Entry #5

One quote from Peggy that struck me is when she said, “We were gonna reach the end of the rainbow. When the war ended, the rainbow vanished. Almost immediately we went into Korea. There was no peace, which we were promised” (194). This made me think about how after wars in the US, like the Civil War and WWI, Americans didn’t want to go to war again because of the destruction they’d witnessed, but the country continually goes to war. Peggy mentioned that the US itself and most American citizens came out of the war unharmed because none of the fighting took place on American soil, and this might explain why the government continually opted to enter wars. While Americans knew soldiers who died in the war and the homefront experienced social and economic changes, most Americans didn’t witness the destruction first hand. If Americans didn’t fully understand the atrocities of war, then public opinion wouldn’t change and the government wouldn’t face opposition when deciding to go to war in the future. Or maybe each time the government considers entering a war, the motivation seems more important than earlier wars. Also, Peggy admitted that she was being manipulated into seeing all Japanese people as enemies, and she didn’t even realize it at the time. Because the government can use propaganda to turn Americans against different countries, ultimately the government decides when to go to war and American citizens will have to allow the government to do so.
Sledge reflected on how the soldiers in Japan (both Japanese and American) acted like savages during wartime. They no longer respected life or other humans because they had to desensitize themselves. Sledge showed the contrast between people as citizens and people as soldiers when he described a picture of a Japanese soldier. He said, “Here would be this soldier, sitting in a studio, with a screen behind and a table with a little flower on it. Often he’d be holding a rifle, yet there was always that little vase of flowers” (203). Every country claims its war aims are humane and that its people are benevolent, but all of the soldiers have to act inhumanely in order to fight. It’s a paradox because in order to bring peace there has to be violence and inhumane acts. Sledge even said, “After a while, the veneer of civilization wore pretty thin” (199). He showed that during wartime, people who were once humane lose their humanity in order to win.

Entry #4

The idea of a disconnect between the homefront and soldiers in the war interested me. In the introduction, Terkel wrote, “children on the homefront who knew or did not know what the shouting was all about” (162). This reminded me of the war today in the Middle East because people know there’s conflicts and soldiers in the Middle East, but some of them don’t understand why there are American troops there today or why American troops were sent there in the first place. It seems like during WWII Americans had a better understanding of why America became involved in the war. Maybe this was because of fireside chats, which allowed the president to communicate with Americans, or because the daily life of Americans was greatly impacted by the war. But today people can choose to ignore politics and the daily life of Americans isn’t as affected by the war, so many people don’t think it’s important to understand the war.
One quote from the introduction was about the turning point for America as a country. It says, “In 1945, the United States inherited the earth...at the end of World War II, what was left of Western civilization passed into the American account” (167). While America had been significantly involved in international affairs for thirty years, the end of WWII seems to mark where the US became a world superpower. America had overcome the Great Depression and won wars against Europeans and the Japanese, so it had proved itself to other countries. Until that point, America had been hesitant to immediately enter global conflicts and had been dealing with internal issues. But at the end of WWII America had a powerful army, a recovered economy, and confidence. WWII also marked a change in the government’s role. An admiral said, “World War Two changed everything...Our military runs foreign policy. The State Department has become the lackey of the Pentagon. Before World War Two...the ultimate control was civilian” (169). Something I’ve noticed this year is the progression of the federal government’s role from being relatively insignificant to intervening on every single internal and external conflict. During WWII Americans were happy to let the government take control because the economy was terrible and there was a major war. But now that there isn’t a global war or a severe economic crisis, I wonder if the extensive role of the government is outdated or unnecessary.
Rasmus’s feelings about the use of nuclear bombs on Japan were surprising but understandable. He explained, “We ended halfway across the Pacific. How many of us would have been killed on the mainland if there were no bomb? Someone like me has this specter” (188). To Rasmus, the use of the bombs saved the lives of thousands of soldiers because so many Japanese people and Americans would have been willing to fight and die in the war, so the fighting might never have stopped. But in a book we’re reading for English, a Japanese civilian gave her account of her daughter being killed by one of the bombs, and this made the use of nuclear bombs seem inhumane. Using the bombs was a tradeoff: is it worth it to prevent an infinite number of military casualties and deaths, or is it worth it to preserve the lives of civilians and let thousands more soldiers die?

Entry #3

Jane Yoder’s story about her struggling family during the Great Depression made me think about Americans today in the recession, and how different Jane is from some Americans today. Jane always lived within her means, whether that meant only having one tv or only having three sweaters. Her family was resourceful and didn’t buy things they couldn’t afford. But during the recent recession, some people don’t cut back on expenses. Many people still buy expensive clothes and take luxurious vacations even though their income has decreased, and it doesn’t make sense. While many Americans have cut back on their spending during hard economic times, some of them still need to learn from Jane’s family’s budgeting. It was interesting how Jane talked about the differences in attitude about the WPA. Her dad got a job because of the WPA and it was extremely helpful to her family, but one nurse, with well-off parents, said the WPA was helping lazy people. This shows that some people couldn’t understand how difficult some families’ financial situations were, and that economic laws can never satisfy everyone from different social classes.
One thing from Peggy Terry’s story that stuck out to me is when she said, “And I was wondering why it is that one man could have all of those cuff links when we couldn’t even have enough to eat...That’s the first time I remember ever wondering why.” It’s understandable that poor people during the depression couldn’t comprehend how some people could be rich while everyone they saw was living in a cardboard box and starving. The cause of the depression is complex and involves a lot of financial and economic factors, but also it was difficult for people to understand how some Americans were able to stay financially stable when others were hit so hard by the depression. It really struck me when Peggy mentioned a family who lived in a piano box. I knew that during the depression people didn’t have a lot of food to eat and that many were unemployed, but I didn’t know the severity of the depression reached that level. I was surprised to hear that Peggy remembers her childhood during the depression as fun. She said standing in the line at the soup kitchen was a fun event, which I didn’t expect. I thought her childhood would have been depressing and maybe even traumatizing, but she said no one was ashamed of their situation because most people were in it too.

Entry #2 Robertson and Paulsen

            One thing Robertson said stuck out to me.  He said, “In 1929, it was strictly a gambling casino with loaded dice.  The few sharks taking advantage of the multitude of suckers.”  Robertson was talking about how a few very wealthy people made a fortune off of the stock market, while the rest of the people were making nothing but thought they were going to get rich.  For normal people, it would be nearly impossible to come out ahead.  So many people were buying stocks with money they didn’t have, so it was inevitable that they would lose money.  Hearing Robertson’s story was interesting because when you hear about the depression you assume everyone was completely impoverished, but he and others were financially stable.  He said many brokers made money during the depression while their customers became poor.  In the mid-thirties, Robertson still had hundreds of thousands of dollars to loan to friends.  He attributed some of his good fortune to sheer luck, but it’s still true that some people simply knew how to operate a business during periods of economic downfall.

             Ed Paulsen was an unemployed young man during the depression who rode in train cars.  He explained how ordinary people felt about President Roosevelt and the New Deal by saying, “It was split thing.  They were cursing Roosevelt for the intrusion into their lives.  At the same time, they were living off it.”  Roosevelt made many programs to help unemployed and suffering people, and some would argue that he was interfering with the economy and the lives of Americans.  Paulsen insisted that the suffering people who benefitted from the New Deal still criticized it.  This is interesting because when I did the webquest about the New Deal I thought Roosevelt was becoming too involved in American society and was overstepping his authority as president, yet his programs did offer relief to many people.  The only thing that can be agreed upon is that Roosevelt was trying to solve an unsolvable problem, and the depression might have been even worse if he hadn’t intervened.  Paulsen experienced both sides of the argument surrounding the New Deal.  He was an unemployed person who didn’t understand price fixing and why food should be destroyed when there were hungry people, but he also benefitted from a job with the National Youth Administration.  Over all, Paulsen understood the futility of the depression.

What was the lasting legacy of the New Deal?

          The Works Progress Administration provided jobs for unemployed Americans during the depression, and the projects were useful decades after the end of the depression.  The Lincoln Tunnel, which connects New Jersey to Manhattan, sees 45 million cars a year.  Members of the WPA made ski trials in Vermont that still offer recreation today.  The  Red Rocks Ampitheatre, constructed by the WPA during the depression, provides entertainment even in modern times.  The Federal Writers Project encouraged writers to contribute to a growing body of American literature and helped preserve oral histories, which are still read today.  The Social Security Act, which was passed to provide financial security for retired people, was a starting point for modern Social Security.  Programs like the National Youth Administration gave young people work opportunities that taught them job skills that could be used in the future.  The creation of the Tennessee Valley Authority provided irrigation and flood control to southern states, as well as cheap electricity, for many years to come.  Over all, programs created as part of the New Deal were made in order to provide employment for millions of Americans, but the effects of the projects are still seen today.

Entry #1- CP Ellis and Vine Deloria

Initially I thought C.P. Ellis’s story was inspiring because he went from being a member of the KKK to working alongside African Americans for better schools and working conditions, but one thing about his story bothered me. Ellis said, “They say the older you get, the harder it is for you to change. That’s not necessarily true” (76). Even though Ellis thought he changed and came to respect people of all different races, when he described Ann Atwater he still used racist expressions. I know that Ellis evolved so much, but his usage of racist terms makes me question whether or not his character completely changed. I thought it was interesting that Ellis was able to identify why he hated African Americans and recognize that he was just looking for someone to blame his economic hardships on. He didn’t say it was his dad’s fault for raising him to be racist, even though his dad was a member of the Klan and told him to stay away from blacks, Jews, and Catholics. Ellis was able to admit that his discrimination was caused by personal problems and he became more tolerant when he got to know different people. This makes me wonder if other members of the KKK joined as a way to feel better about themselves and if their opinions on people of different races and religions changed later, but it’s impossible to know because not everyone got a chance to tell their story like Ellis did. Reading Ellis’s story makes it seem more understandable how so many white civil rights activists were willing to work alongside African Americans to improve southern communities.
Vine Deloria had a lot of interesting views about America and the first settlers. One idea of his that was particularly thought-provoking was about the American Dream when he said, “Maybe the American Dream is in the past, understanding who you are instead of looking to the future...Maybe this is a period of reflection” (37). It’s possible that America as a whole has achieved the American Dream because the country is technologically advanced, has democracy, and is a major world power, so now reflecting on how fortunate Americans are is what makes people realize they’ve already achieved the American Dream. Usually in textbooks the relations between settlers and Native Americans are described from an American point of view, so hearing a Native American’s perspective was interesting. Deloria said that in the Great Plains the Native Americans didn’t see Americans as a threat, and each group simply failed to understand the other. This makes me wonder what would have happened if Native Americans and Americans had reached out to each other more and really made an effort to understand the two cultures and find a way to live peacefully.
Both of these people’s stories showed a perspective that usually isn’t represented as much in textbooks, and reading about their opinions and views made me see the time periods differently.