- ホーム
- > 洋書
- > 英文書
- > History / American
Full Description
This reader introduces students to controversies in American history since 1945. The issues discuss topics such as: was it necessary to drop the atomic bomb to end World War II; was Dwight Eisenhower a great president; and did the great society fail. "Taking Sides" actively develops critical thinking skills by requiring students to analyze opposing viewpoints and reach considered judgements. Visit our student Web site for additional support to this "Taking Sides" title.
Contents
PART 1. American HighResponsible for the Cold War? YES: Thomas G. Paterson, from Meeting the Communist Threat: Truman to Reagan NO: John Lewis Gaddis, from Russia, the Soviet Union, and the United States: An Interpretive History, 2d ed. Professor of history Thomas G. Paterson argues that the Truman administration exaggerated the Soviet threat after World War II because the United States had expansionist political and economic global needs. Professor of history John Lewis Gaddis argues that the power vacuum that existed in Europe at the end of World War II exaggerated and made almost inevitable a clash between the democratic, capitalist United States and the totalitarian, communist USSR. ISSUE 2. Did Communism Threaten America's Internal Security After World War II? YES: John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, from Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America NO: Richard M. Fried, from Nightmare in Red: The McCarthy Era in Perspective History professors John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr argue that army code-breakers during World War II's "Venona Project" uncovered a disturbing number of high-ranking U.S. government officials who seriously damaged American interests by passing sensitive information to the Soviet Union. Professor of history Richard M. Fried argues that the early 1950s were a "nightmare in red" during which American citizens had their First and Fifth Amendment rights suspended when a host of national and state investigating committees searched for Communists in government agencies, Hollywood, labor unions, foundations, universities, public schools, and even public libraries. ISSUE 3. Should President Truman Have Fired General MacArthur? YES: John S. Spanier, from "The Politics of the Korean War", in Phil Williams, Donald M. Goldstein, and Henry L. Andrews, Jr., eds., Security in Korea: War, Stalemate, and Negotiation NO: D. Clayton James with Anne Sharp Wells, from Refighting the Last War: Command and Crisis in Korea, 1950-1953 Professor of political science John S. Spanier argues that General Douglas MacArthur was fired because he publicly disagreed with the Truman administration's "Europe first" policy and its limited war strategy of containing communism in Korea. Biographer D. Clayton James and assistant editor Anne Sharp Wells argue that General MacArthur was relieved of duty because there was a lack of communication between the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the headstrong general, which led to a misperception over the appropriate strategy in fighting the Korean War. ISSUE 4. Were the 1950s America's "Happy Days?" YES: Melvyn Dubofsky and Athan Theoharis, from Imperial Democracy: The United States Since 1945, 2d ed. NO: Douglas T. Miller and Marion Nowak, from The Fifties: The Way We Really Were Professor of history and sociology Melvyn Dubofsky and professor of history Athan Theoharis argue that throughout the 1950s, the U.S. economy dominated much of the globe and created a period of unprecedented growth and prosperity for the percentage of the American population that made it into the middle class. Professor of history Douglas T. Miller and journalist Marion Nowak argue that the nostalgia craze, which re-creates the 1950s as a sweet, simple, golden age of harmony, masks the fact that the decade was an era of conformity in which Americans feared the bomb, Communists, crime, and the loss of a national purpose. <new>ISSUE 5. Did Lee Harvey Oswald Kill President Kennedy by Himself? <new>YES: President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, from The Warren Report: Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy <new>NO: Michael L. Kurtz, from Crime of the Century: The Kennedy Assassination From a Historian's Perspective, 2d ed. The President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy argues that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole assassin of President Kennedy and that he was not part of any organized conspiracy, domestic or foreign. Professor of history Michael L. Kurtz argues that the Warren commission ignores evidence of Oswald's connections with organized criminals and with pro-Castro and anti-Castro supporters, as well as forensic evidence that points to multiple assassins PART 2. From Liberation Through Watergate: 1963-1974 ISSUE 6. Was Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Leadership Essential to the Success of the Civil Rights Revolution? YES: Adam Fairclough, from "Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Quest for Nonviolent Social Change", Phylon NO: Clayborne Carson, from "Martin Luther King, Jr.: Charismatic Leadership in a Mass Struggle", Journal of American History Professor of history Adam Fairclough argues that Martin Luther King, Jr., was a pragmatic reformer who organized nonviolent direct action protests in strategically targeted local communities, which provoked violence from his opponents, gaining publicity and sympathy for the civil rights movement. Professor of history Clayborne Carson concludes that the civil rights struggle would have followed a similar course of development even if King had never lived because its successes depended upon mass activism, not the actions of a single leader. ISSUE 7. Did the Great Society Fail? YES: Charles Murray, from "The Legacy of the 60's", Commentary NO: Joseph A. Califano, Jr., from "How Great Was the Great Society?" in Barbara C. Jordan and Elspeth D. Rostow, eds., The Great Society: A Twenty Year Critique Conservative social critic Charles Murray argues that not only did the Great Society's retraining, anticrime, and welfare programs not work, but they actually contributed to the worsening plight of U.S. inner cities. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., a former aide to President Lyndon Johnson, maintains that the Great Society programs brought about positive revolutionary changes in the areas of civil rights, education, health care, the environment, and consumer protection. ISSUE 8. Was the Americanization of the War in Vietnam Inevitable? YES: Brian VanDeMark, from Into the Quagmire: Lyndon Johnson and the Escalation of the Vietnam War NO: H. R. McMaster, from Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies That Led to Vietnam Professor of history Brian VanDeMark argues that President Lyndon Johnson failed to question the viability of increasing U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War because he was a prisoner of America's global containment policy and because he did not want his opponents to accuse him of being soft on communism or endanger support for his Great Society reforms. H. R. McMaster, an active-duty army tanker, maintains that the Vietnam disaster was not inevitable but a uniquely human failure whose responsibility was shared by President Johnson and his principal military and civilian advisers. ISSUE 9. Has the Women's Liberation Movement Been Harmful to American Women? YES: F. Carolyn Graglia, from Domestic Tranquility: A Brief Against Feminism NO: Jo Freeman, from "The Women's Liberation Movement: Its Origins, Structure, Activities, and Ideas", in Jo Freeman, ed., Women: A Feminist Perspective, 3rd ed. Writer and lecturer F. Carolyn Graglia argues that women should stay at home and practice the values of "true motherhood" because contemporary feminists have discredited marriage, devalued traditional homemaking, and encouraged sexual promiscuity. Feminist Jo Freeman argues that in the late 1960s activists challenged the notion of women's inferior status in society through lawsuits and through "consciousness-raising" sessions to develop egalitarian and liberation values. ISSUE 10. Will History Forgive Richard Nixon? YES: Joan Hoff-Wilson, from "Richard M. Nixon: The Corporate Presidency", in Fred I. Greenstein, ed., Leadership in the Modern Presidency NO: Stanley I. Kutler, from "Et Tu, Bob?" The Nation According to professor of history Joan Hoff-Wilson, the Nixon presidency reorganized the executive branch and portions of the federal bureaucracy and implemented domestic reforms in civil rights, welfare, and economic planning, despite its limited foreign policy successes and the Watergate scandal. Professor and political commentator Stanley I. Kutler argues that President Nixon was a crass, cynical, narrow-minded politician who unnecessarily prolonged the Vietnam War to ensure his reelection and implemented domestic reforms only when he could outflank his liberal opponents. PART 3. Postindustrial America and the End of the Cold War: 1974-2001 ISSUE 11. Did President Reagan Win the Cold War? YES: John Lewis Gaddis, from The United States and the End of the Cold War: Implications, Reconsiderations, Provocations NO: Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry, from "Who Won the Cold War?" Foreign Policy Professor of history John Lewis Gaddis argues that President Reagan combined a policy of militancy and operational pragmatism to bring about the most significant improvement in Soviet-American relations sinc e the end of World War II. Professors of political science Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry contend that the cold war ended only when Soviet president Gorbachev accepted Western liberal values and the need for global cooperation. <new>ISSUE 12. Did President George Bush Achieve His Objectives in the Gulf War? <new>YES: Colin L. Powell, from My American Journey <new>NO: Michael R. Gordon and Bernard E. Trainor, from The Generals' War: The Inside Story of the Conflict in the Gulf Secretary of State Colin L. Powell argues that the American armed forces successfully achieved their limited and specific objective in the Gulf War, which was to liberate Kuwait from the occupation army of Iraq. Journalist Michael R. Gordon and Bernard E. Trainor, a retired lieutenant general of the U.S. Marine Corps, argue that the Bush administration's lack of a clear political strategy for postwar Iraq allowed Saddam Hussein to remain in power with half of his important Republican Guard military tank units intact. ISSUE 13. Should America Remain a Nation of Immigrants? <new>YES: Tamar Jacoby, from "Too Many Immigrants?" Commentary <new>NO: Patrick J. Buchanan, from The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization Social scientist Tamar Jacoby maintains that the newest immigrants keep America's economy strong because they work harder and take jobs that native-born Americans reject. Syndicated columnist Patrick J. Buchanan argues that America is no longer a nation because immigrants from Mexico and other Third World Latin American and Asian countries have turned America into a series of fragmented multicultural ethnic enclaves that lack a common culture. ISSUE 14. Will History Consider William Jefferson Clinton a Reasonably Good Chief Executive? <new>YES: Nicholas Thompson, from "Graduating With Honors: The Hits and Misses of a Protean President", The Washington Monthly NO: James MacGregor Burns and Georgia J. Sorenson et al., from Dead Center: Clinton-Gore Leadership and the Perils of Moderation Journalist Nicholas Thompson argues that President Bill Clinton's governing style of simultaneously pushing and pulling in hundreds of directions led Americans to be better off in 2000 than they were when Clinton first took office eight years earlier. Political scientists James MacGregor Burns and Georgia J. Sorenson et al. argue that Clinton will not rank among the near-great presidents because he was a transactional broker who lacked the ideological commitment to tackle the big issues facing American society. <new>ISSUE 15. Did the Supreme Court Hijack the 2000 Presidential Election From Al Gore? <new>YES: Stephen Holmes, from "Afterword: Can a Coin-Toss Election Trigger a Constitutional Earthquake?" in Jack N. Rakove, ed., The Unfinished Election of 2000 <new>NO: John C. Yoo, from "In Defense of the Court's Legitimacy", in Cass R. Sunstein and Richard A. Epstein, eds., The Vote: Bush, Gore, and the Supreme Court Professor of law Stephen Holmes maintains that the U.S. Supreme Court acted in a highly partisan and hypocritical fashion in the case of Bush v. Gore when it utilized the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to prevent the Florida Supreme Court from ordering a recount of the election returns in certain disputed counties. Professor of law John C. Yoo argues that "rather than acting hypocritically and lawlessly, the Court's decision to bring the Florida election dispute to a timely, and final, end not only restored stability to the political system but was also consistent with the institutional role the Court has shaped for itself over the last decade". <new>ISSUE 16. Environmentalism: Is the Earth Out of Balance? <new>YES: Otis L. Graham, Jr., from "Epilogue: A Look Ahead", in Otis L. Graham, Jr., ed., Environmental Politics and Policy, 1960s-1990s <new>NO: Bjorn Lomborg, from "Yes, It Looks Bad, But...", "Running on Empty", and "Why Kyoto Will Not Stop This", The Guardian Otis L. Graham, Jr., a professor emeritus of history, maintains that the status of the biophysical basis of our economies, such as "atmospheric pollution affecting global climate, habitat destruction, [and] species extinction", is negative and in some cases irreversible in the long run. Associate professor of statistics Bjorn Lomborg argues that the doomsday scenario for earth has been exaggerated and that, according to almost every measurable indicator, mankind's lot has improved.
