tisdag 18 mars 2008

Männen som maktinnehavare i Medea av Euripides och Ett dockhem av Henrik Ibsen

De båda verken Medea och Ett Dockhem publicerades under tidsperioder då jämlikheten mellan man och kvinna inte var den självklarhet den på många sätt är i vår tid. Båda verken väckte debatt på sin tid då de porträtterar kvinnor som på olika sätt frånsäger sig det beroende av mannen som samhället och de, till viss del, själva skapat. Medea, av Euripides, är en av de äldsta epikerna som återfunnits och tar upp tidlösa motiv såsom äktenskap, skilsmässa, svartsjuka och maktbalans. Ett Dockhem, skrivet av Henrik Ibsen, handlar på samma sätt om äktenskap och kvinnans begränsade roll i familjens affärer. Gemensamt i båda verken är att männen är i maktposition och är de enda som har rätt att göra de avgörande besluten för sina familjer. Gemensamt är också att kvinnorna i dramerna förbiser detta och tar själva beslut som dramatiskt ändrar familjens förutsättningar. Kvinnornas perspektiv har dock redan varit objekt för åtskilliga analyser och reflektioner. En intressantare och mer outforskad aspekt är därför männens roll och mer specifikt männens makt och hur den i de båda verken går igenom en drastisk förändring i takt med att de kvinnliga protagonisternas fattar beslut som överskrider de normer som vanligtvis begränsar deras befogenheter.

Jason och Helmer innehar båda, i egenskap av män levande på 400-talet f.Kr respektive 1800-talet, positionen som försörjare i sina familjer och har därmed ett maktövertag i relationen med deras respektive fruar, Medea och Nora. Denna maktbalans etableras tidigt i Ett Dockhem då Helmer efter en diskussion bestämmer sig för att ge Nora pengar att spendera: ”HELMER: Se där! (Räcker henne några sedlar.) Herregud, jag vet väl, att det behövs en hel del i ett hem, när det är jul. NORA (räknar): Tio — tjugo — trettio – fyrtio. Å, tack, Torvald, tack! Nu reder jag mig långt.” (Ibsen, s.9-10) Faktumet att Nora tackar för pengarna indikerar att hon själv inte har något inflytande i deras gemensamma ekonomi utan hålls innanför de gränser Torvald sätter för henne. Likaså erbjuder sig Jason att hjälpa Medea ekonomiskt då hon blir förvisad från Korint; ”Jag är mån om dig och barnen och ville gärna ordna så för er att ni ej någonsin stå utan medel.” (Euripides, s.111). Jason har den dåvarande patriarkala kulturen att tacka för den makt han besitter i sitt äktenskap. Medea beskriver mannen i ett äktenskap som ”en tyrann med envåldsmakt över vår kropp” (Euripides, s.101). Den makt som Jason innehar låter honom lämna sin fru utan att hans omgivning dömer honom, något som inte skulle vara fallet för kvinnan; ”Skilsmässan gagnar ej en kvinnas rykte, / hon har ej rätt att gå ifrån sin man” (Euripides, s.101). Medeas maktposition försvagas också av faktumet att hon befinner sig i ett främmande land, utan möjlighet att återvända till sitt hemland. Den manliga överlägsenheten i äktenskapet är en förutsättning för det myteri protagonisterna begår.

Männen i de båda dramerna tar sitt övertag för givet och underskattar förmågan hos sina respektive makar. Efter att Medea och Jason mötts i en ordduell där de båda förbannat varandra återvänder Jason till Medea. Hon använder sin retorik till att övertyga Jason att själv överlämna den förgiftade kransen. ”Jason! Förlåt mig vad jag yttrat förr! […] Jag ger mig, det var jag som hade fel; men jag har kommit nu på bättre tankar. Kom, barn där inne, kära barn, kom ut och hälsa riktigt vackert på er far!” (Euripides, s.132-133). Medeas använder här sin roll som mamma och beskyddare över barnen för att uppnå sitt syfte; att få Jasons tillfälliga förlåtelse. Genom att erkänna att hon själv gjort misstaget manipulerar hon Jason till att känna sig i kontroll. Jason beskrivs själv som en skicklig retoriker: ”Med talförmågan skyler han sitt brott, […] hans vishet bor på tungan, är blott sken” (Euripides, s.115), men Medea har, i och med att hon kan använda barnen för sina ändamål, ett övertag. Ett övertag som Jason underskattar, vilket leder till hans gemåls och hans blivande svärfars död. I Ibsens Ett Dockhem blir den manliga hybrisen tydlig när vi får lära att Nora räddade livet på sin man genom att låna pengar till hans behandling: ”Torvald med sin manliga självkänsla — hur pinsamt och förödmjukande skulle det inte vara för honom att veta, att han hade mig att tacka för något. Det skulle alldeles förvränga vårt förhållande” (Ibsen, s.23). Detta citat visar tydligt hur oberättigad Helmers överlägsenhet över sin fru är och hur han underskattat hennes förmågor. Nora gör till en början ingenting för att få sin man att ändra uppfattning om hennes kapaciteter som människa, tvärtom så säger hon vid ett tillfälle ”Ja, Torvald, jag kan inte komma någon vart utan din hjälp” (Ibsen, s.44). Genom att förstärka illusionen av makt hos sin make, hoppas Nora fortsätta hålla Helmer i okunskap om hennes hemlighet. Även om Helmer vid enstaka tillfällen ger indikationer på att han har misstankar om Noras förehavanden eller på andra sätt hotar att avslöja Noras hemlighet, så lyckas hon alltid att distrahera honom med sina trick och konster, som till exempel när Helmer är på väg att öppna det brevet från Krogstad, innehållande Noras hemlighet:


Nora: Vad ska du göra där ute?

Helmer: Bara se efter, om det kommit några brev.

Nora: Nej, nej, gör inte det, Torvald!

Helmer: Varför inte det?

Nora: Torvald, jag ber dig! Det finns inga.

Helmer: Jag kan väl få se efter.

(Ämnar gå.)

Nora (vid pianot, slår an på de första tonerna av tarantellan).

Helmer (stannar vid dörren): Aha!

Nora: Jag kan inte dansa i morgon, om jag inte får repetera med dig. […] Å, sätt dig och spela för mig, Torvald, snälla du, rätta mig och instruera mig, som du brukar.

Helmer: Gärna, mycket gärna, om du vill.” (Ibsen, s.73)


Även i det här exemplet är det tydligt att Helmer låter sig manipuleras av den falska känsla av makt han åtnjuter till följd av Noras spelade hjälplöshet. Helmer är, liksom Jason, mottagbar för smicker och faktumet att de båda blir manipulerade genom att de sätts på en pedistal av sina fruar tyder på en självupptagenhet som förblindar deras förmåga att resonera och se de sanna motiven bakom protagonisternas handlingar.

Jason och Helmer lämnas båda ensamma i slutet av de Medea och Ett Dockhem. Eftersom ett centralt motiv i de båda verken är den kvinnliga frigörelsen, så är en separation med mannen nödvändig för att protagonisterna ska kunna ta, eller återta, den kompletta makten över sina liv från sina mäns händer. ”ju större ett hus, desto större dess fall, om ödet vill slå det i spillror” (Euripides, s.96) säger Medea, och denna liknelse kan mycket väl appliceras på Jason och hans makt, som efter att Medea ber honom om förlåtelse, är större än någonsin, åtminstone i hans egna ögon. Som en påföljd, förlorar han också allt han håller kärt, inte minst närheten till den ännu större källa till makt han är nära att ansluta sig med, nämligen den kungliga familjen. Helmer har också börjat en klättring upp i den sociala näringskedjan och ska strax efter tiden dramat tar plats under, börja arbeta som bankdirektör. De båda männens nederlag i maktkampen sker alltså vid ett tillfälle då de båda har uppnått höjdpunkten av auktoritet, även om auktoriteten de utövar i äktenskapet bara är lite mer än en illusion. Fastän de båda fått indikationer på att maktbalansen i deras förhållanden är på väg att ändras permanent så kommer förändringen hastigt och de båda lämnas förkrossade, Jason över saknaden av sina barn och hatet mot Medea (eller ”tigrinnan” som han kallar henne) och Helmer över Noras första ärliga och sanna ord om deras relation. Jason och Helmer har till sist förlorat könskampen och finner sig själva maktlösa i den relation de inte längre har.

Från att, med samhällets uppbackning, varit autokrater i sina äktenskap så genomgår Jason och Helmer, i de båda verken Medea och Ett dockhem, en stor förändring i sina respektive maktpositioner. De båda har sin självupptagenhet och sin likgiltiga inställning till kvinnornas behov och vilja att skylla för sitt öde. Genom att inte bejaka deras respektives åsikter så tvingas Medea och Nora in i situationer där de tvingas använda sin manipulationsförmåga för att få sin vilja fram. Männens hunger efter bekräftelse och maktkänsla som lett dem till de samhällsställningar de är på väg att åtnjuta, är ironiskt nog anledningen till deras fall.







Källor:


Euripides, ”Medea”,”Alla tiders klassiker”, Bokförlaget Natur och Kultur, Södertälje 2002. ISBN: 91-1-921372-7


Ibsen, H, ”Ett dockhem”. Ur: Tio dramer av Henrik Ibsen. Tredje bandet, P.A. Norstedt & Söner, Stockholm 1935

torsdag 14 februari 2008

Metternich var en sympatisk man AV OLA

How successful was Metternich in dealing with the principal problems of

the Austrian Empire in the period 1815-48?

Introduction

Europe had been, through the course of the Napoleonic wars, reshaped and gone through dramatic changes in many aspects. France, a state which had gone through a revolution fueled by a strong sense of nationalism and liberalism had been successful in conquering a significant part of Europe. The traditional and conservative kingdoms and empires of Europe were--and had reason to be--afraid of the upcoming ideas of the freedom of the individual and united nationalities. It did not fit well with their system of ruling, which often endeavored the governing of several nationalities and minorities in a number of regions. That was certainly the case in 'The Empire of the House of Austria', where a sovereign, namely Emperor Francis I, controlled an empire that consisted of a wide range of regions with an even wider range of ethnicities. Emperor Francis' greatest companion in the task of keeping his empire intact was Prince Clemens Wenzel von Metternich, Foreign Minister of the Austrian empire, and later its State Chancellor.

The question about to be answered is 'How successful was Metternich in dealing with the principal problems of the Austrian Empire in the period 1815-48?'. The question has a few variables and can be looked at from many perspectives. Because the definition of the 'principal problems' facing the empire ought to have been different amongst the habitants, and because not even Metternich and his superior shared the same opinions on the matter (even though they were in no way antagonists on what the problems facing them were, they did not have the same approach to how to handle them) the viewpoint one should take when attempting to identify the 'principal problems' is debatable. The liberals and nationalists would probably have defined the 'principal problems' as the lack of a constitution and the government's blindness to the aspiring national unity. The working class would probably consider the 'principal problems' being the lack of housing due to the increasing urbanization following the industrialization, and the insignificant working conditions. However, since the focus in the question lies on Metternich, who without a doubt was one of the most influential and powerful men in Europe at this time, and since he was the one with the most decisive power over the empire, save for the change-despising emperor, it is from his point of view and with regards to the 'principal problems' of his definition that this essay will put its focus.

Metternich's problems consisted of trying to restrain the erupting forces of nationalism, liberalism and democracy that had already exploded in France and brought disruption and unwanted chaos into Europe and now, in a similar manner, threatened to tear apart his empire. Only the diminishing respect and loyalty to the Hapsburgian throne glued the different ethnic groups together. To counter the rising popularity of nationalism, he used the principle of divide and rule to keep his people in check. He responded to the rising demand for change and democratization with control the people to the extent that historians has referred to the Austrian empire under his rule as a 'police state'. His refusal to embrace the new liberal ideas and use them to his advantage was perhaps a result of the Emperor's reluctance to act and allow for reforms and was probably an important factor in his inability to further control the fate of Austria.

Body

Up until that moment in time, the natural way of governing had been with one autonomous leader in control of one or several regions. No consideration was taken to things such as language and cultural background of a group of people when the borders were divided between the rulers, but the possession of a territory was rather defined by whom was married to whom and who had the military control of the area. Thus it is not hard to understand how alien and threatening the ideas of nationality and democratic rule were to the Kings and Emperors throughout Europe. After all, the last country that showed any tendency towards these concepts was France where the rulers had been decapitated following the revolution. When voices such as that of Count Istvan Szechnyi of Hungary, calling for unification by promoting the Magyar language culture, were raised, Metternich's diagnose was that the infectious Nationalism had begun to spread in the Austrian empire. He had to come up with a treatment. His answer was to let the different strains of Nationalism grow in a controlled manner by allowing and even encouraging the increased interest in local languages, literature and history. Metternich thought that this would satisfy the nationalistic needs of the liberals and at the same time, he could use the renewed hate towards other ethnic groups that came with the nationality, in order to play the different peoples against each other whenever he saw fit. According to Professor Amy Chua, all the powerful empires throughout history "rose to global dominance through tolerance"[1] . Though the tolerance by her definition is not the modern version comprising "human rights [...] equality, or even respect"(1) but rather tolerating their existence on their terms and let them "live, participate, prosper and rise in your society, regardless of ethnicity race and nationality--even if it's just for instrumental reasons"(1). To some extent, Metternich identified this and could use this to his advantage. By letting some manifestations of nationalism be, he thought himself able to satisfy the needs of his population, while still remaining on top of the empire. Ofcourse, there was still a need of common factors that which could bind the different nationalities together. Believing that increased saying in the affairs of the empire might encourage renewed loyalty towards the empire, Metternich put forward ideas to increase the involvement of the different nationalities in governmental affairs. None of these did however function properly and Emperor Francis was suspicious towards any form of change. The nationalistic 'disease' that was to a considerable extent enabled by Metternich's own actions, that he himself had helped feeding, with the motive of dividing and rule, eventually became out of control and manifested itself in the 1849 revolution sending him into exile.

To Metternich, liberalism was synonymous with chaos and anarchy. In line with the common perception from the 18th century enlightenment, he thought that life was to a great extent controlled by a number of natural laws--not only those which controlled the physical world and our perception of it, but also the interactions and changes of society and mankind. He believed that it followed a natural cycle and that the balance between chaos and stability was natural. In his view, the liberal ideas was nothing more then the chaos of anarchy that threatened the stability of his society and he saw in himself the person who was to stop the trouble from taking a hold of the empire. Just as he argued in the Vienna congress that a powerful Austria was the key to a balance of power in Europe, so did he see conservatism and authority as the answer to the increasing disorder. With a strong emphasis on authority, he set out to create a system of oppression that had no equivalent in Europe at that time. It included the establishment of a network of informers, surveillance of individuals and monitoring of letter correspondence. With the industrialization at its rise, communications were getting better, but there were still obstacles in getting your voice heard and the liberal ideas were most widespread in the middleclass, which was not a very big part of the population. In order to get a real movement going, the liberals needed to spread their ideas and thoughts to the working classes. In this regard, Metternich's methods were sucessful in slowing spreading the 'anarchy' and 'disorder', greatly helped by "the Carlsbad Decrees" which followed the assassination of August von Kotzebue, that forbid any texts under 320 pages. By controlling the allready quite limited flow of information, Metternich made the way towards revolution a hard struggle and pushed many liberals underground. However, if we look at a more recent example of a government controlled state, the USSR, data from a US government funded study from 1979 showed that "alternative press reached 45% of high-level professionals, 41% of political leaders, 27% of managers, and 14% of blue-collar workers."[2] It is, of course hard to compare the two states, but this study can give us a hint that the public continued to receive information that they were not supposed to, despite Metternich's best attempts.

Conclusion

Ultimately, Metternich did fail in his attempts to revitalize the Austrian empire without having to embrace the, in his view chaos, that would follow liberalism. While it is true that he accomplished more then most prominent men in power during his years of rule, he did it at the cost of many of the already few liberties that his people had. His attempts to combat nationalism with nationalism could have been more successful, had it not been for the fact that when he gave the people an inch, they wanted a mile. This could have been prevented if they could have, through the use of a central system like the ones attempted by Metternich, apply some of that nationalism back at the empire. It is very hard to prevent an idea, once it gets a foothold, and liberalism was on the rise throughout Europe. Metternich's police state may have had a certain success, but it is hard to enforce a law that criminalizes widespread ideas and beliefs. Metternich's ultimate failure lie in his failure identify the possibilities of the 'chaos' that was liberalism and to adapt to the new circumstances instead of dismissing the ideas as presumptuous.



[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QenLlFx4cCQ

Conversations With History - Amy Chua // November 15, 2007 - University of california, berkeley

[2] The Propaganda System

Noam Chomsky

Lies of Our Times, May 1992

Letter from Lexington April 6, 1992

onsdag 13 februari 2008

Assessment of Metternich

How successful was Metternich in dealing with the principal problems of the Austrian Empire in the period 1815-48?


The first thing which needs to be considered in answering this question is the time period as it plays a vital role. During 1812, Napoleon was defeated after two decades of war, and in 1814, France had been completely defeated as the victorious leaders marched through the streets of Paris. After the French defeat, the main objectives of the leaders who were to decide the faith of Europe were to keep peace and order, and to restore rightful leaders to their throne. In their eyes, the main enemy of these aims was the new ideology of liberalism and nationalism. Metternich was one of these foreign statesmen, representing the Austrian Empire.
When discussing the principal problems of the Austrian Empire, it is important to define what they actually are. To liberalists, nationalists and revolutionaries of the time the actual Austrian Empire was the main problem. They did not want to live centralize to a single huge empire, when they believed that they could do better themselves as a nation on their own. Although these were the views of a new ideology, Metternich and other conservatives saw the opposite. If “nations” or states were to become independent then only chaos would arise from this, instead they sought to bring back order, so that wars like the one of Napoleon would not arise again. They saw it as only natural that people would always be drawn towards disorder and chaos, and it was their job to once again in history restore order.
So, the “principal problems” are actually the forces, which according to conservatives, would bring the downfall of the Austrian Empire, thus the revolutions and demonstrations demanding nationalism and liberalism.
Metternich was deeply involved in trying to repress these ideologies, even though he had limited power due to the emperor, his policies made a great impact on how the peoples of the Austrian Empire would regard themselves and others. To some extent Metternich was also able to repress the revolutions for some time, but in the end his policies turned out fatal to the Austrian Empire.

One example of a successful repression of a revolution is Metternich’s anti-revolutionary crusade in Germany starting 1819, when a student killed a journalist with a political motivation. This was Metternich’s chance to strike down:

“All my efforts are directed towards giving the affairs the best possible sequel and to taking as much advantage of it as possible. I shall act vigorously to this end”, Metternich, 9 April 1819 (P. 49 The Great Powers)

Here Metternich was able to bring the revolutionaries to a decline, and so we can say that he was somewhat successful at times to bring down revolutions through means of repression and force.

However, the opposite can also be argued. That Metternich, by being so forceful and repressive, gave more incentives to nationalistic ideologies. One example is in Hungary, where nationalism was growing. As Metternich opposed all of the Hungarian’s proposals of more independence, Lajos Kossuth became a more and more popular figure. He proposed nationalism and dreamed of Hungary as an independent state, completely separate from the Austrian Empire and was also a very popular figure during the 1848 revolutions. So Metternich’s policies also turned against him at times, the repression made a lot of people hate the Austrian Empire and the crown, and so they turned to the nationalistic and liberalistic ideas offered to them by people of the same identity.

To oppose this problem, Metternich tried to give the different states some sort of identity which would separate them from others, such as traditions, language and culture. Although this seemed like an almost nationalistic attempt, he never gave the states any real independent power. The so called “local Diets” were not actually given any real power, but were there more for show to make people satisfied towards the crown and the Empire. Another motive behind this way of actually encouraging some identity within the states was to make them feel closer ties to the crown, but also to separate them from each other. This idea of “divide and rule” was something which both Metternich and the emperor were familiar with, if they could get the different states to look towards each other as rivals, attention would be turned away from the Austrian Empire itself and so the states could be controlled:

“My people are strange to each other and that is all right. They do not get the same sickness at the same time… The one does not understand the other and one hates the other… From their antipathy will be born order and from the mutual hatreds general peace”, Emperor Francis to French ambassador (p. 50 The Great Powers)

At least this was the idea, however, the diets soon became centers for Empirical opposition, and the states turned their attention towards the Empire anyway. This effort was thus a failure, Metternich had deeply underestimated the growing nationalism and his encouragement to satisfy the regions had only strengthened its foothold. This was one of the worst of all failures which inevitably led to the 1848 revolutions.

To some extent Metternich may have delayed the 1848 revolutions, but also, his actions were at sometimes so inaccurate that they actually encouraged the revolutions. His limited power and the ultra-conservative Emperor Francis also played a vital role in the inevitable downfall, but in the end, Metternich’s policies were doomed to fail. The ruthless repression, at times was successfully restoring order, was however also a failure, as it finally brought on more incentives to strengthen the nationalism and with more extreme leading figures, at the top of the revolutionary ideologies.
The attempt to achieve regional contentment and to separate the states from each other was also a failure, as the encouragement of identity only strengthened the growth of nationalism and the revolutionary ideas against the Empire.
Metternich did not succeed in dealing with the principal problems of the Austrian Empire, and finally, his attempts inevitably led to the 1848 revolutions. Although he can be said to be partially responsible, he had only limited power, and furthermore the civilization can be said to have been at a crucial stage at this time, making it impossible to stop the actual development of society.

Lägga upp Word dokument på bloggen!

Om ni vill lägga upp word dokument på bloggen så kan ni gömma dem i .rar dokument innuti bilder: gör bara som bilden beskriver.



Till exempel: i den här bilden finns en .rar fil (kan öppnas med WinRar) som innehåller en eh... kokbok i .PDF fromat.

onsdag 6 februari 2008

questions - educating Rita, by russel

Educating Rita

By Willy Russell


What does Rita gain from her education and what does she lose?53

Firstly, Rita is a 26 year old woman that does not live in an intellectual environment, something that means that she has plenty to learn from Frank. Rita did not gain the proper opportunity to study, as she sometimes desired “See, if I started takin’ school seriously I would have had to become different from me mates, an’ that’s not allowed.” (Page 21)
The environment in which she lived influenced her to a great extent “So y’ never admit that school could be anything’ other then useless.” (Page 21)
This lack of opportunity to study as she sometimes prefers, leads to the fact that she learns more than she loses. During the course at Frank’s, Rita leans how to analyze and how to treat literature. One of the most significant things Rita learns is how to write an essay in an appropriate way. Rita’s first essay turns out to be a disaster; she must learn how to write references: “Rita, how the hell can you write an essay on E.M Forster with almost total reference to Harold Robbins?” (Page 29) Rita must learn about source criticism “Crap? And who are you citing in support of your thesis, F.R Leavis?” “No. Me!” (Page 23)
Throughout the play you can notice how Rita’s essays develop. On page 71 you can see how Rita’s essay is written properly but this time Frank does not like it because, according to Rita, he is subjective. Simultaneously, Rita discovers the secret of intellectual conversations. Throughout the play she learns from Frank how to structure an argument properly, this means first to make a statement, then give an example and ultimately explain. Towards the end, she does this quite often “I walked over an’ said, ‘Excuse me but I couldn’t help overhearin’ the rubbish you were spotting about Lawrence’. […] The next thing is there’s this heated discussion, with me right in the middle of it.” (Page 67)
This scene proves how Rita has developed. She gained the knowledge and the courage that is needed for an argumentative discussion.
Frank helps Rita to expand her vocabulary. In the beginning of the play, you can notice Rita’s sometimes informal language, which also every now and then creates misunderstandings between the two main characters “No. Roger McGough. It was about this old man who runs away from hospital an’ goes out on the ale. He gets pissed an’ stands in the street shoutin’… […] It’s dead good.” (Page 7) You can observe Rita’s informal language here. Her language contains plenty of abbreviations as well. This might decrease the quality of the spoken language. The example above can be compared with “But Frank, I have to persevere in order that I shall.” (Page 66) Here, Rita illustrates the fact that she must talk properly in everyday situations. Also, towards the end Rita does not use as many abbreviations as in the start. It may be visible that Rita improves her language and expand her vocabulary.
As almost everything in everyday life, her education contains not only advantages but drawbacks as well.
As I mentioned above Rita did not gain the proper opportunity to study, also because of her family and friends. The educations Rita gains might distance her from her family and friends. This for example, was one of the causes that ended Rita’s relationship with Denny “No. I don’t wanna talk about Denny. […] Why was Chekhov a comic genius?” (Page 40)
Here we can see that Rita feels a bigger connection to knowledge than Denny. Several times Denny showed his anger and explained that this was because her education. The education created vast differences between Rita and her family and friends. These differences might distance her from the environment she used to live in.

Compare and contrast the way Rita and Frank use language throughout Educating Rita.
Both Rita and Frank wish the surrounding to identify them by their usage of language similarities!!!!!!!!!!!



From the beginning of the play there exists a huge contrast between Frank’s and Rita’s language. Frank is about fifty years old and has worked with literature the big majority of his life, something that improved his language incredibly “But the term ‘beautiful’ covers the many feelings I have about that picture, including the feeling that, yes, it is erotic.” (Page 5) You can notice how the sentence contains formal language and is even well structured in the conversation’s context.
Rita, on the other hand, comes from an uneducated family and from a non intellectual environment. Rita’s problem in the beginning of the play is the language. She replies often with witty lines but the lack of formal language makes her argument weaker “I’ll bet he did y’ know. You don’t paint pictures like that just so that people can admire the brush strokes, do y’?” “Frank (Giving a short laugh) No-no-you’re probably right.” (Page 5) Here you can observe that Frank agrees with Rita, to a certain extent, that the painting is erotic. If she had used a more advanced and formal language, Frank would probably agree with her entirely.
In the last part of the play you can see the development of Rita’s language (Page 66), while Frank’s, according to me, has not altered.


Rita describes herself as a ‘half-caste’, neither fitting comfortably into her own society or that of Frank. Find evidence for this. How appropriate would it be to describe Frank in the same way? Explain.
As I mentioned before Rita comes from a non intellectual environment. What makes her special and different is her desire to study. This is why does not feel full connection to the environment she lives in “I mean, there was always somethin’ in me head, tappin’ away, tellin’ me I might have got it all wrong. But I’d just play another record or buy another dress and stop worryin’ […] Is this the absolute maximum I can expect from this living lark? […] And it’s really tempting to go out and get another dress y’ know, it is. Cause it’s easy, it doesn’t cost anything, doesn’t upset anyone around y’. Like cos they don’t want y’ to change.” (Page 21) This quotation shows that Rita wanted more from life, but the people around her influenced her in a negative way and this is why she did not fit comfortably into her own society.
The play is about educating Rita, this means that Rita does not fit into Frank’s society yet. It takes a time before she can feel a part of Frank’s educated society. The more time it will pass the more Rita will feel connections to Frank’s society. These quotations are taken from the play’s last pages
“[…] Rita: What you can’t bear is that I am educated now read […]” (Page 78) and “Frank: Is that all you wanted? Have you come all this way for so very, very little? ” (Page 79)
In the first example, Rita realizes the fact that she is educated, while Frank, in the second quotation, explains that Rita is still a half-cast because she must continue with her studies in order to feel full connection to such a society.

4. Look closely at Act 1, scenes 6-7. Explain why Frank invites her to dinner and ultimately, why she fails to turn up.
In the beginning of Scene 6, Rita bursts trough Frank’s door and interrupts him by telling about the play that she has seen. Rita explains what a magnificent time she has had at the theater. Frank and Rita start an intense conversation about Macbeth, the play that Rita went to.
Understanding the fact that Rita is deeply interested in literature and intellectual life, Frank gives her the opportunity to come for dinner. Frank notices that Rita might now be able to cope with a conversation with educated people and simultaneously that she must experience such a great event. Frank is also familiar with the fact that Rita does not live in an intellectual environment and has not the opportunity to go to dinner with such kind of people.
At the same time, according to me, Frank wants to be thankful “Rita: I just had to tell to someone who’d understand” “Frank: I’m honored that you chose me.” (Page 47)
Rita is revealing something that might be considered by Frank as emotional. In this case he wanted to be thankful as well. So, Frank invites Rita to dinner because she is deeply interested in literature and intellectual life and because Frank wanted to give Rita the opportunity ‘to sing a better song.’
Unfortunately, Rita does not show up. The main reason why Rita did not come was because she did not feel intellectual prepared “I am alright with you, here in this room; but when I saw those people you were with I couldn’t come in.” (Page 52) This failed attempt of entering Frank’s society shows that Rita is still a half-caste.

5. Explain Willy Russell’s use of humor in the play. Hint: You might begin by looking at the misunderstandings which arise between Frank and Rita at the beginning of the play, a consequence of their different social/ cultural backgrounds.
The humor in the play occurs in situations quite often. The misunderstandings arise often because Rita’s personality. She has the desire to talk rapidly and she gets often off topic. Already on the second page we are give such an example “Frank: You are? Rita: What am I? Frank: Pardon? Rita: What? Frank: Now you are? Rita: I’m what? ”
Rita’s personality, her openness, her desire for studies, her dialect and her thoughts play a big part of the play’s humor.
Another humorous act of Rita is every time she gets of topic after she started a discussion
“Rita: That’s a nice picture; isn’t it? […] Frank: I think it’s very beautiful. Rita: I didn’t ask if it was beautiful. […] Rita: D’ y’ get a lot like me? Frank: Pardon?” (Page 5)
This quotation is taken from their very first dialog, when Rita refuses to answer Frank’s question. She suddenly changes the topic and starts discussing about a picture on the wall and after a short time she changes topic again. Frank does not always succeed to keep up with Rita’s discussions, something that may be amusing.

6.

What consequences for the Swedish language are there of this English-language expansion into secondary school system education? Should the government

What consequences for the Swedish language are there of this English-language expansion into secondary school system education? Should the government make any restrictions? Why or why not?


I want to begin with my burning interest in English studies, something that might affect my opinion towards this area. Anyhow, some languages and of course cultures are considered, more or less, being under threat because the English-language expansion. Throughout the whole history, nations have expanded and that expansion brought about the death of some cultures and languages. We can notice and come to the conclusion that the extent to which a language can be reborn is very small. This is why I will look closer to the question:
What consequences for the Swedish language are there of this English language expansion into secondary school system education? Should the government make any restrictions? Why or why not?
I do not think that the government should make any restrictions within this area and that the consequences are not as negative as in other countries yet.
First of all, I have to mention the big American-life style-influence- that exists in Sweden. As many people know, food habits, fashion etc. are imported directly mostly from the USA and then from other countries as well. This great influenced Sweden, has affected the local language to a great extent, but one factor that might help the Swedish language stay alive under a longer period of time, is the people’s awareness of the English influenced Swedish. With the help of this factor, people can conserve old traditions more, something that may help the Swedish language. This is why I believe that the English language does not create significant negative consequences. Furthermore, the English loan words even enrich the Swedish vocabulary. Words as: alliteration, gravitation, Darwinism etc. emphasize my opinion. This is one reason for the Swedish government not to take any restrictions.
There are many other factors that affect my opinion about the English influence on Swedish, but as far as I understand, in Sweden, this expansion creates more then it destroys.
As far as the people are aware of this fact and as long as they do something about this, for example conserving old traditions and give birth to diasporas abroad, the English- language expansion represents no major consequences. Another process that underlines my theory is that the English loan words enrich the Swedish language, something which is mainly positive.
As I wrote above, the Swedish government should not take any restrictions yet and the present consequences are mostly unimportant.

Strindberg, Fadren och Könskampen

Strindberg, Fadren och Könskampen
Intro:
NIONDE SCENEN
De förre. Laura.
Laura Jaså, Bertha är där! Då kanske vi kan få höra hennes egen mening, då frågan om hennes öde skall avgöras.
Ryttmästarn Barnet kan väl knappt ha någon grundad mening om huru en ung flickas liv kommer att gestalta sig, vilket vi däremot lättare kunna ungefär beräkna, då vi sett ett stort antal unga flickors liv utveckla sig.
Laura Men efter som vi äro av olika mening, kan ju Bertha få ge utslaget.
Ryttmästarn Nej! Jag låter ingen inkräkta på mina rättigheter, varken kvinnor eller eller barn. Bertha, lämna oss.
Bertha går ut.
Laura Du fruktade hennes uttalande, emedan du trodde att det skulle bli till min fördel.
Ryttmästarn Jag vet, att hon själv vill ifrån hemmet, men jag vet också, att du äger makt ändra hennes vilja efter behag.
Laura Å, är jag så mäktig!
Ryttmästarn Ja, du har en satanisk makt att få igenom din vilja, men det får alltid den som icke skyr medlen. Hur fick du till exempel bort doktor Norling och hur fick du hit den nya?
Laura Ja, hur fick jag det?
Ryttmästarn Du skymfade den förre, så han gick, och lät din bror skaffa röster åt den här.
Laura Nå, det var ju mycket enkelt och fullkomligt lagligt. Ska Bertha resa nu?
Ryttmästarn Ja, om fjorton dagar skall hon resa.
Laura Är det ditt beslut?
Ryttmästarn Ja!
Laura Har du talat vid Bertha om det?
Ryttmästarn Ja!
Laura Då får jag lov att söka hindra det!
Ryttmästarn Det kan du inte!
Laura Inte! Tror du att en mor släpper ut sitt barn bland dåliga människor att lära sig, det allt vad modern inplantat är dumheter, så att hon sedan får gå föraktad av sin dotter hela sitt liv.
Ryttmästarn Tror du att en far vill tillåta okunniga och inbilska kvinnor lära dottren att fadren var en charlatan?
Laura Det skulle nu betyda mindre med fadren.
Ryttmästarn Varför så?
Laura Därför att modren är närmare till barnet, sedan man upptäckt att ingen egentligen kan veta vem som är ett barns fader.
Ryttmästarn Vad har det för tillämpning i det här fallet?
Laura Inte vet du om du är Berthas far!
Ryttmästarn Vet jag inte!
Laura Nej, det ingen kan veta, det väl inte du!
Ryttmästarn Skämtar du?
Laura Nej, jag begagnar endast dina lärdomar. För övrigt, hur vet du att jag inte varit dig otrogen?
Ryttmästarn Mycket tror jag dig om, men det inte, och inte det heller om du skulle tala om det, såvida det var sant.
Lura Antag att jag föredrog allt, att bli utstött, föraktad, allt för att få behålla och råda över mitt barn, och att jag nu voro uppriktig, när jag förklarade: Bertha är mitt, men inte ditt barn! Antag...
Ryttmästarn Sluta nu!
Laura Antag bara detta: då vore din makt ute!
Ryttmästarn Sedan du bevisat, att jag icke var fadren!
Laura Det vore väl inte svårt! Skulle du vilja det?
Ryttmästarn Sluta nu!
Laura Jag skulle naturligtvis bara behöva uppge namnet på den verklige fadren, närmare bestämma plats och tidpunkt, till exempel -, när är Bertha född? - tredje året efter vigseln...
Ryttmästarn Sluta nu! Annars...
Laura Annars vad? Vi ska sluta nu! Men tänk noga på vad du gör och beslutar! Och gör dig framför allt inte löjlig!
Ryttmästarn Jag finner allt detta ytterst sorgligt!
Laura Desto löjligare blir du!
Ryttmästarn Men inte du!
Laura Nej, så klokt har vi fått det ställt.
Ryttmästarn Det är därför man inte kan strida med er.
Laura Varför inlåter du dig i strid med en överlägsen fiende.
Ryttmästarn Överlägsen?
Laura Ja! Eget är det, men jag har aldrig kunnat se på en man, utan att känna mig överlägsen.
Ryttmästarn Nå, då skall du få se din överman en gång, så du aldrig glömmer det.
Laura Det skall bli intressant.
Amman (in) Bordet är serverat. Behagar inte herrskapet stiga ut och spisa?
Laura Jo gärna!
Ryttmästarn dröjer; sätter sig i en fåtölj vid divanbordet.
Laura Ska du komma och äta kväll?
Ryttmästarn Nej, tack, jag vill ingenting ha!
Laura Va! Är du ledsen?
Ryttmästarn Nej, men jag är inte hungrig.
Laura Kom nu, annars ska man göra frågor som - äro onödiga! - Var snäll nu! - Du vill inte, så sitt där då!
(Går.)

Amman Herr Adolf! Vad är det här för slag?
Ryttmästarn Jag vet inte vad det är. Kan du förklara mig hur ni kan behandla en gammal man som om han vore ett barn!
Amman Inte förstår jag det, men det är väl därför att ni äro kvinnors barn alla män, stora som små...
Ryttmästarn Men ingen kvinna är av man född. Ja, men jag är ju Berthas far. Säg, Margret, tror du inte det? Tror du inte?
Amman Å gud, vad han är barnslig. Visst är han väl sitt eget barns far. Kom och ät nu, och sitt inte där och sura! Så! Så, kom nu bara!
Ryttmästarn (stiger upp) Gå ut kvinna! Åt helvete häxor!
(Till tamburdörren.) Svärd! Svärd!
Kalfaktorn (in) Herr ryttmästarn!
Ryttmästarn Låt sätta för kappsläden, genast!
Amman Herr ryttmästarn! Hör nu på...
Ryttmästarn Ut kvinna! Genast!
Amman Bevara oss gud, vad skall nu bli av?
Ryttmästarn
(tar på sig mössan och rustar att gå ut) Vänta mig icke hem före midnatt!
(Går.)


Fadren är ett drama skrivet av August Strindberg och temat är kampen mellan könen som vi precis har visat exempel på, det är en stark och hetsig dialog igenom hela boken som bara tycks blir mer hetsig för varje scen. Dramat är uppbyggt i tre akter, med rollerna Ryttmästaren, Laura, Pastorn, Bertha (hans dotter), Doktor Östermark, Amman, Nöjd och Kallfaktorn.
I Fadren kan vi också utläsa många motiv som drar nära paralleller till Strindbergs liv. T.ex. Så är Ryttmästaren vetenskapsman och hindras i sitt arbete av Laura, såsom Strindberg kan ha uppfattat sitt liv som vetenskapsman med Siri. Samma sak är med Ryttmästarens tvivel om att han faktiskt är son till sitt barn, som också är ett av motiven i boken. Laura väcker hans oro genom en ironi om att han faktiskt inte kan veta om barnet är hans och han går rätt i fällan, och det blir hans undergång. Strindberg hade samma problem med Siri, och hon hade dessutom varit otrogen och Strindberg gruvade sig mycket över om han faktiskt var far till vissa av sina barn.
Sen har vi ett av de starkaste motiven i dramat vilket är själsmordet. Jag tänker inte gå in på handlingen eftersom jag inte vill avslöja slutet, men det syftar på, att man endast med psykisk press kan driva en person så långt att det slutar i galenskap och till och med död.
I många verk så drar Strindberg nära paralleller till sitt eget liv och Fadren är ett mycket bra exempel på det, motiven, rollerna och intrigerna är så som Strindberg upplevde dem i sitt liv. Med det vill jag avsluta och tacka Anna för att hon varit med och haft en av dialogerna från Fadren med mig.

The English Language Today

The English Language Today
By David Crystal
Summary


The English linguist, David Crystal, tries to explain the importance and the reasons why English counts as a global language. The text shows two different theories of why a language can be counted as worldwide. The first is the extent to which a language is found useful outside its original setting and the second describes the grade of difficulty of considering the language as global with the help of the total number of its speakers.
To count all the mother tongue speakers of English is not the biggest obstacle, because we have exact numbers of the population of these countries. The problem seems to be the countries that use English as a second or as a foreign language. In these areas where English is used as a foreign language, it is studied at high levels, for example in schools and universities. Even though this happens mostly in developed countries, to make an estimate of the English speakers here is, as Crystal claims, something almost impossible and of course the question of -to what extent somebody speaks English- comes in the picture as well.
In countries where English is used as an official/second language such as Ghana and Nigeria the problem becomes even more difficult. Here, the legal system, education and media are mainly in English. But because of the existence of several ethnical groups, all with different native languages, English has been chosen to neutralize possible ethnical and lingual conflicts in the area. English is counted here as a “second” language also because the people want to maintain their traditions. Because of this many of them speak their own language at home. This factor combined with the poverty that makes the educational opportunities limited, makes it, again, impossible to make an exact estimate of the English speakers in the area.
Crystal argues that every language reaches its climax with the help of the economy. Several languages as French and Latin have reached the worldwide status. Today is the turn of English, but in case of a massive change in the economy and of the balance of power of the western world, the position of the English language can be put in danger, but until then the English language will continue to develop and the number of the English speakers will continue to increase.

Word Count: 383

What does Rita gain from her education and what does she lose? based on educating rita by Willy russel

What does Rita gain from her education and what does she lose?

In the play written by William Russell in 1979, you meet a 26 year old hairdresser that decides to improve her life trough an education. The hairdresser, Rita, comes from a working class background from Liverpool, something which is an obstacle in her pursuit of knowledge. Nevertheless, she understands that a possible education would function as an entry into a superior lifestyle. As the time passes, Rita’s thirst of education increases and she feels that she gains an identity. Her tutor, Frank, plays a vital part in her development.
The process of gaining this identity decreases her ability to understand the possible drawbacks of her education. Throughout her development, her personality is changing inevitably and according to her, the development is mainly positive. This essay will analyze what Rita gains from her education and what she loses.

Rita is gaining a lot from her education but simultaneously refuses to cope with the fact that her personality and mentality alter too. Because of these changes, Rita distances from her family and the environment she was part of. This huge loss of separation from her family is, anyhow, not comprehended completely by Rita. Nevertheless, the connections with her old environment disappear and not having arrived yet in the new desired, upper-class world, Rita feels desolated and claims that she is ‘I’m a half-caste’. This somber separation from her family, friends, acquaintances and boyfriend can be noticed during several occasions in the play; when Rita joins her family at the pub and while the whole family is singing joyfully along the jukebox, Rita realizes how futile her family’s present is. Rita remarks that she must revive and obtain a genuine identity. This process becomes her intention and because of the education, it occurs. But everything has a prize in life; the more she is distancing from her family and earlier environment, the more she gains the desired upper-class identity.
This fact is grasped by her teacher, Frank. The tutor is, to a certain extent, aware of his decline within the private and working life and notices that Rita yearns for the same things that he does not value anymore. Throughout the play, Frank realizes that because of this education, much of Rita’s personal charisma, as for example her vivaciousness and brightness vanishes. Rita refuses to understand these drawbacks of her education and instead of taking in consideration Frank’s observation, she negates replies: ‘What's up, Frank, don't y' like me now that the little girl's grown up, now that y' can no longer bounce me on daddy's knee an' watch me stare back in wide-eyed wonder at everything he has to say?’
As I mentioned before, with the help of the education Rita gains, more or less, the kind of identity that she yearned for. This occurs tragically because it distances Rita from her family and friends.
In terms of education, because of her thirst of knowledge, Rita gains a lot. She learns how to articulate a speech, to discuss properly, she gains knowledge about classic literature and music, learns how to write essays and learns famous quotations. However, one of the most vital accomplishments of Rita is self judgment. Throughout the play, you can notice how Rita’s ability of questioning knowledge increases. In the beginning of the play, this quotation is found: “Rita, how the hell can you write an essay on E.M Forster with almost total reference to Harold Robbins?” Rita must learn about source criticism “Crap? And who are you citing in support of your thesis, F.R Leavis?” “No. Me!”).
In this case, Rita is making an attempt to write an essay in a germane way, but eventually fails because she cannot question her own work and the sources she is dealing with. Throughout the book, she is progressing to a large extent. In the end she says, I will try to quote from the memory, that “I wanted it all so much, I did not want it (the knowledge) to be questioned”. Frank’s and Trish’s influence helped the protagonist to understand that in order to be a genuine educated person, she has to question all possible knowledge.

Nevertheless, throughout the play, Rita is distancing from her family as a consequence of her new upper-class identity. Her new identity helps her to make tremendous progresses within the scholar life. Despite the obstacles that she faces in the pursuit of knowledge, she succeeds, more or less, to accomplish the demands of her education. Beside that Rita is on her way to become well-read, she even gains knowledge of source criticism and thus understands that questioning all kind of knowledge is vital.

david mcintyre(teacher) talks about main cahracters in remains of the day

Describing the main characters in The Remains of the Day

Miss Kenton
Worked at Darlington’s for 15 years
Housekeeper
She tells and imagines how her life would be with Stevens P251
She is giving optimismà first time for the reader
She is determined
Seeing & Blindness: she sees that she cannot enter the relationship between Stevens and Darlington
Marries Mr. Ben
Has no close relatives
Not afraid of expressing ideas
Straight forward
Reveals Steven’s personality
Drives the narration
Comes to life at the end of the novel
Can become emotional, then becomes the opposite of Stevens
In contrast to Stevens, she wishes to do something with her life

Darlington
Comes from old distinguished family
Dead and diseased
Darlington symbol for Englishness, when Faraday takes overàsymbol for the disappearance of the empire and the abolishment of the Loyal Houses
Had a nephew
Trusted Stevens
Influenced by the Germans
Symbolizes the position of Britain in politicsà Darlington=powerful, Britain=world power
Has a friend that commits suicide
Darlington is symbol for Englishness & Faraday for Americans
Like a match of rugbyà British traditional sportà fight during the match and friends afterwardsà the same as Darlington thought about Germans, they fought against the Germans, but the fight was now over (UNRELIABLE IDEA OF DAVID)à contrast with USA

Father
· 2 childrenànot a good father à regrets that to the end
· 70 years oldàdies of heart attack
· Worked for Darlington àprofessional relation with himà dignityà Stevens regarded him as the personification of dignity
· Dedicated to work
· Not a member of Hayes Society
· Is Stevens model
· His name was William

comparative commentary, based on article sam cerro

Firstly, in my commentary, the text to the left that is an obituary will be called text A, while the newspaper story, on the right, text B.
The most obvious connections between the two texts, is the theme. The both articles are based on the same piece of information, which is the death of Sam Cerro. Even though the articles have, to a certain extent, a similar theme, the both texts convey different motives.
Another similarity that can be found in the both texts is the cause of Cerro’s death. Although this connection can be perceived, as a close reader, you can notice that in text A the protagonist “died at his home, on August 32, 1994, after a long illness”. The other text transmits the following information “died at St Mary’s Hospital from heart disease”.
An important similarity that you have to take in consideration is that the both texts are paradigmatic. Text A can be classified as paradigmatic because of its structure and language. An obituary is always compact, but very efficient. For example, in its first part it describes Cerro’s personality and conveys what kind of person he was, while the second part of the obituary gives you information about the funeral. The compact form is also combined with a big number of adjectives. These adjectives are words that usually describe the main character in a positive way. “We thank God for the 68 years we were allowed to share his life and know his love.” In the obituary Cerro is described as: beloved, loving and a person that the family members will miss. Text A follows the pathway of an obituary. The text is compact and packed with adjectives that describe the positive properties of Cerro, something that logically affects the readers thinking.
In the same way is the reader affected in text B, which is a newspaper story. Likewise text A, the structure and language of the newspaper story makes it paradigmatic as well. The pathway of a newspaper story consists, unlike text A, of a big number of verbs, while the structure is much longer and divided in columns. The usage of the big number of verbs occurs in order to keep the audience read and get informed through a fast way. As I stated above, the fact that both texts are paradigmatic, makes one similarity that has to be taken in consideration.
It is crucial to understand that even though the both texts are based on the same theme, they convey different motives. Already through the headline in text B, you encounter the word “crime figure”. The subtitle strengthens the negative picture of Cerro even more with the help of the incomplete sentence “Record includes drugs, gambling”
In contrast to text B, text A, already through the first words, the protagonist is given the role of “beloved husband, father, brother, grandfather…” In text A, the presence of the emotional atmosphere describes gives the reader an opposite appreciation.
The texts are dissimilar mostly because their complete different purposes. Text B is a newspaper story, something that forces the journalists to use terms of exaggeration or situations that attract the readers in order to be published. The terms of exaggeration can be noticed between the lines. Throughout the text, the newspaper story infers details of the main character’s life and off-putting arguments that construct an interesting article. There exist several examples that do so, one of them can be “... to have supplied cocaine to the men…”. The use of cocaine works as an eliminating factor from today’s society. A person that makes use of this drug might be shut from the society. In our case the author accomplishes his goal.
On the other hand, text A has a completely different purpose. The obituary has the aim of informing the society of the death of a normal person. Unlike text B, the obituary is most probably written by Cerro’s family. The members of his family, in this case, want to convey the genuine person behind the descriptions of the media, something that can be understood with the help of the presence of love and respect for Cerro in the obituary. The following example “We will love him forever and miss him greatly” confirms the purpose of the obituary, because it argues against text B, which may have been published before text A. The previous example above shows that although Cerro might have had difficulties during his life with following the law, he was a remarkable person, which will be remembered by his family forever. The different purpose of the texts is an important factor that proves the vast differences between the texts.
Another enormous difference is the usage of language in the texts. In text A, the author uses a special kind of vocabulary. This specific code describes the positive properties of the central figure and his/her personality or attitude, “Sam loved the birds and the bees, the flowers and the trees and all the animal life beautified from his loving care.” Here the words work together to classify Cerro as a normal genuine person, precisely like everybody else. Unlike text A, text B uses an entirely different language, “Cerro’s long career in local crime included drugs, tax evasion, gambling and illegal abortion.” This example, unlike text A, analyzes what the central character did during his life and what kind of person he was. The poetic way of writing in text A and the journalistic text in the newspaper story makes the two texts even more dissimilar.
Ultimately, if you do not take the paradigmatic form in consideration, it is interesting to analyze what devices the two texts use for the information. Unlike the obituary, in text B, you can notice the presence of the authority of voice. This means that the journalist notifies important associations as the coroner’s office and hints the situation to negative figures, as Garrot the pimp, to influence the reader in the way they wish. In text A, the author uses the presence of several members of family to make the protagonist as normal as possible, “He is survived by his daughters, Linda, Michelle, Cathy and Jacky, his brother, John, and sisters Nellie and Joe and many grandchildren, nieces, nephews and cousins.” The usage of different tools to influence the reader and win his attention is an important difference that has to be taken in consideration.


Word Count: 1068

notes and preparation on the theme butlers and dignity, The remains of the day

Butlers and Dignity

-Remains of the Day-


The Remains of the Day is a novel written by Kazuro Ishiguro in 1989. In the novel we follow the central character, Stevens, on a six-day-trip. Stevens, the butler, regards himself as a professional butler and squanders his life on improving his dignity and professionalism as a butler. During the novel, the reader comprehends his painful life and past.
Butlers and dignity are two themes in the novel, which might play a part of Stevens’ unhappiness. These two themes are present throughout the whole novel.

Stevens’ unhappiness, as I mentioned above, may be a consequence of his occupation. Being a butler, was not Steven’s genuine choice. He wanted to become a great butler, because it was the only way that a butler’s son could influence the course of events positively. Stevens’ devotion to his vocation and the dignity that is related to his profession is giving him an identity that gives him the role of admirer of life. Stevens converses about how true Butlers must behave and structure their dignity. Throughout the novel he uses his position as a British butler to justify himself.

“The great butlers are great by virtue of their ability to inhabit their professional role and inhabit it to the utmost; they will not be shaken by external events, however surprising, alarming or vexing, they wear the professionalism as a decent gentlemen will wear his suite; he will not let ruffians or circumstances tear it off him in the public gaze; he will discard it when, and only when, he is entirely alone. It is as I say a matter off dignity.”

During the years, Stevens’s personality, interests and behavior are merged together into one professional butler. This becomes “his suite” that he never takes off. This turned Stevens into a day-night professional with “the suit” on. Stevens acts fully professionally. Even the novel is written in such way. Since it is a diary, the reader expects it to be like most diaries: personal, subjective, full of confessions and emotions. As a replacement for such, the diary is composed of structured memories and considerations of butlers. Every single thought is described and analyzed from a butler’s professional point of view.



His vocation correlates with dignity. Stevens considers hid duty in the following way:
“My vocation will not be fulfilled until I have done all that I can to see his lordship through the great tasks that he has set himself. Only on that day I will be able to call myself a well-contented man.”

This example proves how devoted Stevens was to Darlington. This, in combination with the struggle for achieving impeccable perfection within his vocation, gives Stevens the role of a passive admirer of life which analyzes his past through ‘corrective lenses’.

According to Stevens, he is not simply a perfect reflection of Britain’s dignity and perfect butlers, but also a factor that contributed to history through his work:

“The state of the silver had made a small, but significant contribution towards the easing of relations between the two gentlemen that evening. Something so trivial, would affect the rest of the world.”

Even though he may have increased the future Nazi influence in Britain, he did not realize this fact. This error occurred because of the ‘corrective lenses’ that I mentioned above.

Folkomflyttning och demokratiska reformer

Folkomflyttning och demokratiska reformer
Läxa. Frågor. Svar.

Frågor

· Diskutera orsakerna bakom den stora emigrationen till Amerika under 1800- talet.
· De stora befolkningsomflyttningarna i samband med industrialismens framväxt väckte oro för social upplösning i samhället. Varför? Finns det paralleller till dagens diskussioner om invandring och globalisering?
· Arbetarrörelsen hade en politisk och en facklig gren. Beskriv likheter och skillnader dem emellan!
· Diskutera argumenten för och emot allmän rösträtt i förra sekelskiftet debatt! Vilken hållning intog företrädare för de olika ideologierna och hur resonerade de?
· Både konservativa, socialister och liberaler slöt upp och kring iden att staten skulle ta ansvar för medborgarnas välfärd. Vilka motiv för detta fördes fram av de olika partierna?


Svar

· En viktig faktor som kan ha orsakat emigrationen är kunskapen. Denna blev mycket större, vanligare och bättre än förut. Denna gav också förbättringar inom kommunikation dvs. exempelvis transport, media och post. Det gav människorna stora möjligheter att vara medvetna och informeras oftare och fortare om ett bättre liv någon annanstans och trodde att gräset var grönare på andra sidan.
Kunskapen gjorde framsteg också inom medicinen som hjälpte folket att leva bättre och säkrare. Också p.g.a. ökade befolkningen enormt. Den stora tillväxten ledde till att mer folk behövdes försörjas, mer land odlas och större mängder saker tillverkas. Detta kan ha orsakat brist på land som ledde till att mer folk sökte sig till ställen där de kunde hitta deras behov.
· Emmigrationen och urbaniseringen hade också nackdelar. När folk flyttade till det nya samhället behövde de inte bara anstränga sig att anpassa sig dit, utan också hitta ett helt nytt levnadssätt in en helt annan miljö. Detta ansträngande skifte gav föda till oro och konflikt.
En annan faktor som utsågs vara ”farlig” var att arbetsgivare utnyttjade dessa kritiska lägen till sin fördel genom att t.ex. pruta om lön.
Även idag är invandring en viktig gren i vårt samhälle. Skillnaden till dåtidens invandring är att man är medveten om den oron som skapas när man flyttar ut eller in i ett land, för att dämpa detta har man försökt hjälpa genom till exempel Integrationsverket.
En märklig skillnad är de sociala och etniska skillnader mellan människor som skapar en orättvis obalans i vårt samhälle. Som exempel kan barnarbete ges.
· När folket kom till nya platser innebar det också att de behövde bygga allting från grunden. Detta skulle nöja befolkningen och skapa ordning. Därför byggde man arbetarrörelsen som hade två grenar; den fackliga som skulle se till att arbetarna förhandlade om ett gemensamt avtal som stadgade lika villkor och rättigheter till alla, och den politiska som ville förändra styrelsesättet i samhället. Både dessa fack hade troligen samma mål, att göra samhället så bekväm som möjligt för alla. Den politiska, hade en teori som var multilateral, hjälpa alla, medan den fackliga var mera självisk, som handlade bara om arbetarnas jobb.
· Då strävade människorna naturligtvis efter jämställighet, därför skulle rösträtten införas. Men det fanns gott om motargument! De innebar också att om hur folket som inte hade egendomar och utbildning kunde rösta. Det menades att om man inte har kunskap vet man inte vad politiska inriktningar innebär och om man inte hade egendomar kunde man inte vara ansvarig. Till slut förstod man hur viktig jämnställigheten är.
· Det uppstod med att folk kände sig inte trygga. Det anklagades om hur den fria marknadsekonomin, som var så kraftfull och dynamisk när det gällde att producera varor, hade så stora brister när det gällde att sörja för folkets sociala välfärd.




I’m sorry that I forgot to give you my answers before the holiday. You have my apologies.

1. To What extent was the Second World War caused by the failure of the League of Nations?

The Second World War

1. To What extent was the Second World War caused by the failure of the League of Nations?

The League of Nations could have been one huge factor in the outbreak of the war.
It was an association built 1919 and had a simple aim; to ensure that war never broke out again. 1919 was a time after famous disputes, for example the First World War. The First World War was a disaster. This means that it destroyed many lives, families, political relationships etc. The people experienced the horrors of war as unique and with this opinion as a bottom line the majority of the people of the western world built a thought that were made of the words: no more war! After the war, many thought that the League would bring stability to the world. Why was then the League a factor in the war’s outbreak and why is it criticized? Shortage of power can be the answer.
The country that built the association was USA, the greatest power in the world at that time. When USA itself refused to join the League of Nations, it was a serious blow to the prestige of the League.
Germany was not allowed in the League because it was considered not to be part of the international community and the aggressor of the war. Russia was not allowed either, because it generated fear in Western Europe.
The League of Nations could do only three things if a dispute occurred, these things were called sanctions: firstly, they could sit down and discuss the problem in an orderly and peaceful manner. If this did not work, they could give economic sanctions, or they could order the League’s members not to trade with the aggressor country in order to make them pay and suffer.
So, the world’s most powerful nations did not support the League in any way and they were not members of the association either. This left only Britain and France in the ruling positions. This and the poor system that they could react with created shortage of power. This played in its turn a big part in the war’s outbreak.
The lack of power was not only economical but also political. This means that Britain and France were both countries that suffered financially and militarily during the war, so the League’s interventions were dependent of their limited resources.
The League was almost powerless also because so few countries in so limited areas were members. Because of this, Britain and France were not enthusiastic to get involved in disputes that did not affect Western Europe. It could have been possible that because of the lack of power that the League suffered of, dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini became almost free hands to do whatever they wished. My opinion is that the lack of power of the League of Nations contributed quite a lot in the war’s outbreak.
At a social level the League did have success but most of it is almost forgotten with its failure at a political level. The League sent teams to the Third World to dig water wells and to wipe out diseases. They even worked with drug smuggling, status of women and child slave labor. Their ideas were taken up and continued by the United Nations. The United Nations is today one of the world’s most significant organization. This is why people should know more about the League of Nations and not only about its failures.
First of all this was group work and the thing is that the members were stupid, except of me, so the whole things isnt made just by me;



The American Revolution
Or
The American War of independence
1775-1783





Roots

In the beginning of the European industrialization (17 Th century), the Europeans lived on the country side, in their small houses, they were poor, they starved and froze. A golden news reached Europe. It was America, which contained gold and it was a good opportunity to get a new life start. The Europeans started to colonize the new land, that later became USA. The people here lived on the country side, for themselves and without a special leader. At the same time the European nations explored every new part of the world and even struggled to own as much land as possible. The need of leadership in America attracted the interests of Great Britain and France. Also through this way, conflicts were born between the two countries. The conflicts switched into war later on, a war that would last for seven years. During the war Great Britain protected the colonists because they wanted to use them later on in the future. When GB defeated France, they took control over the North American continent.









The Thirteen Colonies

The British North America was divided by the Englishmen into 13 different colonies. Every colony had a certain leader, a governor controlled by the British parliament, so the colonists had no word to say in this situation! They forced also the whole American trade to be British.
The English manipulation led to a struggle for independence.
The term is used for the colonies of British North America that joined together in the American Revolution against the mother country adopted the Declaration of Independence (1776) and became The United States of America.
The thirteen states are also called the 13 original states.


Causes and Early Trouble

In the middle of the 18 Th centuries, differences in life, thought and interests had developed between the mother country and the growing colonies. Social customs, religious beliefs and economic interests added to the potential sources of conflict.
The British government, like other imperial power in that time, favored a policy of mercantilism (only money, material!), for example The Navigation Acts that were intended to regulate commerce in the interest of the British. The colonies were enforced but allowed to develop freely with a little interference from GB.
When the colonies wanted to become independent the conditions changed abruptly (1763).
The ministry of George Greenville in GB undertook a new colonial policy intended to tighten political control over the colonies. That meant that the colonies hat to pay for own defense and return the revenue to the mother country. When the colonies get very upset, they stopped
the entire trade with GB. To show who the boss was, the British, taxed everything. The Stamp Act taxed practically everything imaginable. This Act was replaced with The Declaratory Act which gave GB the authority to tax whatever they wanted, except for tee.




The War

The decision of the British about the taxing policy, led to The Boston Tea Party. A couple of colonists sneaked on 3 British ships uploaded with tee. They threw the tea abroad and later refused to pay for it and when the colony Massachusetts made up an own government, the war started.
The shot heard round the world, fired at Lexington, April 20, 1775, started The War of Independence and it ended eight and a half years later.
The people that fought in the revolution were: Americans and British.

The Americans were divided into four groups, pro and anti:

The patriots--- also called as rebels, congress men and Whigs. About 40-50% of the population, they fought pro America.
The Loyalists--- the people that supported the British crown, about 20-25% of the population.
The Blacks---served for the Americans
The Native Americans---the most of the joined the British

The British---33% of the British were hired German merchant called, Hessians.








Indecision and Declaration

During the war, some British delegates tried to declare the “dangerous” colonies independent.
The time was indecision and the division of the people was symbolized by the great split between Benjamin Franklin and his loyalist son, William.
In 1776, Thomas Paire wrote a pamphlet, Common Sense, which urged the colonial cause. Its influence was tremendous, but militarily did not prosper greatly. The British gave up Boston, March 1776.
Thomas Paire wrote another pamphlet, The Crisis. It exhorted the revolutions and gave the population courage in desperate days. Washington showed its increasing militarily skill and helped to restore colonial spirits, by crossing the ice ridden Delaware and winning small victories over forces made up mostly of Hessian mercenaries at Trenton and Princeton.
The British gave up Boston in 1776.


Foreign Assistance


When the colonists settled almost at stagnation, foreign aid was finally arriving. Pierre de Beaumarchais had succeeded in getting arms and supplies sent to the colonies in time, helping the victory over the Battle at Saratoga. The French help was two years late and it was also a rematch on neutral territory. The victory made it easier for France to enter upon an alliance with USA.
Spain entered the war against GB, in 1779, but their help did little for the United States, while French soldiers, sailors, supplies and money were of crucial importance.
The Declaration of Independence declared the independence of the 13 colonies and is conventionally dated, 4 July, 1776. July 4, is even today a vital day for the Americans and is also the national day.


Aftermath

The Treaty of Paris formally recognized the new nation, 1783, although very many questions were left unsettled.
The States went through a depression and met its administrative problems under The Articles of Confederation
The American Revolution had a great influence on liberal thought in Europe. The struggles and successes of the youthful democracy were much in the minds of those who brought about the French Revolution etc.
The leader of the colonists became later America’s first president.
This revolution was the most terrible and significant out of the ten that the American population went through.


The End

What were the main factors that made Kenya independent?

What were the main factors that made Kenya independent?



Colonialism is a tremendous part of the global history. You can argue that this process began when “The Partition of Africa”, 1884-1902, began. The European powers created a struggle of colonies, which means that the most major European powers struggled to gain as many colonies as possible. The time passed and after the Second World War, certain colonies began a struggle of independence. Certainly, the Europeans rejected this idea mainly because the colonies offered them significant benefits. The struggle of independence became more and more visible and powerful and became even supported, to a certain extent, by two of the world powers, the USSR and the USA. In the beginning of 1950, certain colonies gained independence. The process of independence was diverse in every area. Each colony had its certain pathway to follow. I will take a closer look to the decolonization in Kenya, which is located in East Africa, and answer to the essay question “What were the main factors that made Kenya independent?”

Firstly, even if each colony developed its own pathway of independence struggle, there existed some similarities within these processes. The big majority of the European powers were affected, to a large extent, by the nationalist movements within the colonies, the effects of the Second World War and the outside pressures. [1]

The nationalist movements were significant for the decolonization. These movements might have been caused by the British themselves. From 1895, when Kenya became a part of the British East Africa, the imperialists created miserable conditions for the natives. In the beginning of the century, the British desired to obtain profits. They wanted to make the farms productive, and did so by confiscating land and force black people to work the land.[2] This procedure started to cause, already then, small numbers of enemies. Before the Second World War, the British colonial policies might have played a big part in Kenya’s poverty and starvation. The miserable social and economical conditions that the British might have caused gave birth to nationalist movements, which played an important part in decolonization in Kenya.

When Kenyan soldiers returned home after taking part in the Second World War, they observed the big contrasts between African colonies and the places were they fought. The soldiers that took part in the war, became also aware of the fact that is was possible to defeat the “superior” Europeans.
The new conceptions about the Europeans and the vast differences of social existing, which the soldiers became aware of came in combination with the outside pressures.
The outside pressures were caused, for example by the USA and USSR, which were anti colonialism and pressured the countries that owned colonies to give up their empires. All these encouraged the native population to expressing their desire of being independent.

Secondly, the Kikuyu people and the Mau Mau played to a certain extent the biggest part in Kenya’s decolonization.

The Kikuyu people are an ethnic group in Kenya, which has its home in the highland and is considered as the most economically active ethnic group in Kenya.[3] The British confiscated the highland area, which was the most desirable agricultural area in the country and which belonged to the Kikuyu people. In the beginning of the 40’s the Kikuyu people had no rights on their former property and were used as laborers.[4]
This unfair method gave birth to an uprising, which was the first genuine opposition against the British. The Kikuyu people catalyzed the independence process.
The critical rural conditions caused urbanization; people moved to big cities to improve their living through working but there the situation was complicated as well.
Slowly but efficiently the opposition grew and in the beginning of the 50’s the opposition merged together and formed Mau Mau, which was for the native population “the sound of liberty”[5]

The Mau Mau opposition was built also by other ethnic groups. Finally, Mau Mau merged together and began an uprising, and a British family was murdered by the supporters of Mau Mau for the first time. This was the spark for the gory conflict that took place between 1953 and 1960. In the beginning of the 60’s the Mau Mau rebellions had been defeated, though it may have hastened Kenyan independence and made the British aware of the local force.

Ultimately, after years of conflict Kenya gained independence, 1963. Kenya gained independence also because own efforts as the Mau Mau opposition and the Kikuyu highland uprising. These developments were catalyzed by the effects of the Second World War, outside pressures and the nationalist movements.
Kenya was only a diminutive part of Britain’s huge empire. This period will remain a dark period in Britain’s history, but it is important to remember that most of the countries have, more or less, a part of their history which they are not proud of.


[1] Lowe, page 25, 26
[2] http://www.casahistoria.net/Imperialism%20in%20Kenya.pdf
[3] http://www.kukummi.org/Stories/kikuyuhistory.html
[4] http://www.casahistoria.net/Imperialism%20in%20Kenya.pdf
[5] http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050221/eviatar

United Nations’ General Assembly Resolution 181

United Nations’ General Assembly Resolution 181
(Palestine 1947)

· In November 1947 the UN took a decision that would turn out to be very very controversial and is even counted as one of the most controversial decisions of the UN, probably because its consequences.

· The decision involved the division of Palestine. This would give even Israel a part.

· The opinion of the decision of Palestine was divided;

a) There were some Jewish minorities of extreme nationalist groups that did not agree with the divided Palestine. They claimed and understood the fact that the Palestines would not give up their territory just like that and that in the future the Jews had to face them by themselves.

b) The big part of Israel accepted the decision; one part was the Jewish Agency (a kind of Jewish government before the establishment of Israel, which was in charge of the immigration and absorption of Jews from Diasporas.)

c) The Arab leadership opposed the plan, arguing that it violated the rights of the people.

· Anyhow, the most interesting thing was The British Mandate of Palestine, which was created 1919. This mandate was actually built up by the League and its function was given to Britain that would oversee the administration and some of the territories of the former Ottoman Empire, until these peoples could take care of themselves.

Britain came first with the proposal of the Palestine division, something that has been researched a lot about. One of the theories that may be true is that the English wanted to reduce the Jewish immigration to Europe to a minimum.

When this fact came to the ears’ of the Jewish population, popular uprisings and guerilla war arose. This and other several factors made Britain to hand over the problem to the United Nations.
The UN took over the issue and after 3 months of negotiations UN released its final rapport that would divide the Palestine country in two parts.



Consequences

Because of this decision, several territorial wars between these two nations took place and again the UN was unable to prevent these later conflicts.















United Nations’ General Assembly Resolution 181
(Palestine 1947)


Why and who?

· The Jews vs. the Palestines because of the controversial decision of the United Nations.

· UN had to interfere because of the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine, which would take care of some of the former territories of the Ottoman Empire.

Consequences. Why is this counted as a failure?

· This resolution caused in the future many territorial wars between Israel and Palestine and showed some weaknesses of the United Nations.[1][2][3][4]
· The division of Palestine is counted as one of UN’s most controversial decisions.
Where?[5]


[1] http://www.palestineremembered.com
[2] http://www.un.org/
[3] Lowe, chapter 9.
[4] Britannica
[5] http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story583.html (map)

7. The Cold War: problems of international relations after the Second World War and 8. The spread of communism outside Europe and its effect on inter

7. The Cold War: problems of international relations after the Second World War

Summary of events:

Relations between USSR and USA became so difficult that, although no actual fight was going on, the period after 1945 became the first phase of the Cold War, which continued in spite of the thaws, to the communism fall in 89’.

The cold war was: instead of open fighting, the rival powers attacked each other with propaganda, economic measures and with a general policy of non- co-operation.

Both superpowers gathered allies around them:
USSR: Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, Czechoslovakia and East Germany (49). N. Korea became a communist government in 48, and in 49 Mao became a dictator in China.
USA: fostered Japan as an ally. Britain and 14 other European countries worked with USA as well. Also Turkey was given economic aid to build an anti communist protection.

Whatever one side did was viewed by the other side as aggressive. For example Poland and Germany, which the superpowers argued about, and no permanent agreement could be reached.

After Stalin’s death, new Russian leaders began to talk about a peaceful co-existence and a thaw was brought about. It was agreed to withdraw all the occupying troops from Austria (55), but the relations were not so good to allow agreement over Germany. Tensions mounted again over Vietnam and Cuban missiles.

7.1 What caused the Cold War?

a) Differences of principle.

The communists system: their ideas came from Marx.
The wealth of a country should be collectively owned and shared by everybody.
The economy should be central planned and the interests and well-being of the working classes safeguarded by state social policies.

The capitalist system:
Wanted to operate on the basis of private ownership of a country’s wealth. The driving forces should be private enterprise in the pursuit of making profits and the preservation of the power of private wealth.

Ever since 1917, the capitalists were afraid of communism spread, which would end the private ownership, political power by the wealthy classes. An example of the capitalist fear was the Russian revolution. USA, Britain, France and Japan sent troops in order to protect the anti communists.
b) Stalin’s foreign policies contributed to the tensions

His aim was to take profit of the military situation, to strengthen Russian influence in Europe.
As the Nazis collapsed they occupied territories of Romania, Poland and Finland. The west was alerted; they thought that this was intent of spreading communism over as much of the globe as possible.

b) US and British politicians were hostile to the Soviet government

· During the war, Lend Lease took place. This was American aid to Russia during the war. This meant that Roosevelt trusted Stalin.
· After Roosevelt’s death (April 45), Truman that was suspicious toughened his attitude towards communism.
· A theory shows that Truman dropped the bomb over Japan, to show Russia what might have happened if they would go too far.
· Stalin suspected Truman for destroying communism.
· Stalin did not know about the existence of the A bomb, just shortly before its use in Japan.
· The west had the bomb and USSR did not.

c) So which side was to blame?

Orthodox view:
During the 50’s, mostly American historians blamed Stalin for the Cold War. The formation of NATO and the American entry in the Korean War were the west’s self-defense against communism aggression.


The revisionist view:
During the 70’s and 80’s some Americans historians argued that Stalin was not to be blamed. USSR suffered losses during the war and it was obvious that Russia wanted to have good friendship relations with the neighboring states. They even claimed that USA had to give more understanding to the USSR.
This view was affected by the Vietnam War, which made the people to reconsider the American attitude and to notice the hostility towards communism.

The post revisionist view
During the 80’s this view was put forward by some American historians. This is because they had accesses to new sources and archives that were not able before. They argued that the both sides have to be blamed for the Cold War.
They believed that:
USA: and its economic policies (Marshall Aid) were due to increase American influence in Europe.
USSR: Stalin had no long term plans of spreading communism but he was opportunist, who would take profit of every situation as possible.


Both powers created an atmosphere that was interpreted in two ways. What was claimed as necessary for self defense by one side was considered by the other side as evidence of aggressive intent.
War was avoided because the Americans were reluctant to use their bomb



7.2 How did the Cold War develop between 45 and 53?

a)The Yalta Conference (Feb 45)

Was held in Russia, Crimea, Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill were there. They should plan the post war time:

A new organization: to be called UN, should replace the failures of the League of Nations.

Germany was to be divided into zones. Russian, American and British (later French), while Berlin would be divided in the same way.

Austria was to be divided in the same way.

Free elections would be allowed in Eastern Europe

Stalin promised to join the war against Japan, if he received some territory of Manchuria and some land of Sakhalin Island

Their biggest problem was Poland:
When the Russians drove the Germans out of Poland, they set up a communist government in Lublin (even though the real Polish government was exiled in London).

At Yalta, they agreed that some of the London based government should be allowed to join the Lublin government, if the Russian in return would allowed to keep a strip of eastern Poland, which she annexed since 39’. Stalin demanded the whole German territory east of the rivers Oder and Neisse. The west was not happy about this.













b) The Potsdam (July 45)

It revealed a distinct cooling off in relations. Stalin, Truman and Churchill were present. But Churchill was replaced by Clement Atlee (the new British Labor Prime Minister, after election victory)

The war was over, but no agreement was reached about the long term of Germany.

Truman and Churchill were angry because the Russians occupied the area east of Odder and Neisse. The area was now ruled by pro communist Polish government. 5 millions Germans were expelled. This was not agreed at Yalta

Truman did not inform Stalin about the A bomb. 2 days after Potsdam, USA bombed Japan, the war ended quickly (10 August) without Russian aid, though the Russian declared war to Japan (8 August) and invaded Manchuria. They annexed southern part of Sakhalin, but they were not allowed in the occupation of Japan.

d) Communism established in Eastern Europe

Establishment of communism in the East caused alarm in the west.
Months after Potsdam, USSR set pro communist government in Eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Albania and Romania), in case of resistance opponents were imprisoned or killed.
In Hungary, free elections were allowed, but communists won only 20 %, but the majority of the cabinet after the elections were communists.

· In February 46’ Stalin frightened with a speech: communism and capitalists could never live peacefully together, and peace was inevitable until communism victory.

Churchill’s responded to all this in an own speech in Missouri (March 46): An iron curtain has descended across the continent. He said that he needed help by the Western powers to withstand the communist expansion, which Stalin cared on.

Stalin called Churchill as a WARMONGER.

e) The Russians continued to tighten their grip on eastern Europe

· By the end of 47’ every state in the East, with the exception of Czechoslovakia, had a fully communist government. Opponents were: expelled, arrested, executed and all political partied were dissolved. Free elections were rigged. All this took place under the eyes of the secret police and Russian troops.

· Only Yugoslavia did not follow the pattern. Tito has been legally elected in 45’. He won because he could he kicked out the Germans from the country, and this is why Stalin could not demand anything from him.

· West was irritated by Russia’s attitude because they disregarded the free elections in the East as they said at Yalta.

· West was not surprised also because in 44’ Churchill agreed with Stalin that much of Eastern Europe would be a Russian sphere of influence. Stalin could argue friendly governments in the neighboring states were necessary for self defense and that these countries have not had democratic governments anyway, so communism would only help them.

· It was not Stalin’s methods of gaining power that upset the West, and they had major results.

e) The Truman Doctrine

· The idea came from Greece, where communists wanted to overthrow the monarchy.
· British troops helped the Greeks (44’), and the west felt now the same about Eastern Europe.
· Ernest Bevin (British foreign minister announced march 47): the USA would support free peoples who are resisting subjugation by armed minorities and by outside pressures.
As a result: Greece and Turkey were helped. Turkey, which also seemed under threat, gained an aid of 60 million dollars.

· Truman Doctrine showed that USA had no intention of returning to their isolation, as after WW1. They would withstand communism all around the globe.

f)The Marshall Plane

· Announced in June 47’, was an economic extension of Truman Doctrine.
· American secretary of state, Marshall, produced his European Recovery Programme (ECR). He declared:
Our policy is not directed against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty and desperation throughout the world.

· One of his aims was to promote the economic recovery of Europe, to ensure American exports. But his main aim was political: if Western Europe had economic problems, it was more likely for the communists to gain control in those areas.
· By September 16 countries joined this.
· USSR considered the Marshal Plane as a dollar imperialism, as a device for gaining control of Western Europe and also as for interfering in Eastern Europe. Even though the aid could have been given to the countries of Eastern Europe as well, USSR rejected the offer for Russia and its Satellite states + Czechoslovakia.
· The iron curtain seemed a reality.

f) The Cominform

· Was the communist response ( September 47)
· Was done to draw together the European communist parties.
· All the satellites states were members+ Italian and French communist parties were represented.
· The aim of this was to tighten the Russian grip on the satellites.
· It was demanded to be Russian style communism. Eastern Europe was to be industrialized, collectivized and centralized.
· It was expected trade routs between the satellites states and all contacts with non-communist countries were discouraged. Yugoslavia objected and was expelled (48’), though it remained communist.
· Molotov Plan was introduced (49’) to offer Russian aid to the satellites
· Comecon was also set up in order to coordinate Russian economic policies.


g) The communist takeover of Czechoslovakia (Feb 48’)

Was a great blow for the west, because it was the last non communist country in the east. They hoped that the country would remain as a bridge between eats and west.
Elections were to be held in May. The candidates were President Benes, Foreign minister Masaryk and the communist Prime Minister Gottwald.
It was obvious that the communists would lose ground because they rejected the Marshall aid, which might have been the solution for the hunger.
Before the elections the communists killed Masaryk and from a strange reason Benes resigned and Gottwald became president.
The western powers and the UN protested but could not do anything because they could not prove the real truth.
The iron curtain was now complete


h) The Berlin blockade and airlift (June 48’-May 49’)

Brought the Cold War to its first climax, this because of the disagreement over the treatment of Germany.

As agreed at Yalta and Potsdam, Germany and Berlin were each divided into four zones. While the west tried to do their best to organize economic and political recovery in their parts, Stalin determined to make Germany pay for everything they destroyed. He treated his zone as a satellite, draining its resources away to Russia.

Early in 48, because of the Marshall aid, they merged to form a single economic unit, something that was the opposite of the Russian situation in East Germany.

The west wanted to unite the whole country, but Stalin saw this as dangerous. He felt scared of the now merged German zone.

In 48 the west ended price controls in Berlin. USSR though that this was an impossible situation because they felt it impossible to have 2 different currencies in the same city + that the USSR was ashamed of the big contrast between West and East Berlin.
The Russians closed all the road, rail and canal links between West Berlin and West Germany. The West was sure that if they would withdraw, the situation would end with a Russian attack in the West Berlin.
The west decided to fly the supplies in the area, and over the next 2 months 2 million tons supplies were given to the West Berliners to cope with the winter.
The Russians admitted failure by lifting the blockade (May 49)


The results of the affair:

It gave a psychological increase to the western powers, but it did worsen the relations with USSR a lot.

It caused the western powers to coordinate their defense by the formation of NATO

Since no compromises were made, Germany would remain divided for the foreseeable future.



i) NATO formed

NATO was formed in April 49’.
Its members would treat any attack of all the members as an own.
This was a highly significant development: the Americans abandoned their policy of no entangling alliances and for the first time had pledged themselves in advance military action.
Stalin took this as a challenge and tensions remained high

j) The 2 Germanies

Sine there was no sign of agreement the west set up, German Federal Republic or West Germany (August 49’).
Elections were held and Adenhauer became its first chancellor.

The Russians replied (September 49’): called their area as German Democratic Republic or East Germany.



k)More nuclear weapons

In September 49’ it became known that USSR had an A bomb of their own and arms race developed.
Truman responded by giving instructions of producing a hydrogen bomb, stronger than any

Not only Russia made the US worried. In 49’ a communist government was proclaimed in China.
Mao hade defeated Chianng Kai Shek, the nationalist leader that was supported by the US, and who was now forced to flee the country.

· February 50’ China signed a treaty of alliance with USSR, something that threatened the US even more.
· In this anxiety the tensions moved to Korea.





















7.3 To what extent was there a thaw after 1953?

a) Reasons for the thaw

The death of Stalin

· Starting point of the thaw. New leaders such as Khrushchev wanted to improve relations with USA. By 53’ both USA and USSR had developed a hydrogen bomb, the two sides were so balanced that international tensions had to be relaxed if nuclear war was to be avoided.

Khrushchev said in a famous speech in February 56’: There are only two ways, friends or enemies.
He even said that USSR had not given up the idea of communist dominated world; this would be achieved when the Western powers recognized the superiority of the Soviet economic system, not when they were defeated in war.

McCarthy discredited

It became clear that McCarthy was something of a fanatical, and when he began to accuse leading generals of having communist sympathies, he had gone too far. The Senate condemned him, and then Eisenhower announced that the American people wanted to be friendly with the Soviet people.





b) How did the thaw show itself?

The first signs:

The signing of the peace agreement at Panmunjon ended the Korean War (53’)
The end of the Indo-China War (54)

The Russian made important concessions in 55’

· Agreed to give up military bases in Finland.
· They lifted their veto on the admission of 16 new member states to the UN
· The quarrel with Yugoslavia was healed by Khrushchev’s visit in Belgrade.
· The Cominform was abandoned, suggesting more freedom for the satellite states.

The signing of the Austrian Treaty (May 55’)

· Since 45’ the country was divided into four, with own government (because they were not treated as a defeated enemy)
· The Austrian power was limited and the situation was like the one in Germany.
· In 55’ the Austrians persuaded the USSR to be more cooperative. The USSR was also afraid of a merger between West Germany and West Austria.
· As a result, all occupying troops were withdrawn and Austria became independent with her 1937 frontiers.
· Austria was: not to unite with Germany, had limited armed forces, had to remain neutral. This means that they could not join NATO or ECC.
· Austrian were unhappy because of the loss of the German speaking area of the South of Tyrol, which Italy was allowed to keep.

b) The thaw was only partial

· Khrushchev’s policy was a curious mixture that west had difficult to understand.
· He had no intention of relaxing its grip on the satellites states; a good example was Hungary (56).

· When the rising against communism occurred, it was crushed by Russian tanks. Sometimes it seemed that he wanted to see how far he could go before the stood him up:

The Warsaw Pact (55’) was signed between Russia. It was signed by USSR and her satellite states, shortly after West Germany was admitted in NATO. This pact was a mutual defense agreement which the west took as a gesture against West Germany’s membership of NATO.

The Russians continued to build up their nuclear armaments.

The situation in Berlin caused more tension

Most provocative of all was when Khrushchev installed Soviet missiles in Cuba, less the a hundred miles from American coast (62’)


The situation in Berlin

· In 58’ , perhaps of the USSR’s apparent lead in some areas of the nuclear arms race, Khrushchev announced that his country no longer recognized the rights of the western powers in West Berlin, but when the USA made it clear that they would do anything to withstand a possible attack, the USSR did not press the point.

· In 60’ USSR became angry when an American U2 spy plane was shot down in Russia. (The U2 incident). Eisenhower refused to apologize, defending America’s right to make reconnaissance flights.

· In 61’ USSR suggested to Kennedy, the withdrawal from Berlin. The USSR was embarrassed by the contrasts and by the large number of refugees escaping from East Germany (over 200 000/year, 3 million since 45’).
When Kennedy refused, the Berlin Wall was built in order to block the escape route.


7.4 The nuclear arms race and the Cuban missile crisis (62’)

a) The arms race began to accelerate

· The race began after USSR had an A bomb of their own
· Since USA already had one; the USSR had to catch up.
· When USA made a hydrogen bomb (end of 52’), the Russians did the same the following year
· USA remained in the lead until USSR took the lead (August 57), when they produced a new weapon:

This was The Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (IBCM), which was powerful nuclear weapon that could reach USA from inside USSR.

The American response was ATLAS (also an IBCM), and soon hade even more then USSR!

Americans even built missiles with shorter range, that could reach Russia from Europe and Turkey, they were called Jupiters and Thors.

· When USSR successfully launched the world’s first satellite (Sputnik 1, 58’) , the USA had to compete. Within a few moths they launched an own satellite.


b) The Cuban Missile Crisis (62’)

· Cuba became involved in the Cold War (59’) when Castro seized the power from the corrupt, American backed Batista, outraged the USA by nationalizing American owned estates and factories.
· As Cuban relation with USA worsened, the ones with Russia improved
· Later (not directly), USA broke off all diplomatic relations with Cuba, and USSR increased their economical aid in Cuba.
· The Bay of Pigs attack (April 61’), was an approved plan (approved by Kennedy) to attack Cuba from American bases in Guatemala. CIA was heavily involved.
Castro defeated the 1400 men-attack, and right after Castro announced that he was a Marxist.


· USSR decided to set up nuclear missiles in Cuba, something that put all the east American cities under threat. This was something risky, but why did he take such a decision?

The Russian lost lead in the IBCMs; this was a way of seizing power back.

Since the USA had missiles pointing at USSR in Turkey, USSR wanted the Americans to understand how such a think felt like.

It was a Gesture of solidarity towards Cuba, which have been under American threat.

It would test Kennedy’s attitude

He might have used the missiles, to force USA to withdraw their missiles in Turkey and the western powers from Berlin.


· Kennedy did the following thing:
Alerted American troops

Began a blockade to keep out ships that were bringing missiles to Cuba

Demanded the removal of US missiles in Turkey (but not publicly)


· The results were:
Both sides thought that they achieved something and understood how easy an nuclear war could begin, may have produced relaxation in tensions.
· The powers created the Hot Line to allow consultations
· USA, Britain, and USSR signed a Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (July 63’), this meant that the tests on nuclear weapons will only occur underground.
· Kennedy’s attitude has been criticized, some people claim that he could resist and push out the communism in Cuba.


c) The race continued into the 70’

· In public the USSR, they announced the Cuban Missiles Crises as a success, but in private they admitted that they failed.
· Removal of the missiles in Turkey did not mean anything because the USA had now:
Ballistic Missiles, or SLBMs (called for Poseidon and Polaris). These could be launched from the subs.

· As the USA did not have so much resources and time, because of the Vietnam, the USSR decided to catch up. Early 70’ they took the lead in the number of IBCMs and SLBMs.

They have even created a new weapon: The Anti Ballistic Missiles (ABMs), which could destroy enemy missiles before they reached their target. This was both offensive and defensive.


· American reply: Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicle (MIRVs). They could carry out 14 different warheads; each one could be programmed to hit different targets.
· Russian reply to MIRVs: SS- 20 (77’), but carried only 3 warheads.


· At the end of the 70’, Americans created Cruise Missiles, which were based in Europe. These could flow under Russian radar, so they could pass by unnoticed.


· The main problem was: each side might be tempted to try to win a nuclear war by striking first or destroying all the weapons of the other side.


c) Protests against nuclear weapons

· In Britain, the Campaign of Nuclear Disarmament (CND, 58’), wanted the government to take the lead of the abandoning of the weapons.
· Mass demonstrations were held every year at Easter (March from London to Aldermaston). British government did not dare to take the risk, the unilateral disarmament would leave them as an offer for the USSR.


















8. The spread of communism outside Europe and its effect on international relation

Summary of events

In 1921 in China that was encouraged by the Russian Revolution, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) had been formed.
First, it cooperated with Kuomintang (KMT), the party that tried to govern China and to control the generals who were struggling among themselves for power. Later on, KMT gained control over a large area in China, and did not wish to share it with CCP. Civil war between KMT and CCP broke out.


The Japanese occupied Manchuria (31’) and invaded parts of China (37’). When WW2 ended, the Japanese were defeated and retired from China.
In China KMT’s leader Chiang Kai-shek, with American help still fought with CCP, that was under Mao. 49’ Mao triumphed and Chiang had to flee the country. China invaded Tibet (59’), which are still communists.

Communism gained a hold in Korea too, which was controlled by Japan since 1919. After the Japanese defeat, the country was divided into two parts. In 50’ communist N. Korea invaded S. Korea. UN (mostly Americans) moved in to help south. The war ended in 53, with a communist result.


In Cuba, Castro drove out the corrupt dictator Batista (59’). First Castro was not communist, but soon USA turned against him.


In Vietnam a similar situation like in Korea occurred. Vietnam won their freedom from France (54’), the country was temporarily divided into to, a communist North and an non communist South. When a rebellion broke out in the south against the corrupt government, North gave military assistance to the rebels.
The Americans became involved to stop the spread of communism. In 73’ USA withdrew and 75’ the whole country was under communist control. Some month later Cambodia and Laos turned communist as well.

In South America communism made little headway, except on Chile where in 70’ a Marxist government was democratically elected, with Allente as president. 73’ the government was overthrown and Allente killed.

Africa: strong Marxist connection in Mozambique (75) and Angola (76’).

During the second half of the 70’s a more consistent haw began, détente (a more permanent relaxation in tensions). There were some problems: Russian invasion of Afghanistan (79’), before Gorbatchev became president (85’), who was determined to end the Cold War.

8.1 War in Korea and its effects on international relations

a) Background of the war

Korea was under Japan since 10’, when the Japanese were defeated (august 45), USA and USSR divided the country along the 38th parallel.
Un wanted free elections, for whole country, and Americans agreed, because South Vietnam contained 2/3 of the population, so the communists would be outvoted. Elections were held, supervised by the UN, and South Korea was set up with Rhee as a president and its capital in Seoul (48’).
Following month, USSR, created North Korea, under the communist government of Kim Sung 2, with its capital at Pyongyang. .
49’ USSR and USA troops withdrew, leaving the both leaders with the belief that each of them had the right of taking control of the whole country. Without warning north invaded south.


b)Why did North Koreans invade the South?


· Kim Sung’s own idea encouraged by a speech of Acheson (American Secretary of State) that referred to the areas that the USA would defend and S. Korea was not included.
· Kim was encouraged by the Chinese attack in Taiwan, when they were about to attack KMT.
· Russians were responsible; they supplied them with armament and wanted to test Truman’s determination.
· Would compensate the failures in West Berlin
· Communists blamed S. Korea for crossing the 38th parallel.


d) The USA takes action

Truman saw the attack as a part of the communist spread, so he decided to support S. Korea.
American troops from Japan were ordered before UN took action.
UN warned North to withdraw, and when they ignored their warning UN asked member states to sent troops.
The decision was taken in the absence of USSR that was boycotting meetings in protest against UN refusal to allow Mao’s new Chinese regime to be represented, they would otherwise veto this decision.
USA + 14 other countries sent troops (majority were Americans), they were under the control of General MacArthur.
After enough difficulties with the communists, when UN and US succeeded to get rid of the communists in the South, Truman ordered an invasion of N. Korean, with UN approval to unite the country and hold free elections.
China warned to defeat the North if needed, so China attacked with 300 000 troops so by January 51’ they pushed the western powers out of the North and captured the south capital, Seol.
MacArthur wanted to resist communism and to bomb Manchuria, but Truman did not agree, so MacArthur was removed from his command
In June, the UN succeeded to push the communists out of the south, and in July 53’ an agreement was signed that the frontier should be along the 38th parallel.

e) The results of the war were wide-ranging

For Korea itself was a disaster; 4 million Korean soldiers and civilians were killed, 5 million people were left homeless and the decision seemed permanent.
Truman could take some satisfaction from having contained communism and could claim success.
Many republicans argued that Truman could actually destroy the communism and this feeling contributed to MacArthurism.

China could resist the USA, the superpower. China was now considered as a world power and the fact that China was still not allowed in the UN seemed even weirder.
The conflict brought a new dimension of the Cold War; American relations were strained with China and Russia.
The familiar pattern of both sides trying to build up alliances appeared in Asia as well as in Europe. China for example, tried to help Indo China and to improve relations with India and Burma (54’).


The Americans tried to encircle China with bases, in 51’ defensive agreements were signed with Australia and New Zeeland, in 54’ these three states joined together with Britain and France to form SEATO. USA was disappointed that only 3 Asian states joined: Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Philippines.

Relations between China and USA were also poor because the Americans defended KMT (with Chang), while the Chinese wanted to attack them in Taiwan and to dissolve the party for good.








8.2 Cuba

a) Why did Castro come to power?

There was a long standing resentment among many Cubans at the amount of American influence in the country:
Dated back in 1898, when the USA had helped Cuba to rescue Cuba from Spanish control.
Although the country remained independent, US troops were needed from time to time to maintain stability.
American aid and investment kept Cuban economy working. American companies held controlling interests in ALL Cuba industries, so the American ambassador in Havana became the second most important man in Cuba


Cuba was too dependent on the export of sugar and the wealth of the country was concentrated in the hands of a few.

· The unemployment was a serious problem; the poverty of the unemployment was in stark contrast to the wealth in Havana and in the hands corrupt government officials.


No affective political system had been developed

Batista, had been a leading politician since 33’, seized power illegally and began to rule as a dictator. He did not introduce reforms, he was corrupt, he did not spent enough time for government business and his system was brutal.

There was no prospect of a peaceful revolution

The feeling grew that a violent revolution was needed. Castro, a young lawyer from middle class background and which was nationalist rather than socialist wanted to get rid of Batista and its corruption. Castro wanted to make reforms so all the peasants would gain some land.
He tried to overthrow Batista (53’), but failed and was jailed for two years. Then he began a campaign of guerilla warfare and sabotages in the cities. The rebels soon controlled big areas, and carried out Castro’s reform policy.

Batista’s reaction played into Castro’s hands

Batista murdered and killed suspects of Castro. Many middle class people started to support Castro, also because they were tired of the brutal dictator. US started to feel embarrassment about Batista and cut all the supplies.

In September, Che Guevara and a group of rebellions got control of the main road across the island and prepared to move to Santa Clara.
Batista fled from Cuba (1st January 59’) and a liberal government was set up, with Castro as a leader.


b) How were Cuba’s foreign relations affected?

· Relations with US did not worsen directly, but when Castro nationalized all the American owned estates and factories, Eisenhower threatened to stop importing sugar, forcing Castro to sign an agreement with USSR.

· In July 60’ USSR promised to buy the Cuban sugar, US carried out their threat, and Castro confiscated all the remaining American properties. The relations with US got bad and the ones with USSR improved.

· US broke off all diplomatic relations with Cuba (January 61’), but the USSR already supplied them with aid.

· After the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Cuban Missiles Crises the relations between USA and Cuba remained cool

· The other South American countries felt themselves threatened, so they expelled Cuba from the OAS (Organization of American States), (62’). This made Cuba more independent of USSR.



c) Castro and his problems

Cuba was too dependent of the USA, of the USSR and of the fluctuation in world sugar prices.

Castro improved a lot the situation in Cuba, he:

Collectivized farms
Factories and businesses were nationalized
Tried to improve the sugar production and increase output
To introduce new industries and reduce Cuba’s dependence on sugar
Social reform included to improve: education, housing, medical facilities and communications.
Equality for black people and rights for women was born
The cultural activities improved
By the end of 70’s children were now receiving education, hygiene and health care, unemployment and corruption reduced
The country became more stabile




· Castro seemed to be popular with the vast majority of people, but some failures DID exist. They were:

The attempt of being less independent of only one part of the industry and the agricultural production were not so successive.

So Cuba still depended of sugar industry and of USSR with its satellite states

80 the sugar and tobacco crop (bete av) were reduced by fungus infections, something that led to an economic crisis
Unemployment rose again, people began to move to USA

By 91’ when USSR split up, Cuba lost its most powerful supporter and became extremely isolated.



8.3 The wars in Vietnam, 46-54 and 61-75

Indo China (Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam) was a part of the French empire in South East Asia and since the end of WW2 there were conflicts going on non stop.

In the first phase of the war people fought about independence from the French, the second phase began with the civil war in S. Vietnam (61-75) and the US intervened to stop the communist spread.


a) 1946 -1954

Indo China was occupied by the Japanese during the war, and Vietminh led by Minh tried to resist both the Japanese and the French.
The Vietminh was led by communists but was an alliance of all shades of political opinion which wanted to withstand foreign control.
1945 Vietminh declared Vietnam independent, but when the French refused to accept, Vietminh attacked the in Hanoi.
This struggle lasted for 8 years (ended in May 54) and ended with a victory of Vietminh, also because :

1. The French still suffered from the affects from the war and failed to send enough troops
2. The Chinese communist government supplied the rebels with arms and equipment
· Seeing this, US provided the French with support, but it was not enough
· The Geneva Agreement (54’), Laos and Cambodia became independent and Vietnam was temporarily divided in two parts, along the 17th parallel.


· In the north, Minh’s government was recognized, and in the south would have a separate government until the elections in 56’, when the country would have become united.
· The elections were never held, and the situation looked exactly like in Korea.


b) What caused the civil war in South Vietnam and why did the USA become involved?

The S. Vietnamese government under Diem (chosen by a referendum in 55’), refused to make preparations for the elections, for the whole country
Eisenhower (53-61) was worried about the spread of communism and about the Domino Theory.

Diem lost popularity because:
He was from a Christian family. This made the Buddhists in the area to feel discriminated.

They demanded a land reform, like in China and North Vietnam

His reputation was bad. He was thought to be corrupt and under too much American influence

In the South, in 1960 various opposition groups, which included many former communists from Vietminh, created the NLF (the national front of liberation). They demanded reforms and a united Vietnam.
Guerilla attack was started, attacking government buildings. Diem took the attack as a total communist attack and he introduced security measures, even though the communists represented only one section on the NLF.
Diem was killed in a cup (63’) after which the country was ruled by a succession of generals, the longest was Thieu (67’- 75’).
The removal of Diem did not change the basic situation and the guerilla warfare went on.

When the US understood that Diem was unable to cope with the situation that went on, they increased the military presence in the country.
Under Eisenhower, supported the S. Vietnamese regime with economic and military advisers since 54’ and accepted Diem’s claim that pointed out the communists as the only aggressor.

Having failed to defeat communism in North Korea and Cuba, the USA felt that a strong stand must be made. Both Kennedy and Johnson were prepared to intervene with more than only advisers.

The US said in public that they help S. Vietnam’s independence, but in reality it was just another of the blocks against communism.

US understood the guerillas (VIETCONG), were supported by North, and Minh said that only force can unite the divided country.

c) The Phases of the war

Kennedy (61-63)

Tried to keep American involvement down to anti guerilla campaign
He sent about 16 000 troops advisers + choppers and equipment
Introduced safe village policy, which would move the local peasants apart from the guerillas, but because the guerillas were most peasants, the policy became a failure. They continued to operate with the villages

Johnson (63-69)

He was not scared about the reports which showed that the guerillas and the NLF controlled less than a half of the South Vietnamese area.

Was sure that Minh was the leader of everything, so he decided to bomb North (65’)

Over half of million troops arrived in South, and despite this the Vietcong still managed to unleash an attack that took over 80% of all towns and villages.

This showed the hopelessness of the Americans, so Johnson was put under pressure and was said to withdraw. He stopped bombing North (march 68)

Nixon (69-74)

Since public opinion would not allow him more troops to Vietnam.

Nixon’s new idea was Vietnamization, the Americans would re arm and train South Vietnamese army, and to look after own defense. This would allow a gradual withdrawal of American troops (50% were sent home 71’)

He started to bomb North again and the Minh Trail (Laos and Cambodia, trough were supplies were brought in from North).

People at home did not agree because:
The terrible bombing of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia
The use of chemicals to destroy forests
The death of innocent lives




In 73’ the American troops withdrew, and the both parts would respect the old frontier. But already in 75 Saigon was occupied by North and Vietcong. Vietnam was now united under communist rule and Americans had to accept failure.



d) Why did the Americans fail?

1. NLF had spread widespread support among the ordinary people and the Americans ignored the rightness of the NLF, doing so they encouraged the spread of communism in the South.

2. The Vietcong were experts on Guerilla warfare and with no distinguished uniform they could penetrate among the peasants.

3. The Vietcong received aid from North Korea, China and Russia. The Russian aid after the 70’s was crucial.

4. The nationalism of the Vietcong was also important. For example instead of taking care of the casualties caused during the US bombing, they replied with evacuations of cities and rebuilding factories outside the towns.


e) the effects of the war were out ranging

Vietnam was united but the problem of reconstruction was enormous
Fir the Americans it was a blow of prestige + Watergate caused big effects on the American society. Future governments had to think twice before allowing the country in any similar situation.
It was a victory for the communist world, but did not make a big deal out of it, perhaps they wished to relax international tensions.

8.4 Chile under Salvador Allende 70-73

In 70 a Marxist doctor of medicine from a middle class background won the presidential election as a leader of the UP (Unidad Popular)
The world’s first Marxist leader that was voted through democratic election.



a) How did Allende come to be elected?

· There were three main parties in Chile:

The Unidad Popular (left)
The Christian Democrats (inclined left)
National Party (liberal/conservative coalition)







The election of Frei (64) brought luck in the beginning, he made several successes, he:

Decreased the inflation with 12%

The rich had to pay their taxes instead of evading them

360 000 new houses were built

The numbers of schools were doubled

Some limited land reforms were introduced

1200 private holdings which were run inefficiently were confiscated and given to landless peasants

The US admired him so much that, they gave him economic aid.

67’ his luck started to turn against him: (STILL TALKING ABOUT FREI)

The left thought his land reforms too cautious and wanted full nationalization of the copper industry (Chile’s most important export), whereas the right thought he had gone too far.

In 69’ there was a serious drought (torka), in which 30% of the harvest was lost, large quantities had to be imported, something that gave birth to inflation.

He and the government shot down the mine strikes.

Allende inspired confidence (elegant and cultured) and thought that communism can be succeeded without a violent revolution.


b) Allende’s problems and policies

The problems Allende was facing were huge:

Inflation was running over 30%
Unemployment at 20%
Industry was stagnating
90% of the population lived under such poverty that the children under 15 suffered from malnutrition.





Allende believed in:

He believed in redistribution of income, which would enable the poor to buy more and thereby to stimulate the economy.

All-round wages increases of about 40% were introduced and firms were not allowed to increase prices.

The remainder of the copper industry, textiles and banks were nationalized.

Frei’s land distribution speeded up

The army played its roll, by supporting the population

In foreign affairs, Allente restored relations with Cuba, China and East Germany.


b) Why was he overthrown?

Land distribution caused a fall in the agricultural production

Mainly because farmers whose land was due to be taken stopped sowing and often slaughtered their cattle, this caused food shortages and inflation.

Private investors were frightened off and the government became short of funds to carry out social reforms as fast as they planned.


Copper nationalization was disappointing:
Long strikes for higher wages took place, affecting the production a lot + world price of copper decreased suddenly with 30%

The US disapproved strongly of Allende’s policies and other S. American governments were nervous in case the Chileans tried to export their revolution


Next elections were due in September 76’. He did not seem to be able to stand, but no Marxist regime hade ever let itself be voted out of power.

The opposition feared that Allende was planning to change constitution, so the opposition groups drew together to take action before Allende did.
The right organized a massive strike and won support of the army + staged a military cup. This was organized by leading generals, with Pinochet as the head.

Left wing leaders were imprisoned and killed, Allente as well.
CIA, helped by the Brazilian government played a vital role in the preparations of the cup, since the both feared the spread of communism in Latin America.


The new Chilean government was soon provoked criticism from outside world for brutal treatment of political convicts.
The USA stopped their aid.
Pinochet regime had some economic successes by bringing down the inflation.
In 89’ he allowed presidential elections and in 90’ Aylwin was allowed to become president


8.5 Détente: international relations from the 70:s to the 90:s

This word means a permanent relaxation of tensions between east and west. The first signs were noticed in the early 70:s.


a) Reasons for détente

The both super powers became fearful of the results of a possible nuclear war, where in reality the winner could not be decided. The both sides were stimulated by the effects of the Vietnam War, but of course had their own reasons as well:

The USSR understood the expense of the nuclear catch up.
They needed to devote more attention and resources to the satellite states, which all were suffering economical problems.

Simultaneously, the relations between them and China were not of the best nature, they did not want to be left behind while the relations between USA and China improved.


The Americans understood that there must be a better way of coping with the communism. Some Congressmen talked about returning to the isolation again.

The Chinese were anxious about their isolation, American intensions in Vietnam and about the bad relations with USSR.


The nations of Western Europe were worried because they would be in the front line if nuclear war would broke out.
Brandt, chancellor of West Germany (69’) tried to improve relations with Eastern Europe through Ostpolitik.





b) The USSR and China



· The Hot Line and the Ban Treaty was a progress. In 67’ an agreement was made that banned the use of nuclear weapons in outer space

· First real break through was :

72’ SALT 1 (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty) was signed, this would:

It decided the total number of each ABMs, IBCMs, and SLBMs. Each side could have.
No agreement on MIRVs were made,
The agreement did not reduce the amount of armament, but it did slow the race down.

SALT 2 ----- US DID NOT ACCEPT THIS ///After, USA began to export wheat (vete)

The Helsinki Agreement (July 75’), in which USSR and USA, Canada and most European countries accepted the European frontiers after WW2.

The communist countries promised to allow their peoples human rights, including freedom of speech and freedom to leave the country.


Détente did not occur without some problems:

When USSR developed their 150 SS-20, NATO decided to deploy over 500 Cruises missiles in Europe in case of Russian attack on Western Europe. At the same time US refused to accept SALT 2, which would have limited the number of MIRVs.
Russia invaded Afghanistan (24 December 79’)

Reagan (81-89), had a new go ahead weapon system, the SDI (strategic defense initiative) also known as Star Wars. These intend to use weapons in space to destroy ballistic missiles in flight.

Détente’s climax, was reached again because of a Russian leader, this time Gorbatchev (85-91), and USA signed the INF (intermediate nuclear forces) (Dec 87’)

All land based intermediate range (300-3000 miles) nuclear weapons were to be scrapped over the next 3 years.

There were strict verification provisions so both sides could check that the weapons were actually destroyed

The INF was an important turning point, because this was the first time any weapons had been destroyed.


By 85’ USSR was embarrassed by its involvement in Afghanistan (100 000 troops were present), they found it impossible to win over the guerillas. The hostility of China, the suspicion of all Islamic nations and repeated condemnations by UN, forced the USSR to withdraw.

c) China and USA


Since the Korean War, the relations between those two were negative.
In 71’ the Chinese unexpectedly invited an American table tennis team to visit China, USA responded by calling off their veto of Chinese entry in the UN. (71’)
Still a problem in Taiwan



































d) Relations between the USSR and China


The relations were bead because the Chinese did not approve Khrushchev’s policies, particularly his belief in peaceful co existence and that it was possible to achieve communism by methods other than violent.
They accused USSR for braking Lenin’s rules in order to suit their own needs, in reward Russia decreased economic aid to China.

At the end of the 70’s, when the relations between USA and China improved, it seemed that both Russia and China were vying for American support against each other, for the leadership of world communism. The Chinese now demanded their territories back, with Russia took.

There were also disputes about backing Vietnam who attacked Manchuria.


In 84’ the Chinese set their grievances against USSR:

The presence of Russian troops in Afghanistan
Soviet backing off Vietnamese troops in Cambodia
The soviet troops build along the Chinese frontiers of Mongolia and Manchuria.


· Gorbachev decided to improve these relations. He:
Five year agreement on trade and cooperation was signed (July 85’)
Regular contact took place between the governments
Formal reconciliation took place in May 89’, when Gorbatchev visited Beijing
89’ Vietnamese withdrew their troops from Cambodia


8.6 The collapse of the communism in Eastern Europe, where international relations transformed

a) August 1988 to December 89’

· In 89 communism in Eastern Europe fell.
· The process began in Poland, in August 88’ when the solidarity trade union organized huge anti government strikes. These eventually the government to allow free elections, in which communists were defeated

· Hungary, was the next country to allow free elections, communist defeat.


· In East Germany, Honecker wanted to withstand the demonstrations, but was overruled by his colleges. By the end of 89’ the communist’s government resigned, the Wall was breached and Germany became reunited.
· Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria and Romania had thrown out their communist governments, multy party elections were held in Yugoslavia and Albania.
· By the end of December 91’ the USSR dissolved and Gorbatchev resigned. Communism was over after 74 years.

b) How were international relations affected?

The cold war was over
In 90’ the Warsaw Pact and the NATO countries signed a treaty of no longer enemies and weapons would only be used al self defense.

New conflicts soon arose

Nationalism started to grow as a sign of communist grip under a long time. Czechoslovakia divided into the Czech Republic and Slovakia

Conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia arose, because of territory
Yugoslavia divided into 5 separate states

As the states of Western Europe were moving closer to the European Community, those of Eastern Europe were breaking up into even smaller units.

3. Nuclear Weapon supervision

Countries considered as unstable or irresponsible governments might use the nuclear weapons. This is why supervision was needed over nuclear, biological and chemical weapons


4. Economical problems

E. Europe had now to learn hot to deal with the economy, from a command economy to a free market economy. They needed to plan their economy carefully with the help of Western Europe; otherwise stability would be hard to be created.

Nationalism and economic unrest could cause a write wing backlash, which could have been dangerous.

They were concerned about a possible income for Russia would have been the commerce with nuclear weapons with smaller countries.


5. The unification of Germany created some problems
The poles were afraid that the Germans would take back the area east of the river of Odder and Neisse.
Polish immigrants were seen as a problem.




Relations between the western allies.

Relations between Japan, USA, and Western Europe were good before they were united. They had the same aim: to withstand communism

USA, for example refused to provide troops for the UN peacekeeping forces, leaving Bosnia the burden to the other member states.