HW4.6

REAGAN'S POLICIES OF DEREGULATION AND DEVOLUTION OF GOVERNMENT POWER FIT HIS BRAND, BUT INCREASING THE FEDERAL DEFICIT DID NOT.

Reagan's believed that “deregulation would make businesses more efficient and competitive” (HA 56.3), and his policies fit this brand. Reagan "replace[d] tough enforcement of environmental laws by a "voluntary" approach," so businesses could decide what they wanted to do for themselves (Zinn). Policies like these reduced governmental control of businesses, therefore fitting Reagan's 'brand.'

"Curb[ing] the size and influence of the Federal establishment" (Reagan's first inaugural address) was one of Reagan's 'brands' that his policies lived up to. Continuing Nixon's 'New Federalism' policy and establishing block grants, which were lump-sum payments to states, who could use it as they wished, lessened federal power and gave states more responsibilities, thus following his brand.

Reducing government spending was one of Reagan's 'brands', because the US "for decades... piled deficit upon deficit" (Reagan's first inaugural address), but his policies did not fit this brand. From 1982 to the end of Reagan's term, annual deficits exceeded $100 billion, due to tax cuts and military spending (HA 56.3). Clearly, high deficits did not fit his 'brand.'

HW4.5

REAGANS POLICIES OF DEREGULATION AND DEVOLUTION OF GOVERNMENT POWER FIT HIS BRAND, BUT INCREASING GOVERNMENT DEFICIT DID NOT.

Reagan's deregulation policies fit his 'brand.' According to Zinn, Reagan "replace[d] tough enforcement of environmental laws by a "voluntary" approach," so businesses could decide what they wanted to do for themselves. Also under Reagan, the EPA 'lower[ed] its federal standards of air and water quality' (HA 56.3). Policies like these reduced governmental control of businesses and promoted economic efficiency, therefore fitting Reagan's 'brand.'

"Cutting the size of government" (Schweikart) was one of Reagan's 'brands' that his policies lived up to. Reagan's policies that supported the devolution of government power includes the continuation of Nixon's 'New Federalism' policy through block grants, which were lump-sum payments to states, who could use it as they wished, without government interference.

Reducing government spending was one of Reagan's 'brands', because the US "for decades... piled deficit upon deficit" (Reagan's first inaugural address), but his policies did not fit this brand. During Reagan's term, annual deficits exceeded $100 billion, due to tax cuts and military spending (85% increase in Dept. of Defence's budget). Clearly, high deficits did not fit his 'brand.'

reagan revolution

What was Reagan's 'brand' of Conservatism in the US, 1980s?

Low taxes, free market, small government, cuts in social spending, return to traditional social values

Did Reagan's Policies fit that 'brand'?

For the most part, yes.

He expanded Nixons policy of 'New Federalism' by distributing tax revenues to states and handing them responsibility for many programs in health, education, and welfare (block grants).

To solve the economic problem of high inflation and high unemployment, Reagan proposed to lower taxes and increase private enterprise through supply side economics, which is a theory that states that economic growth depends on increasing the supply of goods and services through tax cuts.

Reagan pushed for deregulation, which is the removal of government regulations to promote free enterprise. These included getting rid of laws designed to curb pollution and ensure safety in the workplace.

He opposed social programs and ended many of Lyndon Johnson's anti poverty programs, including food stamps and aid to the elderly, poor, and disabled.

HW4.4

WEALTHY MIDDLE AGED MEN AND FEMINISTS WHO PUSHED FOR NO FAULT DIVORCE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIGH DIVORCE RATES

Wealthy middle aged men are partially responsible for high divorce rates because of their 'me' attitudes. According to Tom Wolfe, 'wife shucking' became 'normal behavior' during the 70s. When famous men left their wives for younger women, (e.g. Eugene McCarthy) it went largely unnoticed. This behavior contributed to high divorce rates.

Feminists who fought for no-fault divorce are partially responsible for the high divorce rate. According to Schweikart, feminists gave men 'a remarkable gift, pushing as they had for no-fault divorce', leading to new laws that allowed easy, 'inexpensive divorces'. This contributed to skyrocketing divorce rates, with 1.1 million in 1979.

Popular 70s TV shows show that society was changing and therefore feminists didn't have to push for no-fault divorce, which contributed to high divorce rates. In All In The Family, Gloria is portrayed as an educated, liberal woman with a job, and refutes her conservative father's sexist protests with "times have changed." This indicates that attitudes towards women in the 70s were already changing, making new divorce laws unnecessary.

HW4.3

WEALTHY MIDDLE AGED MEN AND FEMINISTS WHO PUSHED FOR NO FAULT DIVORCE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIGH DIVORCE RATES

Wealthy middle aged men are partially responsible for high divorce rates because of their 'me' attitudes. They often left their current wives for younger, more attractive women, leaving their ex-wives to fend for themselves. This irresponsible and reckless behavior ("Jennifer Fever") led to higher divorce rates.

Feminists who fought for no-fault divorce are partially responsible for the high divorce rate. Their advocacy of this policy caused divorce laws to change in the early 70s that allowed inexpensive, easy divorces. People could now obtain divorces without legal problems, causing divorce rates to skyrocket (1.1 million in 1979.)

HW4.2

"Who is to blame for America's trend toward high divorce rates, starting in the 1970s?"

The trend toward high divorce rates can be attributed to the actions of wealthy middle-aged men as well as the feminists who fought for no-fault divorce.

Middle-aged men who had the typical "Me" attitude of the 70s contributed to high divorce rates. They often left their current wives for younger, more attractive women, leaving their ex-wives to fend for themselves. This irresponsible and reckless behavior ("Jennifer Fever") resulted in the high divorce rate.

Also, men's inability to understand the 'problem that has no name' contributed to higher divorce rates. Women were delegated to the role of housewife, or stereotypically female jobs, and were expected to remain content. Naturally, women were dissatisfied with their restricted lives, and therefore this lead to higher divorce rates.

Feminists who fought for no-fault divorce are partially responsible for the high divorce rate. The passage of this law meant that men and women who were dissatisfied with their marriage now had an easy way out. Because of this, divorce rates rose greatly.

HW4.1

1. “Mr. Dash” is Sam Dash, an attorney for the Senate Watergate Committee. What does he hope to discover, overall from his questions of Mr. Kalmbach?

He is trying to see if the Watergate defendants received bribes from Nixon's people, in exchange for keeping quiet about this and past criminal activities.

2. Why do you suppose Mr. Dash makes Mr. Kalmbach recount his trip from the West Coast to Washington, DC?

Possibly to keep Kalmbach honest, and later his statements can be checked to make sure that all the times and dates are accurate and true.

3. What is the message of Doc C?

The intended audience of doc c was the senate, the message Dash was trying to convey to themwas that Nixon's people were undoubtedly paying off the burglars involved in Watergate in order for them to keep quiet about it.

4. What is the significance of the “$50,000 - $100,000”?

It is significant because $100000 is an extremely large amount of money and this could mean that it definitely could not have just been money for 'legal fees' and others but rather to bribe people with.

5. What is one value of this document for the historian investigating whether men working for President Nixon broke the law or not?

One value is that since it is an actual transcript of a hearing where the man who supplied the money could have his say on the matter, and he was under oath, so one could assume that he is telling the truth, or at least not blatantly lying about it.

6. Is that value based on origin or purpose?

Origin.

HW8

“Non-violent resistance to injustice was a good strategy for southern civil rights leaders.”

Non-violent resistance was a good strategy, evidenced by sit-ins in Nashville, Tennessee in 1960. Businesses lost money, and they eventually gave in to integration. Nashville eventually became the first major southern city to integrate its public systems on May 10, 1960. This shows that non-violent resistance was effective.

Non-violent resistance was an ineffective strategy, as demonstrated during Freedom Summer in 1964. It was an attempt to help black voters in Mississippi, but instead there were widespread beatings, shootings, and bombings, most of which went largely unpunished. Therefore, non-violent resistance was not a good strategy.

HW7

To what extent can the members of the Hitler Youth be blamed for their actions during WWII?

The amount of blame and responsibility that HJ members have should be determined on an individual basis: it largely depends on their age, their hierarchal position in the organization, and also the total amount of criminal activity they engaged in and the extent of these activities.

Kater, Michael. Hitler Youth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004.

The members of the Hitler Youth should not be blamed for their actions. The guilt lies with the higher commands, specifically the SS, who exploited their enthusiasm and indoctrinated them with Nazi ideals. Remper calls them "a generation of misguided idealists."

Gerhard Rempel, Hitler's Children The Hitler Youth and the SS (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1989) 262, Questia, Web, 2 Mar. 2010.

Sem2.HW6

"America's poor, in the mid 20th century, were mostly responsible for their own problems."

An argument against this would be congress passing the Housing Act of 1949 which was intended to solve the housing problems in inner-city slums. Instead, the homes of hundreds of thousands were bulldozed and not enough new apartments were built. This law caused problems for America's poor.

An argument against this would be the growth of agribusiness, or where agricultural products were produced by large corporations. Small farmers could not compete, and as a result, thousands of poor rural whites and blacks lost their jobs and sank into deeper poverty.

An argument for this statement is that the American Indians didn't take the opportunities given to them from the Voluntary Relocation Program in the 50s and 60s. They were provided with help for finding jobs and housing, but many could not adapt to city life, resulting in further poverty.

Sem2.HW5

"How real was the threat of Communist spies within the USA?"

The threat of Communist spies was not very real; most of the fear was generated by McCarthyism. Claiming that he had a list of communists working in the government was just one of his unproved accusations. His actions lead the public to perceive the threat as real, but it was not.

However, despite the fact that many of the accusations were false, some instances like the Alger Hiss case and the Rosenberg Trials confirmed that there were spies operating in the US at that time, so therefore the threat of communist espionage was present.

"Is it fair to say that the anxiety caused in the US due to Nuclear threat, was useful and 'healthy?' (security of the nation . . . = its health)"

It is fair to say that the anxiety caused by the nuclear threat was useful during the Atomic age, because money could be made off that fear. Items that became popular included the 'atomic cocktail' and bikinis, and places like Nevada profited off tourism due to the atomic testing there.

The drills created by the the FCDA, who were responsible for planning civil defense, were not useful or healthy because they were ineffective. An example was Operation Alert, a large scale drill that showed that millions of people would have died had the attack been real.

Sem2.HW4

"How does the CIA's activities in Iran show that the US behaves undemocratically in its foreign policy?"

The CIA's use of bribery in Iran shows its undemocratic behavior in it's foreign policy. One example of this was when the CIA gave Iranian agents $50,000 to produce a crowd posing as communist agitators. This covert action was blatantly used to sabotage the democratically elected government, and is therefore undemocratic.

The CIA trained and equipped SAVAK, which served as the shah's personal secret police. This action taken by the CIA was undemocratic because instead of promoting freedom and fairness in the new government, they supported SAVAK, and by extension also supported the dictatorship-like conditions there.

The CIA's use of propaganda shows that they behaved undemocratically. They used $150,000 to create pamphlets and posters containing slanderous messages about the democratically elected leader, Mossadeq. The spreading of misinformation is evidently very undemocratic.

Sem2.Hw3

"How convincing was America's attempts to influence other parts of the world to side with them in the Cold War?"

The use of the anti-communist radio broadcasts in Soviet Bloc countries by the US was unconvincing. This was because the government's of these countries actively disrupted broadcasts by jamming signals, therefore rendering them obsolete.

The US's support of anti-communist dictators was an unconvincing attempt. The US was under the impression that everyone under communist rule was suffering, and therefore funded dictatorships in countries like Nicaragua and Haiti. To the people of these countries this seemed hypocritical of the US, and they resented the aid.

The use of covert action by the US was ineffective in gaining support. For example, the US was opposed to the reform plans of the Guatemalan government, and therefore sent the CIA to help overthrow the leader, Jacobo Arbenz Guzman. This caused many Latin Americans to view the US as an enemy of social reform.

How wise were America's decisions to produce advanced weapons during the Cold War's first 20 years?"

The decision to produce the H-bomb was not wise. Tensions were already high between the US and the USSR, and producing the h-bomb only caused the USSR to scramble to create their own. This dangerous pattern continued, with both countries stockpiling extremely powerful weapons.

The production of advanced weapons was wise because it prevented a possible armed conflict between China and Taiwan. When China started shelling the Taiwanese islands of Quemoy and Matsu, the US threatened the use of its nuclear weapons, causing China to back down.

Sem2.HW2

"Were the Methods the US used to Contain the spread of Communism justified?"

The U.S. sending U-2 spy planes over the USSR, and various other forms of spying, was not justified. Instead of containing the spread of communism in an open, productive and honest way, the US resorted to spying and espionage. These actions were not justified.

A justified method the US used was founding and joining NATO. By the late 1940s the USSR had drastically tightened it's grip on it's satellite nations, with democratic parties in these nations being unfairly persecuted. The US joining the anti-communist organization to contain communism was justified.

Ending relations with China from the 1950s onward was an unjustified method the US used. Congress and the American people viewed the USSR and China in the same negative light, but instead China followed it's own interests and rejected Soviet control. Cutting off relations with China was not justified.

Sem2.HW1

“could the US and the Soviet Union have avoided the Cold War?”

The cold war could have been avoided if Kennen had not sent the Long Telegram that put the USSR in a threatening and bad light. It fueled the uneasiness that US leaders already had

about the spread of Communism in Eastern Europe.

In 1946, the US conducted tests of two atomic bombs at Bikini Atoll. Had they taken steps to disarm after Hiroshima and Nagasaki instead of continued testing, the USSR would not have felt threatened and the arms race could have been avoided.

In 1946, the USSR refused to withdraw troops from Northern Iran, thus breaking an agreement made with Britain stating that both countries would withdraw within six months of the war’s end. Had they followed through with the agreement, tensions wouldn't have risen and the cold war could have been avoided.

Scholars debate that both sides didn't fully understand the motives and aims of the other. The US saw the USSR's actions as threatening democracy, while the USSR wanted to improve security. If they had communicated more openly and clearly, they could have resolved their problems.

The cold war could have been prevented if the Truman Administration hadn't "worked to create an atmosphere of crisis" (Zinn 1), with the goal of continuing the successful war-economy in the US. If the government hadn't actively made the USSR look like the enemy, the cold war could have been avoided.