None_Provided
In looking for ways to start this review over the book In The Shadow Of The Garrison State, I ran across and excerpt of a review by the publisher of the book a professor with the Princeton University Press in which he states "War--or the threat of war--usually strengthens states as governments tax, draft soldiers, exert control over industrial production, and dampen internal dissent in order to build military might. The United States, however, was founded on the suspicion of state power, a suspicion that continued to gird its institutional architecture and inform the sentiments of many of its politicians and citizens through the twentieth century. In this comprehensive rethinking of postwar political history, Aaron Friedberg convincingly argues that such anti-statist inclinations prevented Cold War anxieties from transforming the United States into the garrison state it might have become in their absence. Drawing on an array of primary and secondary sources, including newly a!vailable archival materials, Friedberg concludes that the "weakness" of the American state served as a profound source of national strength that allowed the United States to outperform and outlast its supremely centralized and statist rival: the Soviet Uni
However, I disagree with Friedberg and Princeton press in that the notion of weakness kept us from achieving garrison state hood. I think it was not weakness of a state but fear of the consequences and perhaps our past, is what made it possible for the United States to shun this behavior and stay away from that which we opposed. Question two asks did these roles or principles help moderate the Military Industrial Complex during these years. I would say yes. We know that because of these popular opinions in these areas, that Truman at first tried to limit involvement. But later as we get closer to the fifties and late forty's Truman goes on a massive build up of the army and signs legislation to spend more money that our country had ever spent on the military at any time, all in an attempt to fight the so called, treat, communism. It wasn't until Eisenhower was elected that he began his policy of "bigger bang for the buck." This was meant to say that no longer would we be requiring man power and military spending on them, we would be using things like nuclear weapons and intercontinental missiles to be doing the dirty work. This plan (the bigger bang for the buck) lead to the escalating of a nuclear arms race and added to the severity of the Cold War. Never the less this did not change us to an Iso! lationist state. We still felt as though we needed to play big brother. I think that Friedberg would agree that the popular opinion of the time was to not get involved until the anti-communist sentiments were at there heights and people were all about blaming or advocating the fight and ultimate end to communism. This all ultimately lead to terms of massive retaliation and second strike capabilities. What will happen if you decide to be a bully. What will I do to you if you act out against our interests. In closing would say that this book does make a argument which I would consider and it brings up many valid points. However, I feel that this book fails to mention many aspects of our nations history as well as, a failure to public opinions which are vital to the understanding of the time period. Economic superiority has to do a great deal with this issue and the inability for the soviets to continue in this matter. Ultimately I feel that the death of Stalin was in essences the beginning of the end for communism and this so called Cold War. With these notions I agree hardly. I think that it was these key factors, which aided in our ability to out
Some common words found in the essay are:
Cold War, Soviet Union, Industrial Complex, Naturally Public, Press War--or, Friedberg Princeton, FDR Truman, Shadow Garrison, Aaron Friedberg, cold war, , nations history, soviet union, military industrial complex, ultimately feel, bang buck, industrial complex, bigger bang, popular sovereignty, bigger bang buck, foreign affairs, military industrial,
Approximate Word count = 1669
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
