, after the total fall of Nazi Germany and its allies of Japan and Italy, the situation in the world changed in a significant way. The world saw two new major players in the face of the Soviet Union and the United States. These two countries represented antagonistic ideologies and philosophies; even the economic models that they defended were completely different. These camps developed speedily occupying new territories and acquiring new allies. Their competition was so outstanding that it caused an unprecedented situation in the world in less than two decades.

Being motivated by different principles and having different values, the United States represented a capitalistic world, and the Soviet Union leading communist countries became enemies. This led to the armament rush having no parallels in the whole course of the history of humanity. The Soviet Union possessed some of the greatest minds in the area of chemistry and physics; it also spent the major part of its financial funds on armament. After a few years after World War II, the countries which lost in it were already rebuilt; however, this did not happen in the Soviet Union as the country used its funds for unprecedented armaments and acquiring new adherents wherever in the world it was possible.

As a result of such politics by the two main players in the world arena the world became a very dangerous place to live. In particular, atomic weapons created by the Soviet Union were produced in horrifying amounts. A similar situation occurred with the other types of weapons of mass destruction including chemical and biological weapons. Along with that, the world continued to be divided into two parts the one controlled by the communists and the one controlled by the capitalist. In the 1960s, it created such a terrible situation that the world was on the edge of nuclear warfare.

Not only became this antagonism transparent in the armament rush. As a response to the capitalistic world, the Soviet bloc continued its expansion looking for new allies, and promoting its values in the world. The Soviet bloc initiated propagating companies against the capitalist world showing it as the source of all the wickedness in the world.

Conclusion

Concluding on all the above-discussed information, it should be stated that after World War II the world was divided between the two superpowers of the Soviet Union and the United States. These countries propagated different concepts of economical development and political system organization. All of that led to the unprecedented armament rush in the history of humanity putting the world on the edge of the danger of nuclear warfare.

References

Jeffry A. Frieden, Global Capitalism: Its Fall and Rise in the Twentieth Century. W.W. Norton Press, 2007