Notes
|
Ideology
- Communism vs Capitalism – 19th century, aims -Bolshevik Revolution 1917: Red Scare in USA: 1920s -Western attempts to destroy Communism 1918-22 -Salami tactics used in post-war Europe; Czech Coup -COMINTERN -COMINFORM and worldwide revolution -Rise of Communist Parties post-war: Greece, France, Italy -Marshall Plan and ‘Dollar Imperialism’ -US calls for ‘free trade’ and ‘democracy’ in Atlantic Charter and war conferences -Iron Curtain Speech, Stalin’s Speeches and Ideology -Western Liberal Democracy vs. Soviet Totalitarianism -Stalinism = paranoid and hostile to outside world? Economic Rivalry -US economic policy -Open markets, free trade, IMF, GATT, World Bank, Bretton Woods Agreement -Marshall Plan aim to prevent Communism by solving poverty in Europe -COMECON – Soviet attempt to create economic sphere of influence, Imposed Stalinist economic systems -German Problem Stalin feared economically powerful Germany, US wanted to export to Germany, West introduced new currency in its zones, this led to Berlin Blockade -Iran Crisis 1946, Stalin/West wanted control of Iranian Oil Power Rivalry -The breakdown was a result of traditional great power rivalry -A balance of power always emerges in history, especially in the power-vacuum of post-war Europe, now Superpowers -Alexis de Tocqueville (1835) – US and Russia seemed destined to control half the world -Both expansionist power, they both needed to ‘feed’ their countries with raw materials, new markets, make the world safe for their countries -Kissinger (1980s) – Soviet policy a continuation of Tsarist empire building Was the war inevitable USSR -Roosevelt said at Yalta that he wanted US troops gone from Germany within 2 years -US expected USSR to be part of new global system UN, IMF, Bretton Woods, ACC in Germany -Stalin disregarded promises at Yalta regarding Eastern Europe, he used Salami Tactics to control east Europe -Remained in Northern Iran despite promises to withdraw -The Berlin blockade was aggressive -COMINFORM evidence of Stalin’s expansionism -Stalin promoted hostility to the West within the USSR US -USSR had legitimate security concerns, they had faced a hostile West since 1917, lost 20 million in war and had a weak economy they needed a buffer zone in Eastern Europe to prevent future attacks -USSR’s actions stemmed from USA’s actions, atomic bomb threatening, USA determined to impose its own ideas on world -Truman exaggerated Communist threat to Congress in order to defend its position in Europe -US viewed all Soviet actions as ideological they didn’t understand USSR’s need for security -Introduction of new currency into Berlin was provocative, US wanted an anti-Soviet state -Establishment of NATO was an aggressive action Both Sides -The West and USA feared communism as a threat to its existence, its presence in the world would also be a threat -USSR’s actions were suspicious and expansionist they went against the spirit of Yalta -Kennan’s Long Telegram presented a very fearful view of the USSR -Developing Red Scare in USA increased paranoia! China, Korea, USSR atomic bomb in 1949 -USSR scared due to weak position after war the US had a strong economy, nuclear monopoly -Stalin was a paranoid leader, totalitarian state meant his fear prevailed Orthodox Historians -USSR's fault -Written in the 1950s-1960s and their narrative were shaped by that of the US government -They argue that Communism was expansionist due to Marxist theory, and that they wanted world revolution against Capitalism Revisionist Historians -They emerged during the 1960s when many Americans began to question the actions of their own government over the controversial war in Vietnam -They believed that the USA was responsible for the Cold War. They argue that US policy was linked to the needs of capitalism Post Revisionist Historians - A third perspective emerged in the 1970s and 1980s that questioned both the orthodox and revisionists -US historian John Lewis Gaddis was a key proponent of this school of thought -Both sides failed to recognize the needs of each other and both overestimated the strength of each side Post Cold War Historians -Since the end of the Cold War in 1989, many Soviet archives have been opened which have allowed historians to see events from the Soviet perspective -They thought that both sides were to blame, but that Stalin really was a crazy leader and his actions encouraged war |
Which historiographical position do I agree with the most and why? |
I agree more with Post-Revisionist historians. I agree with them because they look at the blame of the cold-war from two different perspectives. They are more open minded and they are not biased towards one side unlike the Orthodox and Revisionist historians. They are able to see the good and the bad of both sides. The Americans hid a lot of things from the communists, and Stalin formed the Berlin blockade.
|