- TNP Nation
- Castle in Confidence
- Discord
- .wonderess
I was asked to post this essay out of interest. I did this for a class so don't judge me.
The United States after the Second World War faced many challenges such as the competitive relationship with the Soviet Union, the military actions in South Korea and Vietnam for the sake of maintaining non communist governments in power, civil unrest and the increase in political apathy domestically, and the cultural shifts of the 60s and 70s. Given these events and movements, the United States must be evaluated based on how it handled these conflicts and if it lived up to its own idealistic view of American freedom and democratic values. The late 20th century in the United States was detrimental because the nation did not live up to its own idea of freedom and democracy as is evident in its political actions internationally, the corruption of political figures, and the continuing of racist policies mainly in the south.
American actions abroad were justified as a means to contain the spread of communism and ensure that the American values of liberty for all were maintained in nations abroad. However, this ideal was not the reality of American involvement. This can be observed in the backing of the South Vietnam President, Ngo Dinh Diem. Despite his persecution of the Buddhist majority in his nation as well as the increasing authoritarian character of his presidency such as the strengthening of persecution against Buddhist practitioners, the United States continued to support him even against the revolution of his own people through the National Liberation Front. The United States ended up supporting a regime that did not coincide with its own idea of freedom and liberty, but it did so only for the sake of opposing communism even when the non communist Diem government was limiting freedom in a way contrary to American ideals.
The United States also suffered detriment from the corruption of political leaders in the period. This corruption works directly against the American idea of freedom because individuals or groups in power work against the will or good of the people for the sake of their own good. One example is President Ronald Reagan.
From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? (Reagan 330)
The President here appeals to a philosophy of government that is oriented towards the will of the people. However, his actions do not always align with this higher understanding. 1985 brought to light the news that the Reagan Administration had illegally funded weapons for Iran in order to funnel money to support rebels in Nicaragua. Whether President Reagan himself knew is not pressing, but his administration defied the legislative branch’s embargo of weapons on Iran. This in itself is a contradiction of Reagan’s presented vision of American government versus the actions of his staff which does not aid the people’s confidence in the dignity of the state. This is not a trend that begins here but rather also goes back to the Nixon Administration and the Watergate scandal which is a more malicious example of corruption since political freedom itself is being circumvented. By stealing information from the opposing party’s headquarters, the bad actors were cheating and disrespecting the will of the people to fairly choose their next president free of any influence brought forth through illegal activity.
The domestic culture of America also reveals the shortcomings of the nation’s reality in comparison to its ideal and it is detrimental because it exposes the failure of the nature to serve its people. The Vietnam War was a significant foreign event that brought out the struggles on the domestic front as Paul Potter highlights.
What kind of system is it that justifies the United States or any country seizing the destinies of the Vietnamese people and using it callously for its own purpose? What kind of system disenfranchises people in the South... that consistently puts material values before human values. (Potter 294)
This passage reveals a dismay of the institutional persistence of denying the ideals of freedom for all at home while also trying to impose this ideal elsewhere in the meanwhile. The United States’s involvement in the Vietnam War made evident the contradiction of the idea that the American culture believes itself to be versus what it actually is. This is further a conflict as freedom is used as a guise for the furthering of disenfranchisement like what was argued in “The Southern Manifesto.” “We pledge ourselves to use all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision which is contrary to the Constitution and to prevent the use of force in its implementation” (Congressional Record 257). This response to the court case Plessy v Ferguson which ordered the integration of schools shows the use of the Constitution or what it stands for in order to further an agenda that is held by the southern white culture. This is an attempt to equate American identity with the held beliefs of the south even if it means denying rights to citizens of a different race which is a direct contradiction to America as an idea.
Overall, through the actions of the United States overseas, the behavior of politicians, and prevalent racial discrimination the United States did not act according to its own ideals that it wished to spread abroad. Rather, the nation in its contradictions exemplified a state of hypocrisy in its attempt to make its ideals a reality outside of its borders while still refusing to improve domestic life according to the same standard both among the equality of the people and the actions of political leaders. This incongruence between the idea of America and actual America is what makes this period one of detriment for the nation.
Works Cited
Congressional Record. The Southern Manifesto. 1956. Voices of Freedom A Documentary
History, edited by Eric Foner, 5th ed., vol. 2, W. W. Norton and Company, 2017, pp.257-259. Potter, Paul. Speech at Washington Anti-War Demonstration. 1965. Voices of Freedom A
Documentary History, edited by Eric Foner, 5th ed., vol. 2, W. W. Norton and Company,
2017, pp.294-296.
Reagan, Ronald. Inaugural Address. 1981. Voices of Freedom A Documentary History, edited by
Eric Foner, 5th ed., vol. 2, W. W. Norton and Company, 2017, pp.329-331.
The United States after the Second World War faced many challenges such as the competitive relationship with the Soviet Union, the military actions in South Korea and Vietnam for the sake of maintaining non communist governments in power, civil unrest and the increase in political apathy domestically, and the cultural shifts of the 60s and 70s. Given these events and movements, the United States must be evaluated based on how it handled these conflicts and if it lived up to its own idealistic view of American freedom and democratic values. The late 20th century in the United States was detrimental because the nation did not live up to its own idea of freedom and democracy as is evident in its political actions internationally, the corruption of political figures, and the continuing of racist policies mainly in the south.
American actions abroad were justified as a means to contain the spread of communism and ensure that the American values of liberty for all were maintained in nations abroad. However, this ideal was not the reality of American involvement. This can be observed in the backing of the South Vietnam President, Ngo Dinh Diem. Despite his persecution of the Buddhist majority in his nation as well as the increasing authoritarian character of his presidency such as the strengthening of persecution against Buddhist practitioners, the United States continued to support him even against the revolution of his own people through the National Liberation Front. The United States ended up supporting a regime that did not coincide with its own idea of freedom and liberty, but it did so only for the sake of opposing communism even when the non communist Diem government was limiting freedom in a way contrary to American ideals.
The United States also suffered detriment from the corruption of political leaders in the period. This corruption works directly against the American idea of freedom because individuals or groups in power work against the will or good of the people for the sake of their own good. One example is President Ronald Reagan.
From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? (Reagan 330)
The President here appeals to a philosophy of government that is oriented towards the will of the people. However, his actions do not always align with this higher understanding. 1985 brought to light the news that the Reagan Administration had illegally funded weapons for Iran in order to funnel money to support rebels in Nicaragua. Whether President Reagan himself knew is not pressing, but his administration defied the legislative branch’s embargo of weapons on Iran. This in itself is a contradiction of Reagan’s presented vision of American government versus the actions of his staff which does not aid the people’s confidence in the dignity of the state. This is not a trend that begins here but rather also goes back to the Nixon Administration and the Watergate scandal which is a more malicious example of corruption since political freedom itself is being circumvented. By stealing information from the opposing party’s headquarters, the bad actors were cheating and disrespecting the will of the people to fairly choose their next president free of any influence brought forth through illegal activity.
The domestic culture of America also reveals the shortcomings of the nation’s reality in comparison to its ideal and it is detrimental because it exposes the failure of the nature to serve its people. The Vietnam War was a significant foreign event that brought out the struggles on the domestic front as Paul Potter highlights.
What kind of system is it that justifies the United States or any country seizing the destinies of the Vietnamese people and using it callously for its own purpose? What kind of system disenfranchises people in the South... that consistently puts material values before human values. (Potter 294)
This passage reveals a dismay of the institutional persistence of denying the ideals of freedom for all at home while also trying to impose this ideal elsewhere in the meanwhile. The United States’s involvement in the Vietnam War made evident the contradiction of the idea that the American culture believes itself to be versus what it actually is. This is further a conflict as freedom is used as a guise for the furthering of disenfranchisement like what was argued in “The Southern Manifesto.” “We pledge ourselves to use all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision which is contrary to the Constitution and to prevent the use of force in its implementation” (Congressional Record 257). This response to the court case Plessy v Ferguson which ordered the integration of schools shows the use of the Constitution or what it stands for in order to further an agenda that is held by the southern white culture. This is an attempt to equate American identity with the held beliefs of the south even if it means denying rights to citizens of a different race which is a direct contradiction to America as an idea.
Overall, through the actions of the United States overseas, the behavior of politicians, and prevalent racial discrimination the United States did not act according to its own ideals that it wished to spread abroad. Rather, the nation in its contradictions exemplified a state of hypocrisy in its attempt to make its ideals a reality outside of its borders while still refusing to improve domestic life according to the same standard both among the equality of the people and the actions of political leaders. This incongruence between the idea of America and actual America is what makes this period one of detriment for the nation.
Works Cited
Congressional Record. The Southern Manifesto. 1956. Voices of Freedom A Documentary
History, edited by Eric Foner, 5th ed., vol. 2, W. W. Norton and Company, 2017, pp.257-259. Potter, Paul. Speech at Washington Anti-War Demonstration. 1965. Voices of Freedom A
Documentary History, edited by Eric Foner, 5th ed., vol. 2, W. W. Norton and Company,
2017, pp.294-296.
Reagan, Ronald. Inaugural Address. 1981. Voices of Freedom A Documentary History, edited by
Eric Foner, 5th ed., vol. 2, W. W. Norton and Company, 2017, pp.329-331.
