Mr. Jones, one of the history teachers at my school, approached me the other day to ask if I had any good resources on the Cold War that his 11th grade U. S. history students could use to complete their research projects. He also indicated that the wanted something audiovisual that he could use to enhance his lessons. I examined what we had in the collection and was discouraged by what I found. Most of the books we have are old and unappealing and could probably stand to be weeded, and we do not have any DVDs or audio materials related to the Cold War era. Since I know that several of his students are college-bound, I want to provide them with a high-quality resource that can really improve the quality of their research. Unfortunately, the …show more content…
I chose these because I knew that students are required to work with primary sources in their research and writing projects and because I wanted to make the Cold War come alive for them through the voices of those who actually lived through it and shaped it. The first collection, The Cold War: A History in Documents, 2nd Edition by Allan M. Winkler (whom Booklist reviewer Gilbert Taylor acknowledges as a reputable historian), is part of the Pages in History series from Oxford University Press, a highly reputable publisher. Though Taylor’s review states that the book underrepresents the Communist perspective, its short length (172 pages), reasonable price (starting from $32.84 for a new paperback), and recent publication date (2011) makes it worthy of consideration. However, it is trumped by an older (2004), similarly titled offering from Oxford University Press, The Cold War: A History in Documents and Eyewitness Accounts by Jussi M. Hahnimäki and Odd Arne Westad. At a whopping 712 pages, this volume is much broader in breadth and depth than the previous title and offers perspectives from a variety of persons from around the world, from political leaders to everyday citizens. Moreover, it specifically makes connections to modern-day politics and world culture, making it a much more valuable choice for a comparable price. While it is the presumptive favorite at this point, there is one …show more content…
In the case of the book, I chose more material over less because I want students to explore the breadth and depth of the Cold War on their own terms and interact with a plethora of personalities from the period. I envision many students working together from this resources and copying relevant documents. In terms of the DVD, I chose less content because of the price point and the reality that Mr. Jones may not have vast amounts of time to share it with his students, so I went for a “condensed: option that hits the high points of the Cold War while also offering sufficient depth for discussion. This process has taught me that it is not easy to make decisions about ordering products and that I should look for special distinguishing features (including differences in content) to help me choose between materials. I have learned that when financial limitations are in play that you sometimes have to discern what will suffice given the amount of money you have. As the above cases illustrate, sometimes less is more and more is less. Ultimately, I tried to focus on what would be most helpful for the students and the teacher, even if my selections may seem to illustrate opposite principles. Nevertheless, I plan to keep several files of items for
1. Identification and evaluation of sources This investigation, examining certain events of the Cold War, will answer the question: To what extent did President Ronald Reagan’s actions aid in the end of the Cold War? The Cold War was a war between the United States and the Soviet Union that took place from 1947 to 1991. During that time several United States presidents took office, one of the last being Ronald Reagan whose actions have been argued to have been more influential than the rest and impactful toward the downfall of the ongoing war with the Soviet Union.
During the long and gruesome second world war, the Soviet Union and the United States were allies because their mutual goal was to destroy the strong military powerhouse of Germany. After completing this daunting task, the United States and Soviet Union each became eager to obtain sole possession atop the international spectrum, meaning the world’s leading superpower. An era known as the Cold War began immediately following World War II and lasted well into the latter twentieth century, but this “war” was not the usual physical war that fills history but a bloodless war of social and governmental world dominance. Although the Cold War did not involve actual fighting and the loss of numerous United States soldiers’ lives, the tension filled
Hajar AlHayki Ms. Winterfeldt US History 11 January 2018 The cold war is a war that began after the end of World War two, from 1945 until 1991. In which the United States and the soviet Unions were involved in this war. They were fighting for two different ideologies: communism and democracy ‘capitalism’. The United States wanted to spread democracy in Eastern Europe: Germany, in which the soviets wanted to spread communism.
History Term Project: Primary Source Analysis Danielle Marshall Professor Ahad Hayaud-Din & Professor Sinclair 1301-2305 Learning Community Fall Semester 2017 2379 Words November 25, 2017 The United States has had many foreign and domestic problems that shaped American society; fear, impacted civil liberties, escalated worldly crises and evoked counter threats from the start of the Reconstruction era throughout our nation’s current history. Some of these problems were depicted in political cartoons, newspaper articles, presidential speeches, proclamations, and photos. Many cruelties in the Reconstruction era came from racial violence, nationalism, and American Imperialism as implied in these documents.
Each book forces the reader to ask difficult questions of themselves and their beliefs of the war prior to beginning the book. I found that so far the books support one another in terms of overall themes. I have not found anything that puts them at odds. Is one perspective more valid than the other? I do not think that one perspective is more valid than the other.
All in all, the lesson you can learn from comparing these two publishings is that you cant judge a book by its cover and sometimes you have to look a little
The Cold War was a war of betrayal, competition, morals, misunderstanding, and fear. Spies, nuclear bombs, blockades, and rockets are weaved into the events
The Cold War had two sides, the United States, and the Soviet Union, both of these countries took measures, including giving money, fighting proxy wars, building a wall, or building missiles to fight for their ideals. Before talking about specific events of the Cold War, it must be understood that there were
Overall, historians and theorists have predicated the Cold War as a learning experience for future decision-making. However, one can draw similarities in current military actions, like Iraq and Afghanistan, where those can argue not much has changed in the demeanor and action of military leadership to civilian leadership. Overall, Betts provides a thoroughly researched and structured framework for the reader to analyze historical evidence from a different perspective but I found his conclusions to be inherently flawed.
The cold war was a battle not like many wars, as wars usually include battles that involved killing and a lot of physical fighting, but the cold war didn’t include to much of things like that. The cold war started after World War Two and was mainly between the Soviet Union and United States. It was a war where instead of face to face fighting, it was a race to gain more arms and build up armies, and to create more and more weapons on the way. It began because of tensions building up between the soviets and the United States when americans were afraid of the possible expansion of the soviet union and their possible plans for world domination. When americans agreed that the soviet union was a threat, the United States started to build up their arms to try and contain the Soviet Union and keep them from
Also, by reading these two books we get to understand how people in the past wanted these to be published for us to read.
he first chapter of The Cold War: A New History begins by comparing the United States to the U.S.S.R. and talking about the similarities between the two. It also talks about Communism and how Marx deemed it necessary in order to build up the economy. Lenin tried to implement Communism in Russia. They were not quite ready for that kind of system, so Stalin tried to modernize the economy. The U.S.S.R. had more casualties in World War II, but things were not necessarily looking great in America either.
The Cold War was a “hybrid” war between the United States and the Soviet Union that started right after the end of World War II in 1947 (Two Super…). Both countries had strong political tensions toward each other. During the Cold War, although the two countries did not battle each other militarily, as a result of all the escalating tensions, the threat of an outright war made all parties nervous. The two countries, along with each other’s allies, differed in their opinions on postwar arrangements, with the Soviets backing out of their promise in the Yalta agreement, they were more interested in the spread of communism in the post WWII era.
After viewing excerpts from Oliver Stone’s “Untold History” documentary, I would say that it best fits along with post-revisionist historiography as it considers a variety of factors to create a balanced viewpoint on the origins of the Cold War. It spent a considerable amount of time, confirmed by the statement of Stone’s thesis towards the end of the episode, making the assertion that a fundamental historical misunderstanding of the Cold War was that it was initiated by Soviet aggression. Stone considered the influence of Soviet actions to expand the influence of the nation’s ideology catalyzed fear for Western nations, such as the strong Soviet presence in Turkey, its want for a share of oil in the Middle East (Iran) to keep supplies out