HST 202 Module #9
World War II
Welcome to HST 202! This is the ninth learning module looking at World War II in the United States.
Rule number nine of history: tear down your idols. The idea of statues is so frustrating for a historian as they create an internal war within us. I have been known to stop and read every placard on every statue in every town I go on vacation with my family. As I read about the historical importance of whatever mundane event or person is being given credit, I can hear both the collective groan of boredom and the eyes rolling back into the head of my wife and children. What can I say? I like the statues! But the sad reality is some of these statues should not exist. Historically speaking, the figures were created initially as shrines to deities. This goes all the way to when man first learned how to chisel into a rock. But then eventually, as society aged, so did people's taste. The dreaded politician or emperor or king also wanted to be immortalized for centuries. This blurred the lines of fact and reality. Gods were perfect; humans are not. The statue seems to neglect the fact that these very fallible people did very ordinary things. Very mundane things.
Next time you see a statue of Nero, remember he ALSO pooped. But the unfortunate truth is these enshrined leaders also did terrible things to others. And it seems that we as humans remove any sort of onus or responsibility for horrific actions made by men in bronzed statues. We must tear down statues (meteorically, of course, please don't catch a charge on my account). Remember that fallible people are in charge always, and just because you are on a pedestal, you should not be removed from the court of opinion. This goes for every person in a position of power, regardless if they are marbleized or not. It makes me sick to my stomach to see or read all the people who venerate politicians, mostly if they ignore all the war crimes and human rights that have been violated in the state's name. It makes you wonder: does everyone or no one deserve a statue?
In the words of Shelly from his epic poem, Ozymandias: "Look on my works ye mighty, and despair."
Welcome to HST 202! This is the ninth learning module looking at World War II in the United States.
Rule number nine of history: tear down your idols. The idea of statues is so frustrating for a historian as they create an internal war within us. I have been known to stop and read every placard on every statue in every town I go on vacation with my family. As I read about the historical importance of whatever mundane event or person is being given credit, I can hear both the collective groan of boredom and the eyes rolling back into the head of my wife and children. What can I say? I like the statues! But the sad reality is some of these statues should not exist. Historically speaking, the figures were created initially as shrines to deities. This goes all the way to when man first learned how to chisel into a rock. But then eventually, as society aged, so did people's taste. The dreaded politician or emperor or king also wanted to be immortalized for centuries. This blurred the lines of fact and reality. Gods were perfect; humans are not. The statue seems to neglect the fact that these very fallible people did very ordinary things. Very mundane things.
Next time you see a statue of Nero, remember he ALSO pooped. But the unfortunate truth is these enshrined leaders also did terrible things to others. And it seems that we as humans remove any sort of onus or responsibility for horrific actions made by men in bronzed statues. We must tear down statues (meteorically, of course, please don't catch a charge on my account). Remember that fallible people are in charge always, and just because you are on a pedestal, you should not be removed from the court of opinion. This goes for every person in a position of power, regardless if they are marbleized or not. It makes me sick to my stomach to see or read all the people who venerate politicians, mostly if they ignore all the war crimes and human rights that have been violated in the state's name. It makes you wonder: does everyone or no one deserve a statue?
In the words of Shelly from his epic poem, Ozymandias: "Look on my works ye mighty, and despair."
HIGHLIGHTS
READING
Carnes, Chapter 27: War and Peace: 1941-1945
My classes utilize both Howard Zinn's Patriot's History of the United States and Larry Schweikart's Patriot's History of the United States, mostly in excerpts posted to the modules. You can access the full text of People's History or Patriot's History by clicking on the links.
Carnes, Chapter 27: War and Peace: 1941-1945
My classes utilize both Howard Zinn's Patriot's History of the United States and Larry Schweikart's Patriot's History of the United States, mostly in excerpts posted to the modules. You can access the full text of People's History or Patriot's History by clicking on the links.
Zinn, Chapter 16: “A People’s War?”
"We, the governments of Great Britain and the United States, in the name of India, Burma, Malaya, Australia, British East Africa, British Guiana, Hong Kong, Siam, Singapore, Egypt, Palestine, Canada, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, as well as Puerto Rico, Guam, the Philippines, Hawaii, Alaska, and the Virgin Islands, hereby declare most emphatically, that this is not an imperialist war." Thus went a skit put on in the United States in the year 1939 by the Communist party. Two years later, Germany invaded Soviet Russia, and the American Communist party, which had repeatedly described the war between the Axis Powers and the Allied Powers as an imperialist war, now called it a "people's war" against Fascism. Indeed almost all Americans were now in agreement-capitalists, Communists, Democrats, Republicans, poor, rich, and middle class-that this was indeed a people's war.
Was it?
By certain evidence, it was the most popular war the United States had ever fought. Never had a greater proportion of the country participated in a war: 18 million served in the armed forces, 10 million overseas; 25 million workers gave of their pay envelope regularly for war bonds. But could this be considered a manufactured support, since all the power of the nation-not only of the government, but the press, the church, and even the chief radical organizations-was behind the calls for all-out war? Was there an undercurrent of reluctance; were there unpublicized signs of resistance?
It was a war against an enemy of unspeakable evil. Hitler's Germany was extending totalitarianism, racism, militarism, and overt aggressive warfare beyond what an already cynical world had experienced. And yet, did the governments conducting this war-England, the United States, the Soviet Union-represent something significantly different, so that their victory would be a blow to imperialism, racism, totalitarianism, militarism, in the world?
Would the behavior of the United States during the war-in military action abroad, in treatment of minorities at home-be in keeping with a "people's war"? Would the country's wartime policies respect the rights of ordinary people everywhere to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? And would postwar America, in its policies at home and overseas, exemplify the values for which the war was supposed to have been fought?
These questions deserve thought. At the time of World War II, the atmosphere was too dense with war fervor to permit them to be aired.
For the United States to step forward as a defender of helpless countries matched its image in American high school history textbooks, but not its record in world affairs. It had opposed the Haitian revolution for independence from France at the start of the nineteenth century. It had instigated a war with Mexico and taken half of that country. It bad pretended to help Cuba win freedom from Spain, and then planted itself in Cuba with a military base, investments, and rights of intervention. It had seized Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and fought a brutal war to subjugate the Filipinos. It had "opened" Japan to its trade with gunboats and threats. It had declared an Open Door Policy in China as a means of assuring that the United States would have opportunities equal to other imperial powers in exploiting China. It had sent troops to Peking with other nations, to assert Western supremacy in China, and kept them there for over thirty years…
…The plight of Jews in German-occupied Europe, which many people thought was at the heart of the war against the Axis, was not a chief concern of Roosevelt. Henry Feingold's research (The Politics of Rescue) shows that, while the Jews were being put in camps and the process of annihilation was beginning that would end in the horrifying extermination of 6 million Jews and millions of non-Jews, Roosevelt failed to take steps that might have saved thousands of lives. lie did not see it as a high priority; he left it to the State Department, and in the State Department anti-Semitism and a cold bureaucracy became obstacles to action.
Was the war being fought to establish that Hitler was wrong in his ideas of white Nordic supremacy over "inferior" races? The United States' armed forces were segregated by race. When troops were jammed onto the Queen Mary in early 1945 to go to combat duty in the European theater, the blacks were stowed down in the depths of the ship near the engine room, as far as possible from the fresh air of the deck, in a bizarre reminder of the slave voyages of old…
…In one of its policies, the United States came close to direct duplication of Fascism. This was in its treatment of the Japanese-Americans living on the West Coast. After the Pearl Harbor attack, anti-Japanese hysteria spread in the government. One Congressman said: "I'm for catching every Japanese in America, Alaska and Hawaii now and putting them in concentration camps. ... Damn them! Let's get rid of them!"
Franklin D. Roosevelt did not share this frenzy, but he calmly signed Executive Order 9066, in February 1942, giving the army the power, without warrants or indictments or hearings, to arrest every Japanese-American on the West Coast-110,000 men, women, and children-to take them from their homes, transport them to camps far into the interior, and keep them there under prison conditions. Three-fourths of these were Nisei-children horn in the United States of Japanese parents and therefore American citizens. The other fourth-the Issei, born in Japan-were barred by law from becoming citizens. In 1944 the Supreme Court upheld the forced evacuation on the grounds of military necessity. The Japanese remained in those camps for over three years…
…The war not only put the United States in a position to dominate much of the world; it created conditions for effective control at home. The unemployment, the economic distress, and the consequent turmoil that had marked the thirties, only partly relieved by New Deal measures, had been pacified, overcome by the greater turmoil of the war. The war brought higher prices for farmers, higher wages, enough prosperity for enough of the population to assume against the rebellions that so threatened the thirties. As Lawrence Wiltner writes, "The war rejuvenated American capitalism." The biggest gains were in corporate profits, which rose from $6.4 billion in 1940 to $10.8 billion in 1944. But enough went to workers and farmers to make them feel the system was doing well for them…
"We, the governments of Great Britain and the United States, in the name of India, Burma, Malaya, Australia, British East Africa, British Guiana, Hong Kong, Siam, Singapore, Egypt, Palestine, Canada, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, as well as Puerto Rico, Guam, the Philippines, Hawaii, Alaska, and the Virgin Islands, hereby declare most emphatically, that this is not an imperialist war." Thus went a skit put on in the United States in the year 1939 by the Communist party. Two years later, Germany invaded Soviet Russia, and the American Communist party, which had repeatedly described the war between the Axis Powers and the Allied Powers as an imperialist war, now called it a "people's war" against Fascism. Indeed almost all Americans were now in agreement-capitalists, Communists, Democrats, Republicans, poor, rich, and middle class-that this was indeed a people's war.
Was it?
By certain evidence, it was the most popular war the United States had ever fought. Never had a greater proportion of the country participated in a war: 18 million served in the armed forces, 10 million overseas; 25 million workers gave of their pay envelope regularly for war bonds. But could this be considered a manufactured support, since all the power of the nation-not only of the government, but the press, the church, and even the chief radical organizations-was behind the calls for all-out war? Was there an undercurrent of reluctance; were there unpublicized signs of resistance?
It was a war against an enemy of unspeakable evil. Hitler's Germany was extending totalitarianism, racism, militarism, and overt aggressive warfare beyond what an already cynical world had experienced. And yet, did the governments conducting this war-England, the United States, the Soviet Union-represent something significantly different, so that their victory would be a blow to imperialism, racism, totalitarianism, militarism, in the world?
Would the behavior of the United States during the war-in military action abroad, in treatment of minorities at home-be in keeping with a "people's war"? Would the country's wartime policies respect the rights of ordinary people everywhere to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? And would postwar America, in its policies at home and overseas, exemplify the values for which the war was supposed to have been fought?
These questions deserve thought. At the time of World War II, the atmosphere was too dense with war fervor to permit them to be aired.
For the United States to step forward as a defender of helpless countries matched its image in American high school history textbooks, but not its record in world affairs. It had opposed the Haitian revolution for independence from France at the start of the nineteenth century. It had instigated a war with Mexico and taken half of that country. It bad pretended to help Cuba win freedom from Spain, and then planted itself in Cuba with a military base, investments, and rights of intervention. It had seized Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and fought a brutal war to subjugate the Filipinos. It had "opened" Japan to its trade with gunboats and threats. It had declared an Open Door Policy in China as a means of assuring that the United States would have opportunities equal to other imperial powers in exploiting China. It had sent troops to Peking with other nations, to assert Western supremacy in China, and kept them there for over thirty years…
…The plight of Jews in German-occupied Europe, which many people thought was at the heart of the war against the Axis, was not a chief concern of Roosevelt. Henry Feingold's research (The Politics of Rescue) shows that, while the Jews were being put in camps and the process of annihilation was beginning that would end in the horrifying extermination of 6 million Jews and millions of non-Jews, Roosevelt failed to take steps that might have saved thousands of lives. lie did not see it as a high priority; he left it to the State Department, and in the State Department anti-Semitism and a cold bureaucracy became obstacles to action.
Was the war being fought to establish that Hitler was wrong in his ideas of white Nordic supremacy over "inferior" races? The United States' armed forces were segregated by race. When troops were jammed onto the Queen Mary in early 1945 to go to combat duty in the European theater, the blacks were stowed down in the depths of the ship near the engine room, as far as possible from the fresh air of the deck, in a bizarre reminder of the slave voyages of old…
…In one of its policies, the United States came close to direct duplication of Fascism. This was in its treatment of the Japanese-Americans living on the West Coast. After the Pearl Harbor attack, anti-Japanese hysteria spread in the government. One Congressman said: "I'm for catching every Japanese in America, Alaska and Hawaii now and putting them in concentration camps. ... Damn them! Let's get rid of them!"
Franklin D. Roosevelt did not share this frenzy, but he calmly signed Executive Order 9066, in February 1942, giving the army the power, without warrants or indictments or hearings, to arrest every Japanese-American on the West Coast-110,000 men, women, and children-to take them from their homes, transport them to camps far into the interior, and keep them there under prison conditions. Three-fourths of these were Nisei-children horn in the United States of Japanese parents and therefore American citizens. The other fourth-the Issei, born in Japan-were barred by law from becoming citizens. In 1944 the Supreme Court upheld the forced evacuation on the grounds of military necessity. The Japanese remained in those camps for over three years…
…The war not only put the United States in a position to dominate much of the world; it created conditions for effective control at home. The unemployment, the economic distress, and the consequent turmoil that had marked the thirties, only partly relieved by New Deal measures, had been pacified, overcome by the greater turmoil of the war. The war brought higher prices for farmers, higher wages, enough prosperity for enough of the population to assume against the rebellions that so threatened the thirties. As Lawrence Wiltner writes, "The war rejuvenated American capitalism." The biggest gains were in corporate profits, which rose from $6.4 billion in 1940 to $10.8 billion in 1944. But enough went to workers and farmers to make them feel the system was doing well for them…
ASSIGNMENTS
Forum Discussion #10
- Forum Discussion #10
Forum Discussion #10
Wisecrack is a US-American film, and video production company founded in 2014 and produces various web series and podcasts such as Thug Notes, Earthling Cinema, and 8-Bit Philosophy. The group focuses on analyzing anime, film, literature, and video games, drawing out philosophy, sociology, psychology, and other meanings that we can interpret from media. Watch this short video on fascism and answer the following questions:
Would you consider former President Trump a fascist, in the vein of Adolf Hitler or Benito Mussolini? Why or why not? Use real-world examples from World War II in your response.
Your initial post should be no less than two paragraphs with at least two sources. You must have your discussion question posted by Sunday by 11:59 pm. Remember, you will be required to respond to two of your peers with a thoughtful question/rebuttal before 11:59 pm.
Need help? Remember the Discussion Board Rubric.
DISCLAIMERS
Would you consider former President Trump a fascist, in the vein of Adolf Hitler or Benito Mussolini? Why or why not? Use real-world examples from World War II in your response.
Your initial post should be no less than two paragraphs with at least two sources. You must have your discussion question posted by Sunday by 11:59 pm. Remember, you will be required to respond to two of your peers with a thoughtful question/rebuttal before 11:59 pm.
Need help? Remember the Discussion Board Rubric.
DISCLAIMERS
- (This is not professional or legal advice. If it were, the article would be followed with an invoice. Do not expect to win any social media arguments by hyperlinking my articles. Chances are, we are both wrong).
- (Trigger Warning: This article or section, or pages it links to, contains antiquated language referring to people of color which may be triggering to some.)
- (Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is granted, provided that the author (or authors) and www.ryanglancaster.com are appropriately cited.)