The View From Here: post-World War II

2013-02-24

Shedding Light On American Society's Myths About U.S. History

In "Society Must Be Defended", Michel Foucault wrote that the winners of a social struggle or armed conflict use their political dominance to suppress a defeated adversary's version of historical events in favour of their own propaganda. It is likely the basis of the expression “history is written by the victor” (which has frequently been attributed to Winston Churchill). This history is then perpetuated through what is taught in schools and, in the modern era, through portrayals of historical events on TV, in film and the mass media.

One of the countries that has done a remarkable job at writing history from the victor’s perspective is the United States, especially as it concerns the events encompassing the period between World War II and the present -- the period which has seen the creation of the "American Empire". Some of the popularly held beliefs of history from a U.S. perspective are that: the Americans have been the “good guys” in any international conflict; atom bombs had to be dropped on Japan to save American lives; and the U.S. is an example to the world of a free and democratic society that values civil liberties and human rights.

Lifting the veil from many of these and other popularly held beliefs about U.S. actions in the historical events of the past 70 years seems to be the intent of a new documentary by Academy Award-winning film-maker Oliver Stone and historian Peter Kuznick. The 10-part series called Oliver Stone’s Untold History of the United States is being broadcast by the U.S. cable channel Showtime. The series challenges the basic narrative about the place of the U.S. in the world that have come to be accepted by most Americans.

Drawing on archival findings, old movie clips and recently declassified documents, the film-makers critically examine U.S. history, from the atomic bombing of Japan to the Cold War, to the fall of communism, and continuing all the way through to the Obama administration. Much of what is challenged is regularly taught in American schools and has become part of the national mythology of the United States. During the making of the series the film-makers discovered that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were militarily unnecessary and morally indefensible. They also propose that the Soviet Union, not the U.S., was ultimately responsible for defeating the Germans in World War II. And, they assert that the United States, not the Soviet Union, bore the lion’s share of responsibility for perpetuating the Cold War. In addition, the documentary found that U.S. presidents have frequently trampled on the Constitution and international law, especially in wartime, and they note the United States has brought the world dangerously close to nuclear war repeatedly by brandishing nuclear threats.

In addition, Stone and Kuznick produced a 750-page book, The Untold History of the United States as a companion to the documentary. Together, the two works are meant to "challenge the basic and commonly held narratives about U.S. history . . . of American altruism, benevolence, devotion to liberty and justice." All myths which, Stone says, are comforting to most Americans but are actually "harmful, noxious and polluted", and leave Americans in the dark about the truth of their nation’s history and its place in the world.

Reaction to the documentary has been mixed. Glen Greenwald, a journalist with The Guardian highly recommended the series and book describing it as "riveting", "provocative" and "worthwhile". Former President of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev wrote approvingly of the book stating that, “Such a perspective is indispensable at a time when decisions are being taken that will shape America's role in the global world of the twenty-first century. At stake is whether the United States will choose to be the policeman of a "Pax Americana", which is a recipe for disaster, or partner with other nations on the way to a safer, more just and sustainable future."

In November 2012 Ronald Radosh, an adjunct fellow historian with the conservative Hudson Institute, lambasted the documentary as "mendacious" Cold War revisionism and "mindless recycling of Stalin's propaganda.” And journalist Michael C. Moynihan criticized the book for "moral equivalence between the policies of the psychotically brutal Soviet Union and the frequently flawed policy of the United States."

The first three episodes of the documentary series premiered at the New York Film Festival on October 6, 2012. The series premiered on the Showtime cable channel on November 12, 2012.

For anyone who does not accept the sanitized, censored and rosy version of America's role in the key historical events of the last 70+ years, a version that has been constantly presented to the U.S. population through the American school system, by the corporate media, Hollywood, and the U.S. government, then this is a documentary that comes highly recommended.

To watch an interview about the series with the Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick, click here.

2013-02-13

Long Ago Dreams of a "New World Order"

February 13, 2013 -- I recently came across this map of the world that was created to illustrate what the "new world order" would look like after the end of World War II. The map was actually completed before the Japanese attack onPearl Harbor and published on February 25, 1942.

It shows a proposed political division of the world after World War II in the event of an Allied victory in which the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union would rule. The map includes a manifesto describing a "New World Moral Order", along with quotes from U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms speech.

While there are many points from the policies of the New World Moral Order that are fodder for endless debate, the following three points should be of particular note:

To reduce the burden and criminal waste of armaments expenditures everywhere in the world, the U.S.A., with the cooperation of Latin-America, the British Commonwealth of Nations, and the U.S.S.R. shall undertake to guarantee peace to the nations which will be permanently disarmed and demilitarized after the conclusion of the present war.
A World Court with punitive powers of absolute boycott, quarantine, blockade and occupation by international police, against lawbreakers of international morality shall be organized.
In the New World Moral Order which we seek to establish, besides the essential political freedoms, the following fundamental economic changes are imperative:

(a) Nationalization of all natural resources and equitable distribution of same to all nations…everywhere in the world;

(b) Nationalization of international banking, foreign investments, railroads and power plants….everywhere in the world;

(c) Nationalization of all armaments producing establishments by all military powers;

(d) Federal control of foreign commerce and shipping;

(e) The establishment of a world common monetary system;

(f) World wide limitations of interest rates to a maximum of two percent.

This vision of a new world would have seen political domination by three major powers which would have been problematic to say the least. However, in hindsight the goals of demilitarization, equitable sharing of the world's natural resources among all nations, regulation of international banking and commerce, and nationalization of the arms industry would have been welcomed (whoever was in control) considering what occurred geo-politically and economically in the decades following WW II, and the political and economic state of the world today.

Instead of the political, economic and social benefits that would have been enjoyed had this manifesto been implemented we have today a world which is more militarized, more economically selfish and politically inequitable then any time since World War II. Today we have a world where 5% of the world's companies control 80% of the planet's economy and resources, and where the profits of corporations are placed ahead of the needs of people. We have a world where international banking and commerce has become increasingly unregulated over the past several decades resulting in the world-wide economic crisis of 2008. We have a world where the sale of armaments and military hardware is looked at in terms of its potential for job creation for the countries doing the selling rather then in terms of its potential for inflicting deathand destruction, encouraging militarism and causing political instability in various regions of the world.

Related: Who really contols the world?

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "When evil men plot, good men must plan . . .When evil men would seek to perpetuate an unjust status quo, good men must seek to bring into being a real order of justice." Looking at the state of society and the world today one has to wonder if "evil men" are the ones who have taken control of the world.

There is no guarantee that the New World Moral Order would have resulted in a world free of political, economic and social injustices. The world doesn't work that way given the general falibility and self-serving character of humans. However, the fact that it was an idea that was discussed at the highest levels, and its details recorded, shows that at one time there were leaders in the world who had a grand vision of a humanity and a world that was less selfish, less greedy and more altruistic then the world which we live in today.

One can only wonder what sort of world it might have been had those plans become reality.