Wednesday, March 18, 2009

The Return to Total War—the United States, 1942

Total war engulfed the world powers once again during World War II, and the United States was certainly no exception in this regard. In western democracies, people were not nearly as ready for another 20th century bloodbath as were the people of the angry, disillusioned Axis powers. Thus, President Roosevelt’s first address to Congress in January 1942 shows him trying to rally the American people for what he warns will be another “all-out” war to counter the aggression of the Axis nations (you can read the speech by clicking here). Notice how he links “modern methods of warfare” with “working and producing” as well as “shooting and fighting” and calls for all-out economic mobilization, conceding that “it will mean the dislocation of the lives and occupations of millions.” How much diversion of national labor and income does he say the war will require? Pay attention to his final call for “total victory.” Do either the means he proposes for fighting the war or this end suggest concern with limiting the war?

The poster above and song (you can see the sheet music and lyrics to the song by clicking here) dealing with Rosie the Riveter, represents one effect of this all-out effort: To compensate for the fifteen million people, mostly men, who were drafted into the armed forces, six million American women were drawn into war work. According to these materials, what were they asked to do? How might such work have affected conventional ideas about gender roles and women’s rights? Your thoughts…

Roosevelt’s Declaration of War Message

For nearly a decade, the Japanese had been expanding into China while the United States worked to thwart the encroachment (yet, ironically, all the while supplying Japan with 80% of its oil and iron ore). Tensions between the two countries remained high, as negotiations either failed or were dismissed. When Japan imperialistically sought to consolidate all of East Asia under its domain in 1941, the United States responded with diplomatic pressure and economic embargoes on goods vital to the Japanese economy. Japanese leaders concluded that to preserve their empire they must fight the United States soon, so preparations were made to attack Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and expand further in Asia. The United States had broken Japan’s diplomatic secret code and knew that some attack was imminent, but the location was not known. American leaders guessed the attack would come in Southeast Asia (possibly Malaya, possibly the Philippines), so only general warnings were sent to forces at Pearl Harbor. On Sunday morning, December 7, 1941, Japanese planes stuck American forces at Pearl Harbor in two separate waves, crippling the Pacific fleet and killing more than 2,000 Americans. The next day, President Franklin Roosevelt gave a speech to a joint session of Congress. You can read the speech by clicking here.

After reading the speech, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: In what manner does Roosevelt characterize the actions of the Japanese? Why does he offer a listing of locations where the Japanese have attacked? How will the United States “make certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us?” Your thoughts…

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Join Us on Wednesday, March 25th for a Screening of "Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"

The premiere of the Five for Five Film Festival launched today with James Moll's The Last Days in the theater. Needless to say, the screening was a success. Thanks to all who came to the premiere. You were a superb audience, and obviously the film had a profound effect on all in attendance. Next week, on Wednesday, March 25th, the second film in our series will be screened: Stanley Kubrick's 1964 masterpiece Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. For me, Dr. Strangelove is the greatest Cold War film ever made, and one of the greatest films ever made of any genre. Kubrick's film was nominated for 4 Oscars in 1964, including Best Picture. The author of your textbook, Dr. Jerry Bentley describes it as a film that "comedically represented the leaders of the United States and the USSR as insane morons whose irrational policies guaranteed the destruction of all life on earth through nuclear war." It really is a primary document in and of itself, as it really manages to give the viewer an authentic impression of the mindset of Americans at this extremely frightening time in human history. The film will be shown at 2:30 pm in my room. Again, NO EXTRA CREDIT IS OFFERED FOR ATTENDING. There are only 30 available spots due to limited seating in my room, so please sign up early right here in the comments section of this blog post. Dr. Strangelove is rated PG, and it has a runtime of 93 minutes. A trailer for the film can be viewed below. I hope to see you there.

"The Last Days" Discussion Board


I find that a Holocaust film without actors but instead starring the actual survivors is most effective. As many times as I have seen The Last Days now, it never ceases to grab my heart and mind and wring it mercilessly. For those of you that made it to the screening, what are your thoughts regarding what we viewed?

Darfur Now?

So many by now have heard the word "Darfur" but have little idea what has gone on in that region of Sudan over the past several years. As I reflect on the Holocaust, and as I try to hope that we have seen our last genocide, I am troubled the fact that not only have we seen questionable or deliberate acts of genocide since the Holocaust, but we've seen it several times (Cambodia 1975-1979, East Timor 1973-1982, Iraq 1988, Burundi 1993-2000, Rwanda 1994, Bosnia 1994, Chechnya 1999-?, Sudan 2003-?). The atrocities that have taken place in the Darfur region of Sudan are incredibly troubling. The BBC, as always, has excellent coverage of the Sudan situation that you can read about in their Special Report by clicking here. They also have an excellent question and answer page on the topic that you can read by clicking here. Remember folks, ignorance is not bliss, but knowledge is indeed empowering.

“Führer, You Order. We Obey”

On gaining power, the Nazis began to implement the anti-Jewish policies Hitler and the Nazis had promised in Mein Kampf and thousands of books, pamphlets, and speeches. Jewish shops were plundered while police looked the other way, Jewish physicians were excluded from hospitals, Jewish judges lost their posts, Jewish students were denied admission to universities, and Jewish veterans were stripped of their benefits. In 1935 the Nazis promulgated the Nuremberg Laws, which deprived Jews of citizenship and outlawed marriage between Jews and non-Jews. In November 1938 the regime organized nationwide violence against Jewish synagogues and shops in what came to be known as Kristallnacht, or “night of the broken glass.”

After the war began in late 1939, conquests in Eastern Europe gave the Nazis new opportunities to address the “Jewish problem.” In early 1941 they began to deport Jews form Germany and conquered territories to Poland and Czechoslovakia, where Jews were employed as slave laborers or placed in concentration camps. In June 1941 special units known as Einsatzgruppe (“special action forces”) were organized to exterminate Jews in territories conquered on the eastern front. In eighteen months, they gunned down over 1 million Jews and smaller numbers of Gypsies and non-Jewish Slavs. Then in January 1942 at the Wannsee Conference outside Berlin, the Nazi leadership approved the Final Solution to the so-called Jewish problem. Their goal became the extermination of European Jewry, and to reach it they constructed special camps where their murderous work could be done efficiently and quickly.

When World War II ended, the Nazis had not achieved their goal of annihilating Europe’s 11 million Jews. They did, however, slaughter close to 6 million, thus earning themselves a permanent place in the long history of man’s inhumanity to man.

The document excerpts that I would like you to read comes form the memoirs of Rudolf Höss, the commandant of the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland between 1940 and 1943. Born in 1900, Höss abandoned plans to become a priest after serving in World War I and became involved in a number of right-wing political movements, including the Nazi Party, which he joined in the early 1920s. After serving a jail sentence for participating in the murder of a teacher suspected of “treason,” Höss became a farmer and then in 1934, on the urging of Heinrich Himmler, a member of the Nazi SS, or Schutzstaffel (Guard Detachment). The SS under Himmler grew from a small security force to guard Hitler and other high-ranking Nazis into a powerful party organization involved in police work, state security, intelligence gathering, administration of conquered territories, and management of the concentration camps. After postings at the Dachau and Sachsenhausen camps, Höss was appointed commandant of Auschwitz, which began as a camp for Polish political prisoers but became a huge, sprawling complex where over a million Jews were gassed or shot and tens of thousands of prisoners served as slave laborers in nearby factories. In 1943 Höss became overseer of all the Third Reich’s concentration camps, but he returned to Auschwitz in 1944 to administer the murder of 400,000 Hungarian Jews. After his capture in 1946, he was tried and convicted for crimes against humanity by the international military tribunal at Nuremberg. He was hanged on April 16, 1947, within sight of the villa where he and his family had lived while he served as commandant at Auschwitz.

While awaiting trial, Höss was encouraged to compose his memoirs to sharpen his recollection of events he experienced. In the document I would like you to read (you can read it by clicking here), he discusses his views of the Jews and his reaction to the mass killings he planned and witnessed.

After reading the document, I would like you all to reflect on and discuss the following: What does Höss claim to have been his attitude toward the Jews? How do his statements about the Jews accord with his assertion that he was a fanatic National Socialist? Does Höss make any distinction between the Russians and Jews that he had exterminated? What was Höss’ attitude toward the Final Solution? How does Höss characterize his role in the mass extermination of the Jews? How did his involvement in the Holocaust affect him personally? How according to Höss, did it affect other German participants? What would you describe as the key components of Höss’ personality? To what extent was his personality shaped by the Nazi philosophy to which he was dedicated? What insight does this excerpt provide about the issue of how much the German people knew of and participated in the Holocaust? Your thoughts…

Himmler on “Evacuation of the Jews”

One of the most heart-crushing chapters in all of human history is the Holocaust. For me, the most disturbing part of this piece of history is the fact that the perpetrators spoke of their actions in the most nonchalant of manners, as if what was taking place was truly normal and desired by the people (unfortunately the latter could be argued as true in the case of so many at this time). Such temperament is clearly exemplified by Heinrich Himmler’s words in a statement given on October 4, 1943. As the head of the SS (Germany’s police force), Himmler took a lead role in Jewish removal and eventual attempted extermination during World War II. You can read his words by clicking here.

After reading Himmler’s words, I would like you to reflect on and discuss the following: How has Germany’s position on dealing with the Jewish population of Germany obviously shifted since the passing of the Nuremberg laws? What can be implied from Himmler’s words as to why this is so? Is the Nazi government any longer trying to force the Jews to leave Germany? Why do you so answer? In what ways does Himmler unapologetically describe Jews in Germany? Do the Nazis have a plan to make their dealings with their Jewish population public? Himmler states that the German government “had the moral right” to carry out their policies against the “Jewish problem.” In what sense does he mean this, and how does he attempt to justify his words? Your thoughts…

A Return to Total War—Germany, 1942

The world saw its first brush with total war in the second decade of the 20th century with WWI. The result was 10 million dead and several million more casualties. Destructive as that conflict proved, it was soon eclipsed by the greater violence that exploded in World War II. By the close of that war in 1945, Europe and the rest of the world had to face the fact that modern nations had unleashed a new kind of unlimited and extremely destructive warfare that had the potential to destroy all of humanity.

The escalating nature of the conflict can be seen in a transcript of a radio broadcast delivered to the German public in October 1942 by Hermann Goering, Hitler’s second in command, who was then trying to mobilize his nation’s economy more fully to match the growing demands of the war (you can read the radio address by clicking here). Goering’s address to the German people reveals how the later American entry into the war (we’ll talk about that in greater detail tomorrow) and its escalation into a total conflict began to affect Germany. Despite having control over most of Europe and eastern Russia, Germany was beginning to suffer from scarcities by late 1942.

After reading the address, I would like you all to think about and discuss the following: What seems to have been most lacking? Observe how Goering reminds the Germans that in the face of such hardships, they must set aside personal interests and fight as “an entire nation, as a totality.” What does he say they must be prepared to give up, and why? His comments on “enemy air attacks” are also worth noting. How does he characterize them? What does he claim they will destroy along with “harmless people?” Do his remarks suggest that the air raids were having a significant effect? What about his reaction to the American threat to wage an all-out economic war against the Axis? How is this a unique characteristic of the time period? Your thoughts…

Monday, March 16, 2009

Neville Chamberlain’s Speech in the House of Commons

In the late 1930s, German leader Adolf Hitler began to expand the German empire. First, the Austrians gave in to Nazi aggression, and agreed to an Anschluss. Next on Hitler’s agenda was Czechoslovakia. The Czech government turned to Britain and France for help, but they refused. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, desperate to maintain European peace, decided to appease Germany by letting it have Czechoslovakia. In the speech that I would like you to read (you can read it by clicking here; read pgs. 429-431) to the British House of Commons, Chamberlain explains his decision.

After reading the speech, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: What reasons did Chamberlain give for signing a treaty with Hitler? What is Chamberlain’s overall tone in his speech? What was discussed with Germany at the Munich Conference according to Chamberlain? What is “the real triumph” of the Munich Conference according to Chamberlain? What are his overall goals for Europe? Do you agree or disagree with these goals? Why? Are his aims reasonable in your opinion? Your thoughts…

Japanese Foreign Policy Priorities on the Eve of the China War

Despite the failure of the takeover of central Tokyo by nationalist soldiers and officers of the First Division in early 1936, the military retained a strong voice in government. Many politicians bent over backward in support of the military and its right-wing agenda in order to prevent renewed violence. The cabinet of Hirota Koti, in power from March 1936 to February 1937, increased military spending and passed stricter laws against communists and socialists.

In August 1936 the Hirota cabinet approved the policy on foreign and domestic policy that I would like you to read (you can read it by clicking here; read section 2, pgs. 418-420). It is an effort to strike a balance between the army’s traditional focus on north China and Manchuria as a means of countering the Soviet Union’s strength and the navy’s new southward policy and its concerns with U.S. naval power. It also shows the degree to which militarism and expansionism had become the bedrock of Japanese politics on the eve of the war with China.

After you have read the document, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: What view of Japan’s role in Asian affairs is expressed in this statement? What views of the Soviet Union and the Western powers does the document express? According to the authors of the document, what steps must be taken to prepare Japan for the foreign policy challenges it will meet? What specific statements in the document reveal the militarist priorities of the Hirota government? How do the ideas expressed in this document compare to those of the Black Dragon Society’s 1930 anniversary statement? Your thoughts…

Memos on the Aims of Germany and Japan

In the 1930s, Germany and Japan began to build up their military power and agitate for more territory. The Japanese invaded Manchuria in 1931, and the Germans took the Rhineland in 1936 (an act specifically forbidden by the Treaty of Versailles). Their goal of world domination was not a secret, as the two memos that I would like you to read suggest. The first was written by Douglas Miller, an official at the United States embassy in Berlin (you can read that memo by clicking here). The second was written by Joseph Grew, the U.S. ambassador to Japan (you can read that memo by clicking here).

After reading the two memos, I would like you all to think about and discuss the following: What does Douglas Miller outline as the “main purpose of the Nazis?” Why, according to Miller, have so many “adopted the National Socialist [Nazi] point of view for the time being?” What were the “two other purposes subsidiary to the main purpose” of the Nazis, and why are these aims sought? What dangers, according to Miller, do the Nazis pose to German society and their neighbors? What is at the root of the danger posed to Germany’s neighbors? How does Joseph Grew describe the current temperament of Japan? How does Grew say some in the U.S. government are actually strengthening the stand of the Japanese? How are Japan’s political aims described by Grew? Is the U.S. officially taking an anti-Japanese stance in this document? How does Grew propose the U.S. should react to the Japanese threat? What are the similarities between the memos from Douglas Miller and Joseph Grew? Your thoughts…

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

The Five for Five Film Festival Kicks off with a Screening of James Moll's "The Last Days" Tuesday, March 17 at 2:30 pm in the Theater

Ladies and gentlemen, on Tuesday we will have a special screening of James Moll's 1998 holocaust documentary The Last Days. The film will be shown in the theater at 2:30pm. THERE WILL BE NO EXTRA CREDIT GIVEN FOR ATTENDING. This will be the first in a series of five films shown in celebration of our fifth and final season together. The remaining four titles will be announced soon. This screening is only for serious and mature students that truly want to learn more about the Holocaust through the words of Hungarians who actually lived it. For any student that plans to attend, please respect the follow rules of our screening:

ABSOLUTELY...
NO FOOD OR DRINK OF ANY KIND IS ALLOWED IN THEATER

NO TALKING OF ANY KIND WILL BE TOLERATED DURING THE FILM

NO TEXT MESSAGING WILL BE TOLERATED DURING THE FILM

NO WORK IS ALLOWED TO BE DONE FROM OTHER CLASSES (BY ALL MEANS IF YOU HAVE MATH HOMEWORK, DO IT, BUT AT HOME, NOT DURING OUR FILM)

NO CONSTANTLY GETTING UP AND DOWN DURING THE FILM

We ask that you please stay for the entire film, and if you cannot stay for the entire film, please do not come (this is not to be rude, but people leaving early does serve as a distraction). Anyone that does not comply with these rules will be immediately escorted out of the theater and barred from future events (there will be 4 more films screened this season). There will be no warnings given as this is the final warning and request. I hope to see you there. A trailer for the film can be viewed below. The runtime is 87 minutes, and the film is rated PG-13 for graphic images and descriptions of Holocaust atrocities.


Unit 12 Test Questions/Discussion

If you want to discuss any items on the study guide, this is the place to do it... cheers...

Hitler’s Dreams

Born the son of an Austrian customs official and is German wife in 1889, Adolf Hitler moved to Vienna at the age of nineteen to seek a career as an artist or architect. His efforts failed, however, and he lived at the bottom of Viennese society, drifting from one low-paying job to another. In 1912 he moved to Munich, where his life fell into the same purposeless pattern. Enlistment in the German army in World War I rescued Hitler, giving him comradeship and a sense of direction he had lacked. After the war a shattered Hitler returned to Munich, where in 1919 he joined the small German Workers’ Party, which in 1920 changed its name to the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazis.

After becoming leader of the National Socialists, Hitler staged an abortive coup d’état against the government of the German state of Bavaria in 1923. For this he was sentenced to a five-year prison term (serving only nine months), during which he wrote the first volume of Mein Kampf (My Struggle). You can read excerpts from his work by clicking here. To a remarkable degree this work, completed in 1925, provided the ideas that inspired millions of followers and guided the National Socialists until their destruction in 1945.

After reading Hitler’s words, I would like you to reflect on and discuss the following: What broad purpose does Hitler see in human existence? How, in Hitler’s view, are the Aryans and Jews dissimilar? What is Hitler’s view of political leadership? What role do parliaments play in a “folkish” state, according to Hitler? How does Hitler plan to reorient German foreign policy? What goals does he set for Germany, and how are they to be achieved? Based on these excerpts, what can you infer about his objections to the ideologies of democracy, liberalism, and socialism? How do Hitler’s view of race compare to those of von Treitschke? Your thoughts…

What is Fascism?

Fascism was a new political force that emerged in opposition to socialism during the post-WWI era. The term and ideology was invented and defined by Italian dictator Benito Mussolini in the 1920s. Mussolini came to power after the “March on Rome” in 1922, and was appointed Prime Minister by King Victor Emmanuel III. This ultimately resulted in his takeover of the Italian government, putting his Fascist Party in full control. While fascism can be rather difficult to define in simple terms, Mussolini wrote an entry for the Italian Encyclopedia on the definition of fascism in 1932. You can read fascism defined by Mussolini by clicking here.

After reading the document, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: According to Mussolini, fascism is not based on the belief of what? What is the idea of peace considered to be on the part of Fascists? What is the idea of war considered to be on the part of Fascists? How, in Mussolini’s opinion, is Fascism “the complete opposite of Marxian Socialism?” How does Fascism “combat the whole complex system of democratic ideology?” What were Mussolini’s predictions for the 20th century? Why? Was he correct in his assessment? Does Fascism allow for individual freedom? In what sense? What is the view of Fascists regarding imperialism? Your thoughts…

The Soviet Model of Economic Planning

Joseph Stalin, the son of a shoemaker from the Russian province of Georgia, was a candidate for the priesthood before he abandoned Christianity for Marxism and became a follower of Lenin in 1903. In 1917 he was named Bolshevik party secretary, an office he retained after the revolution. Following Lenin’s death in 1924, Stalin won the battle for party control with Leon Trotsky, the leader of the Red Army during the civil war and Lenin’s heir apparent. Shortly after taking power in 1928, Stalin launched a bold restructuring of the Soviet economy.

In 1928, the New Economic Policy (NEP), which Lenin had instituted in 1921, still guided Soviet economic life. Through the NEP, Lenin had sought to restore agriculture and industry after seven years of war, revolution, and civil strife. Although the state maintained control of banks, foreign trade, and heavy industry, peasants could sell their goods on the open market, and small businessmen could hire labor, operate small factories, and keep their profits. The NEP saved the Soviet Union from economic collapse, but its acceptance of private profit and economic competition troubled Marxist purists, and it did little to foster industrialization. Thus in 1928 Stalin abandoned the NEP and replaced it with the first Five-Year-Plan, which established a centralized planned economy in which Moscow bureaucrats regulated agriculture, manufacturing, finance, and transportation. In agriculture, the plan abolished individual peasant holdings and combined them into large collectives and state farms. This meant the obliteration of the class of prosperous and successful peasant farmers known as kulaks. In manufacturing, the plan emphasized heavy industry and the production of goods such as tractors, trucks, and machinery. Second and third Five-Year Plans were launched in 1933 and 1938.

Despite its enormous human costs, measured in terms of economic growth and industrial development, the Soviet experiment in central planning can be called a success. During the 1930s, when the Depression was devastating Western capitalist economies, the Soviet economy grew at an annual rate of 27 percent and achieved impressive increases in the production of iron and steel, oil and electricity, tractors, trucks, and chemicals. To many observers central planning seemed to be the solution to the challenge of rapid industrialization. In the second half of the twentieth century, it became the economic model throughout the communist world and for many newly independent states in Asia and Africa that were seeking rapid industrialization and economic development.

In the report I would like you to read, delivered to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in January 1933, Stalin outlines the goals and achievements of the first Five-Year Plan. You can read the report by clicking here.

After reading the report, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: What were the overriding reasons, according to Stalin, for adopting the Five-Year Plan? Does socialist theory or the defense of the Soviet Union seem more important to him? Why, in the industrial area, was it necessary to concentrate on heavy industry? According to Stalin, why was the collectivization of agriculture such a key component of the Five-Year Plan? What were the main obstacles to the success of the Five-Year Plan, according to Stalin? In Stalin’s view, how have the Soviet people benefited from the Five-Year Plan? What sacrifices have they been asked to make? According to Stalin, how does the success of the Five-Year Plan prove that communism is superior to capitalism? Your thoughts…

The Nationalist Agenda in Japan

During the Meiji period traditional Japanese pride in their independence and cultural distinctiveness was transformed into something recognizable as modern nationalism as Japan competed for territory and markets in Asia and sought recognition as one of the Great Powers. In the 1920s and 1930s, Japanese nationalism gained broader support and, as in Germany and Italy, came to be identified with antidemocratic and antisocialist movements. Its appeal grew in response to several developments, including resentment of the West for its treatment of Japan after World War I, fears of a united China under Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalists, opposition to “dangerous” ideologies such as socialism and communism, anxieties about Western influence on Japan, and most important, the effects of the worldwide economic depression of the 1930s. With the onset of the Great Depression Japanese exports declined by half, workers’ incomes fell, and unemployment reached 3 million. The failure of the rice crop in northern Japan in 1931 reduced families to begging, eating bark and roots, and selling daughters to brothel keepers. Facing economic catastrophe, increasing numbers of Japanese came to support the ultranationalist claim that authoritarian government and military expansion would solve the nation’s problems.

With strong support in the rural population and the army, ultranationalism became a major force between 1931 and 1936, when its disciples assassinated business leaders and politicians, including a prime minister, and plotted to overthrow the government. The most serious coup attempt took place in February 1936, when officers and troops of the First Division attacked and briefly occupied government buildings in downtown Tokyo. The government suppressed the rebellion and executed its leaders, but to many Japanese those executed were heroes not traitors. Constitutional government survived on paper, but when Japanese and Chinese troops clashed in the summer of 1937 near Beijing, the ensuing war between China and Japan put political authority firmly in the hands of militarists and nationalists.

The Black Dragon Society was one of the many nationalist organizations that flourished in Japan in the first half of the twentieth century. An offshoot of a secret society established in 1881 by former samurai, the Black Dragon Society was founded in 1901. Its original goal was to promote war with Russia as a means of expanding Japan’s influence on the Asian mainland. After the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, which gave Japan a protectorate over Korea, the group advocated an aggressive foreign policy in Asia and denounced democracy, big business, Americanization, socialism, and party politics, all of which were viewed as threats to Japanese culture and their plans for military conquest. Although membership in the Black Dragon Society and similar organizations was small, their self-promotion, assassinations, and strong-arm tactics kept alive their brand of extreme nationalism, allowing it to flourish in the troubled atmosphere of the 1930s.

In 1930 the Black Dragon Society published a two-volume Secret History of the Annexation of Korea, in which it claimed a key role in inspiring early Japanese expansion. It concluded the second volume with the statement that you can read by clicking here.

After reading the document, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: What aspects of the Black Dragon Society’s philosophy caused it to support interventions in Korea, China, and the Philippines? In what ways, according to the authors of the document, has Japanese foreign policy been thwarted in the years since World War I? According to the Society, how has Japan’s domestic situation deteriorated? According to the Society, what are the causes of Japan’s problems, and what solutions does it offer? What might explain the appeal of such ideas to the Japanese populace? Your thoughts…

Monday, March 9, 2009

Is This Really Happening? World Bank Says Global Economy Will Shrink in ’09

I must honestly say that today's discussion of financial crisis was the most startling, sobering, and timely discussion I have ever had regarding economics in the 1920s after having taught this for a few years now. Again, history is not about the dead but about the living, and today certainly proved that. I just want to take a moment to post a newspaper article from the New York Times this morning that you may find interesting. It is regarding the report that the World Bank released today regarding the global economic slump. Again, the gist of the report is that the world economy is shrinking for the first time since WWII and that trade is down at its lowest level in 80 years (80 years ago takes us back to the year 1929 folks if you do the math). At any rate, the article is certainly sobering, and you can read it by clicking here. Of course, as always, the BBC has the best coverage of such issues. I can honestly say that they have the very best coverage of the global financial crisis, complete with background, interviews, etc. You can check that site out by clicking here. Public Radio International had an excellent piece this afternoon on their program The World that I heard driving home this afternoon. You can read the general contents of it or download the audio of the piece by clicking here. The piece mentions an interview with Warren Buffett that took place this morning on CNBC in which he mentions that the U.S. economy has "fallen off a cliff." Historic times indeed.



Economic Nationalism in Mexico


Following the overthrow of dictator Porfirio Díaz in 1911, instability and conflict among aspiring leaders marked the first decade of Mexico’s revolution, and it was unclear whether the revolutionary movement would survive. In 1917, however, a constitutional convention drafted a new charter for the nation that confirmed the principles of free speech, religious toleration, universal suffrage, the separation of powers, and the inviolability of private property. It also committed the government to social reform and greater control over foreign corporations.

Little changed, however, until the presidency of Lázaro Cárdenas from 1934 to 1940. In a series of bold steps he confiscated millions of acres of land from large estates for redistribution to peasants, introduced free and compulsory elementary education, and sponsored legislation to provide medical and unemployment insurance. His most audacious step, however, was the nationalization of Mexico’s oil industry. In 1936, a dispute between unions and the U.S. and British oil companies erupted into a strike, and in the ensuing legal battle, seventeen oil companies refused to accept the pro-union ruling of an arbitration board appointed by Cárdenas, even after the Mexican Supreme Court upheld the decision. In response, on the order of Cárdenas, the government seized the property of the oil companies. Cárdenas announced his decision on March 18, 1938, in a radio speech to the nation. In the excerpt from the speech that I would like you to read (you can read it by clicking here), Cárdenas, after recounting the events in the labor dispute, comments on the role of the oil companies in Mexico’s economic and social development.

After reading the speech, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: In the account of Cárdenas, which actions by the foreign oil companies forced him to nationalize the oil industry? According to Cárdenas, what truth is there in the oil companies’ claims that they have benefitted Mexico? According to Cárdenas, who is ultimately responsible for the actions of the oil companies? Which political activities of the oil companies does Cárdenas condemn? What hardships does Cárdenas anticipate for the Mexican people as a result of his decision? In what ways is Cárdenas’ speech an appeal to Mexican nationalism? You thoughts…

The Depression Hits Philadelphia

Disproving predictions that the economy would rebound quickly, the Great Depression was prolonged and pervasive. The banking system collapsed. Factories were overburdened with unsold merchandise. Prices plummeted. These economic problems had devastating effects on individuals. Millions lost their life savings when financial institutions failed. Unemployment reached 25% here in the United States. Urban families and those already living in poverty were particularly hard hit by the economic crisis. As the Depression paralyzed the American cities, Congress began investigating the dire conditions facing many urban families. In the document I would like you to read, Dorothy Kahn, executive director of the Jewish Welfare Society of Philadelphia, tells the Senate Subcommittee on Unemployment Relief about the difficulties facing the urban poor. You can portions of the testimony by clicking here.

After reading Kahn’s testimony, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: How did the Depression affect many families in Philadelphia? How did people respond to their economic troubles? How did the New Deal attempt to resolve the problems that Kahn describes? Your thoughts…