To examine the Cold War consensus, one must discuss the Cold War. The Cold war was the tension between the United States, standing for capitalism, and the USSR, standing for totalitarianism and socialism, following World War II. Although it was not a physical war between the two superpowers, many proxy wars had came out of it as way to spread or combat communism throughout the Free World. The Free World, as the U.S. came to define it, did not necessarily mean free as countries were being ruled by military regimes and dictatorships, but free from communism(70). During the Cold War, the spread of communism frighted the American People.
These new policies led to even further weakening of the Soviet Union, economically and politically and as a result there were revolutions against the communist governments of many of the Warsaw Pact alliance member (Doyle, 1996). By viewing NATO as an institution, it is clear that NATO was able to win the Cold War because it’s member states believed in achieving a common goal even if it meant giving up on their individual state needs or goals. While the member states of NATO
Ronald Reagan was an influential leader due to his actions in the Cold War, his stance on international peace, and his impact on the US economy. Between 1981 and 1989, Ronald Reagan was a major force in creating a peaceful end to the Cold War. The military spending policies of the Reagan-Bush years forced the Soviets to the brink of economic collapse (Jim Woods). This was beneficial to ending the Cold War because the Soviets could not afford to move resources, Nuclear Missiles, into firing positions. In particular, President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative intimidated the Soviet leaders and
The revisionists kept insisting on blaming the American expansionism rather than the Soviet Union’s wish to spread communism into Eastern Europe. There are two levels to the revisionist school of opinion. Level one revisionist historians continue to stress the significance of the individuals concerned in the Cold War. “These argue that after FDR’s death in April 1945, policies towards the Soviet Union became a lot harsher once Truman took office.” (Nye 118). Level two revisionist historians such as William A. Williams, stress on the nature of American capitalism rather than individuals.
This is where the nuclear weaponry came into play, again both knew the consequences of military action on both sides could result into an appalling catastrophic ending. After nearly forty-six years of idle arguing back and forth fueled by the suspicion of one another, they finally came to their senses and reached an agreement due to the crumbling power of the Soviet Union. Similarly, Dr. Seuss’ “The Butter
The second reason for why the superpower rivalry between the Soviet Union and the United States can explain the absence of major wars is that ideological competition between them do not lead to direct confrontation between the two countries. Another way that the two superpowers compete after the second world war is by spreading their ideology to third world countries so as to increase their influence over the world. Before world war two, the Soviet Union and the United States are once allies to fight against government of Nazi Germany. However, after the collapse of Germany, the two superpowers have different opinions on how the Europe should be reconstructed. The United States is in favour of democracy while the Soviet Union is in support of communism.
America and Russia had different Aims for Germany. Stalin wanted to destroy Germany, and was stripping East Germany of its wealth. Britain and America wanted to rebuild Germany’s industry in January 1947, they joined their two zones together into Bizonia. This had a big impact on both Sides sphere of influence because the USSR’s way of protecting their sphere of influence is to make Russia more powerful, by stripping Germany from their industrial resources, they are leaving Germany helpless while Russia can expand its industrial dominance. But when America interfered with the USSR’s plans they tried to help Germany by occupying Western Germany, this helped America’s sphere of influence because not only did they have control over germany, but they were able to convert West Germany to become a democratic country.
‘The concept of total war originally emerged in the ideological and political context of the interwar period. It was not designed as a precise tool of academic analysis, but as a rhetorical’ During the Interwar period, the concept developed into ideas on how to prepare for a possible new conflict, especially in Germany there was a sense of that the country had not been willing to go far enough. ‘Eric Ludendorff saw ‘total war’ as the Great War done right.’ ‘Total war’ was to Ludendorff during the interwar period becoming an ideal where Germany could succeed if followed until the hostile nation was crushed. ‘He was convinced that to succeed, the nation would need a military dictatorship, and that ‘total war’ was total mobilization of all human material resources. ’ In a more modern context ‘The notion of ‘total war’ is commonly used within military history to describe a totality of effort, meaning the full mobilization of civil, economic and military sectors for war.’ This, however, is only one of several depictions of ‘total war’.
They happen because of a reason based on the issue that comes up in the international system, and most of the reason is because of the power of the states. Actually, in this case, the main cause of The Cold War was the unbeatable power that USA and USSR had at that time. Because of that unbeatable power, security dilemma, arms race and balance of power happened in the international system and as the result The Cold War happened between USA and USSR. “Neither side ever fought the other directly in a hot or “shooting war,” due to the looming threat of a nuclear war.” Back in 1945 when The Cold War started until 1980 when The Cold War ended, neither side ever used hard power or used it directly to the opposite side. The war between USA and USSR were in the arms race between them and also they were spreading ideology to other states in the world.
Although both Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson both were progressives, they used their powers in the federal government pretty differently from each other. Roosevelt often used the “bully pulpit” as a way to acquire his ambitions and goals as president. He was commonly known for using, and possibly overusing, his power as the president to get many laws and acts passed. Oppositely, Wilson made sure to get the approval of Congress before acting out of hand. However, both made sure that the old “invisible hand” economy was abolished by the necessary intervention of the federal government in the US economy.