The theme of “polarization” is a tool by which historians can better understand contemporary American history. It is both a consequence of historical events and a contributing causal factor to the 1960s era onwards. By examining historical events, narratives and social movements, this essay argues that polarization is a part of the American experience, identity and development as a nation and culture. In exploring the multifaceted nature of the concept of polarization as a historical concept and as a lens by which to view contemporary American history, we will gain a deeper understanding of the intricacies of what it means to be America, who is American, what is American about identity and who defines it. Chafe frames the 1960s onwards within the frame of hope first and, as this progresses, highlights the inadequacies of not only the personalities that led and countered movements but also the American dream as a whole. Chafe vividly depicts American politics during the 1960s as polarized. Chafe’s framing of foreign and home policy through personalities such as Kennedy and Johnson is especially explicit in their connection to the persistence of conflicts and policy abroad and at home. Chafe argues that the Vietnam War and its anti-war sentiment increased polarization (213). Race mobilized the masses and deepened polarisation as the movement evolved …show more content…
The piece focused very much on the servicemen and women of the United States and those a part of American security infrAmerica’se during the Cold War. A greater framing of the home movements would have strengthened their argument, especially the perception of the “domino effect” of foreign policy. The framing of the gay rights movement was ultimately different to the feminist and women’s
The author is also a political historian, and has written many articles for magazines across the country. He was a history major from the University of Chicago, and later on, Pearlstein went and received his PhD at the University of Michigan for American culture. The book is broken up into four books into one, describing the events that happened in America during the 1960’s and 70’s. Going into detail describing disparity with the war, discrimination and how peoples’ opinions were taken into consideration. First we are introduced to the 1965 riot, which happened nine months after Lyndon Johnsons’ triumph over Barry Goldwater.
i. Difficulties faced by soldiers due to the nature of fighting in the Vietnam War - Personnel had difficulties with transportation supplied with adapted vehicles back seat faced rear to provide additional fire power (Source A) – It appears as if the government didn't worry enough to supply men with safe and capable equipment - Threat of traps led to fear as vehicles had to be parked on street at night (Source A) o Check for traps each morning became a daily ritual particularly in fuel tanks (Source A) o A request for a locking fuel cap was denied because weren’t entitled to one” (Source A) • What circumstances would have needed to arise for them to be entitled to one? The Offensive full guard was set up (24hrs a day), personnel got no sleep and were constantly on alert (Source A) – How significant would this have been in the personnel’s mental frame of mind?
Increasingly over the past two decades, and in part thanks to the publication of James Davison Hunter’s book, Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America, the idea of a culture war in American politics has been gaining attention. While the tension between conservatives and liberals is palpable, it’s intensity has proven hard to measure. However, it doesn’t seem that many Americans are polarized on the topic of polarization, as most would agree that the culture war is real (Fiorina, 2005). This thinking is what prompted Morris Fiorina to write the book Culture War. The Myth of a Polarized America?
In the early 1960s the U.S. began sending military advisors to South Vietnam beginning the Vietnam War, arguably the most controversial war in United States history. This incident followed Vietnam gaining its independence from the French Empire’s Indochina in 1954. The nation soon split, creating a communist North Vietnam, and a noncommunist South Vietnam. In fear of communism spreading the U.S. supported South Vietnam and sent troops. As the incident dragged on it caused a huge anti-war movement and a lot of political turmoil.The troops were withdrawn in 1973, the whole country fell to communism, and the U.S. failed. How did a superpower such as the U.S. take defeat from a small country like Vietnam? Many have wondered and continue to wonder
During the Progressive Era, our country was going through many changes and those changes have had numerous effects that are still apparent today. Theodore Roosevelt and Randolph Bourne both had very differing opinions about how citizens should be seen by themselves and their governments. The main difference between Roosevelt’s and Bourne’s theories on citizenship is the amount of domination and empowerment that was posed to the people. Roosevelt had thought that the people of American should only identify as American, even if they were born in another country. Bourne’s opinion was drastically different form Roosevelt’s by believing that the people of America should embrace their own cultures and share it with the rest of the country. Using Randolph Bourne’s “Trans-National America” and Theodore Roosevelt’s “True Americanism” this essay will show that over time Bourne’s idea of empowering the diversity of citizens has been more successful than Roosevelt’s idea of having a society that was more dominated by a the need for everyone to be the same.
...War and the Civil Rights Movements in order to illustrate how the 1960s was a time of “tumult and change.” To Anderson, it is these events, which sparked the demand for recognition of social and economic fairness. He makes prominent the idea that the 1960s served as the origin of activism and the birth of the civil rights movement, forever changing ideals that embody America. The book overall is comprehensive and a definite attention grabber. It shows how the decade had the effect of drastically transforming life in America and challenging the unequal status quo that has characterized most of the nation's history. Despite the violence and conflict that was provoked by these changes, the activism and the liberation movements that took place have left a permanent imprint upon the country.
America is a nation that is often glorified in textbooks as a nation of freedom, yet history shows a different, more radical viewpoint. In Howard Zinn’s A People's History of the United States, we take a look at American history through a different lens, one that is not focused on over glorifying our history, but giving us history through the eyes of the people. “This is a nation of inconsistencies”, as so eloquently put by Mary Elizabeth Lease highlights a nation of people who exploited and sought to keep down those who they saw as inferior, reminding us of more than just one view on a nation’s history, especially from people and a gender who have not had an easy ride.
Godfrey Hodgson believes that the ideal for the American Exceptionalism stands for its great principle (rule of law, rights protection, constitution, and sovereignty of the people) that protects it from any political crisis that hit other great countries (xvi). He goes further and suggests that ideology was involved in establishing the exceptional character of American civilization (7). However, his purpose in writing the Myth of American Exceptionalism is to dispute Perry Miller’s (1905-1963) assumption of “the uniqueness of the American experience.” Essentially, he argues that the exaggeration of the American experience and destiny is extremely dangerous, “because they are the soil in which unreal and hubristic assumptions of the American history have grown” (16). That is to say, the American experience is less exceptional than it seems. He offers two counter arguments. First, the history of the United States is connected to the history of Europe. Second, the social and political ideals, especially democracy and liberty, have come into existence after a struggle as anywhere else (Hodgson 16). For him, it is true that American history has distinct and original features; yet, it is also true that America always been greatly influenced by European
President Dwight Eisenhower conditionally pledged to support South Vietnam’s new nation in 1955. In the time period between 1955-1961 the United States pumped seven billion dollars in aid so that Vietnam would not “go over quickly” like a “row of dominoes” (McNamara 31). In the next 6 years Vietnam would cost America billions of dollars, thousands of lives, and the disaffection of much of the United States public. Yet in the end, South Vietnam would fall to the North less than 2 years after the United States military involvement ceased.
It is understandable that some Americans strongly opposed the United States getting involved in the Vietnam War. It had not been a long time since the end of World War II and simply put, most Americans were tired of fighting. Mark Atwood Lawrence is one of the people who opposed our involvement in the Vietnam War. In his essay, “Vietnam: A Mistake of Western Alliance”, Lawrence argues that the Vietnam War was unnecessary and that it went against our democratic policies, but that there were a lot of things that influenced our involvement.
American Public Opinion of the Vietnam War At the beginning of the U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, in 1965, The American public favored the idea of war because they feared the threat of communism. Polls conducted in 1965, showed 80 percent of the population agreed with President Johnson and were for the war. Rousseau 11. The U.S. got involved in the war to stop communism. from spreading throughout South Asia.
The 1960’s and early 1970’s were a time that eternally changed the culture and humanity of America. It was a time widely known for peace and love when in reality; many minorities were struggling to gain a modicum of equality and freedom. It was a time, in which a younger generation rebelled against the conventional norms, questioning power and government, and insisting on more freedoms for minorities. In addition, an enormous movement began rising in opposition to the Vietnam War. It was a time of brutal altercations, with the civil rights movement and the youth culture demanding equality and the war in Vietnam put public loyalty to the test. Countless African-Americans, Native-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, women, and college students became frustrated, angry, and disillusioned by the turmoil around them.
James Wilson’s article, “How Divided are We?”, attempts to convince the reader that there is polarization (a culture war) in the United States. Wilson does not define polarization by partisan disagreements solely, rather as “an intense commitment to a candidate, a culture, or an ideology that sets people in one group definitively apart from people in another, rival group” (Canon 205). This polarization stretches to the extent that one group’s set of beliefs is totally correct and the rival is wholly wrong (Canon 206). Wilson provides three chief factors for the growth of polarization...
"From the first day that the United States won its independance, thoughtful Americans have attempted to define the new national identity" that decolonization invited. Becoming an independant political nation forced citizens to suddenly devise a "community and character" (Finkelman, 63) worthy of this newborn America. It was believed that, once free from Birtish fetters, a unique American character would emerge automatically. But this was not so, and it was left up to the artits, politictians, scientists, businessmen and women, and every other citizen to contrive the American identity. Those who were most accomplished at scrutinizing the American identity and what it was, were the many authors and writers of the 19th century.
Although the sixties were a decade in which the United States became a more open, more tolerant, and a freer country, in some ways it became less of these things. During the sixties, America intervened in other nations and efforts were made to stop the progress of the civil rights movement. Because of America’s foreign policy and Americans fight against the civil rights movement, it is clear that the sixties in America were not purely a decade of openness, tolerance, and freedom in the United States.