Propaganda was mainly used to promote ideologies and sway people’s beliefs. Propaganda can also display, in an exaggerated way, the attitudes and the distaste some governments have against each other. This is often shown through colours, bold writing, symbols and catchy slogans to emphasise their key ideas. The two sources offered different attitudes from both sides of the superpowers and reflected the deterioration of US-Soviet relations. Source A shows one countries fear of communism, whilst the other demonstrates the need to be ready for “work and defence”.
Reflection of this conflict was apparent in the American ethos, in which Americans feared that if “world communism captur[ed] any American state…a new and perilous front…will increase the danger to the entire free world and require even greater sacrifices from the American people” (Document B). As illustrated by Eisenhower, “the hysteria” of communism propagating into American society and threatening the American way of life was a very prevalent fear at the forefront of the Cold War (Document A). McCarthyism, a system established by Senator Joseph McCarthy in which he made unsubstantiated accusations of subversion or treason to America, acted as the culmination of this hysteria, directly reflecting the sentiments driving the American people. Eisenhower did not engage in any domestic policies to quell these “multiplicity of fears” (Document A). Instead he compounded them with legislation such as the “National System of Interstate and Defense Highways…connect[ing] 209 of the 247 cities having a population of 50,00 more and [serving as] the country’s principal…defense” (Document D).
First off domestically, before the Cold War the U.S. was loose with their domestic policy but after it they were very strict with their domestic policy. The U.S. formed the House of Un-American Activities, which checked just about every foreign person for them being a spy. This action made every foreigner a suspect. On top of that the HUAC would attack anyone in their way and claim it was justified because they feared the Communists invading their nation. So domestic wise the
After World War 2, things got pretty intense between the former allies Soviet Union and the United States. For example, because the United States and the Soviet Union had different views and different stand on human rights, economic freedom, religious belief, self-determination and individual liberties, it sparks a war between them known as the Cold War. Now, the Cold War was different than any previous war that ever happened in history because this war was an ideological contest between the Communist countries and the Western countries. But let’s focus our attention to the man that was leading America after World War 2- Harry Truman. Now, many questioned “Who’s Harry Truman?” because everyone was already used to Franklin Roosevelt leading
In the debut of John le Carre’s novel, The Spy Who Came In from the Cold, there is a paradigm shift in the perspective on intelligence and espionage within popular culture. Gone are the days of heroic romanticism that came with characters like John Buchan’s Richard Hanay and Ian Fleming’s James Bond. Through morally ambiguous characters like Control and complex machinations that is Leamas’ mission, le Carre is establishing a systematic critique on the nature of intelligence agencies and their methods specifically in context of the Cold War. In a sense, the novel itself is anti-intelligence in theme, plot, and character. Specifically, the novel condemns the institution of intelligence as a whole to be dehumanizing of the people involved, immorality of its actions, and bereft of any ideological passion.
In response to the second Red Scare, prompted by the accusations of Senator Joe McCarthy, Arthur Miller felt it necessary to express his political feelings through an author’s medium. Similarities are shown between McCarthyism and the Salem witch trials in the way Senator McCarthy gained power and control by inducing fear and hatred of communists in America, comparable to the fear and hatred of witches in the late 1600s. Miller shares that themes of paranoia and vengeance continue on even as society progresses, and presents The Crucible as an example to shed light on issues inherent with using accusations to gain power. With its ability to relate to a number of political situations in many countries, even as far as 50 years past its creation,
How The Crucible Advocates for a Change in Political Attitudes The Crucible and “Why I Wrote The Crucible” are works by Arthur Miller written for the purpose of advocating changes in political attitudes. During the construction of the play, The Crucible, Miller was living in the United States. Miller was concerned with the government and how it wrongfully accused people for supporting Communism. He realized that this phase, called “The Red Scare,” deeply resembled The Salem Witch Trials, which inspired him to ink The Crucible. Miller uses elements such as tone and satire, character motivation, and indirect characterization in The Crucible to elucidate a change in political attitudes.
Violent imagery is quite key to the strategies of propaganda in the Cold War. As mentioned in the earlier post, both sides based their propaganda on the criticism of the opposing ideology and state. However, the more extreme strategies were employed in raising hostility towards the opponent among the population and in the world. One of the examples is the period of ‘Hate America’ campaign that showed a lot of aggression towards the US, for instance, as in the course of the Korean war communist propagandists were accusing the United States in torturing the prisoners of war and using biological warfare. (Belmonte, 47) Nevertheless, violent images used by the propagandist were usually linked to the ideas of murder, weapons and, sometimes, rape:
Robert W. Merry, a political editor of The American Conservative, wrote the article “A Profound Question Behind the Immigration Debate” as well as other articles relating American History like James Polk and the Mexican War. The author claims that the immigration debate is the main reason why America is changing how it functions in the world. He provides arguments from both sides of the debate: those against and those for the immigration policies. Also, he says “definition of America” to support his claim of how immigration is changing America. The author’s intended audience is the people in America because he targets both views on the issue.
Throughout history literary texts have been a vehicle for social commentary and political ideas. Both Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” and Michael Moore’s political documentary “Bowling for Columbine” exemplify this notion, utilising their own political perspectives to create unique and evocative interpretations of their time’s political situation. Miller presents “The Crucible” as an allegorical piece that is a commentary of the mass hysteria and paranoia that engulfed American society surrounding the McCarthy era. In “Bowling for Columbine” Moore creates a comedic, yet chilling documentary attempting to unveil the causes for the Columbine High School massacre and violence more generally in America. Both composers cleverly criticique the political circumstances of their time through a range of literary techniques and themes.