During and due to the War economy, the American factories had been very active. They bustled with triple shifts. The US had eventually absorbed one of the most severe attacks launched on its values. However the role of the family and women within, it highlighted the uncertainties facing the American society. 6 million women had taken jobs during the War and they wished to carry on working. As one worker put it, "war jobs have uncovered unsuspected abilities in the American women. Why lose all these abilities because of the belief that woman's place is at home? For some it is, for others it is not". This issue stimulated the Black Americans as they moved from the countryside to assembly lines. They found new opportunities and new reasons to be angry and to insist on Freedom, especially as they were confronted with new sorts of jobs related to city life.
[...] Truman and Dean Acheson, who was an influent member of the State Department as early as 1941, and later secretary of state in 1949, argued that the Greek issue was essential. With a typical rhetoric, they spoke about "apples in a barrel which are infected by the corruption of a rotten one" : it meant that corruption of Greece would infect Iran and Africa. "It will also carry infection to Africa through Italy and France, already threatened by the strongest communist party in Europe. [...]
[...] For 16 years since 1929, the USA have been rising, preoccupied with economic disaster and military threat. "Would the new life involve the redistribution of income? Would the USA move toward new measures to correct the old ancient injustices of discriminations based on race and gender?" It was a time of anxiety and fear but it was also a unique moment of opportunity. As for the "state of the world", the relative optimism of the early 1945 vanished very quickly. [...]
[...] Rather than confront the full dimensions of the conflict that existed, Franklin Delano Roosevelt opted that its political genius and the exigencies of post-war would paved away for a neutral accommodation, that would somehow satisfy both the American commitment to a world of free trade and democratic rule, and the Soviet Union obsession with national security, and he safely defined "spheres of influence". The Soviets also appeared content to wait. In the mean time, they worked militarily to ensure a maximum effort for achieving their spheres of influence goals. [...]
[...] The countries that benefited the substantial loans had to sign bilateral treaties with the USA in which they agreed to balance their budgets to restore their monetary stability and to remove any trade quotas. Despite important communist movements in France and Italy, both countries signed the NATO in April 1949. This reciprocal military alliance guaranteed that all members would assure the common defence of any single member that might be attacked. The influx of aid did contribute to the 30 Golden Years ("Les 30 Glorieuses"). [...]
[...] ( In front of this dominant interpretation, other historians have considered that the conflicts could have been handled in a way that could have avoided bipolarisation and the rhetoric of an ideological crusade. Even anti-communist activists like John Foster Dulles acknowledged that the Soviet leadership did not want a military confrontation. Despite the often belligerent pose the Soviet Union took, one can still wonder there existed military basis for the fear that the Soviet Union was about to seize world domination. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
