View Single Post
Old 05-31-2005, 03:55 AM   #18
Mike
Member
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 489
Mike is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to Mike
I really sort of forgot where I was, historically.

The war on Communism waged by the conservatives was an attempt to get power in the United States. While this is partially a criticism of conservatives, it's justified, because they hadn't been able to gain any momentum for about 20 - 25 years, politically. And Communism was perfect, as it still provided a threat (a threat to American values, American society, the economy, and also militarily... though I see most of the military race similar to the space race, where they both militarized not to use those weapons against one another, but to show each other that they *could* use those weapons) and it was something that the Democrats really weren't that good at handling... first with Wilson and the February/October Revolutions (though there was nothing the US could do with that, nothing they really wanted to do either), then with FDR's mishandling of unionization in ... maybe like 1933/1934 or so, with Truman and China, and then with Kennedy and Vietnam. Many of these weren't really out-right failures ... but they were obvious and in the public spotlight (especially with China).

So, the Republicans used the Communist threat to gain a foothold in American politics. It actually birthed the Neoconservatives, Republicans who still held conservative economic and social viewpoints, but were able to use the ferved passions of progressive liberals (this is something that I still think that Progressive liberals in the US resent... I'm not a NeoCon, but the *hatred* for "the Neocons in Washington" runs through almost every noteworthy piece of liberal journalism ... because they use the same techniques, word play, etc, that successful liberals had used [FDR, Kennedy, and Clinton--the most successful democratic liberals of the 20th century--share the same techniques that Reagan used in their speeches... they're principalled, they play on passions, they harp on themes that run through society ... it's he heart of any good speech... this was something that conservatives could never do before the Neocons mastered it]).

THough, while the Conservatives used the Communist failures of the Dems against them, they also had a resounding success with dealing with Communism. Nixon, though remembered as one of the few presidents to leave office before his term expired, was brokered international relations between China and the US ... this was a huge victory... though it was shakey, it has stood as the basis for Chino-American diplomacy for the last 40 years. Though Korea is still a political and military hotbed, Eisenhower managed to prevent the Chinese-backed Korean communists from taking over Korea... though the nation remains divided and the war is shrouded in indecision and confusion. Reagan, of course, is heralded for bringing about the end of the Soviet Union ... and while I still don't always buy into it ... IF Reagan did not take the hard-line approach that he did, it is arguable whether the USSR would have actually fallen (though, it's also arguable that it never really did).

Though the Cold War ended in 1991, US politics is still dictated by its rules. It's 4:54... This is mostly what the Cold War and the USSR meant to US national politics. I still haven't really addressed the nature of the Cold War between the US and USSR.... Though that's a difficult question to answer, because the policies within the Soviet Union are still shrowded in some mystery.

I'll come back tomorrow probably.
Mike is offline   Reply With Quote