Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Traditionalists believe that the expansion policy of the Soviet Union under Stalin, shortly after the Second World War was the main cause of the Cold War. It was this expansion policy that lead to America needing to intervene. Examples like the Soviets refusing to demilitarize the Iran after the send world war had ended, and the Soviets shipping military supplies to Communist North Korea, fuel the Orthodox' evidence. Herbert Feis, a traditionalist, focused more on the White House, and the state-to-state relations between America and the Soviet Union. He argued that Roosevelt's policies towards Stalin paved the way for Soviet Aggression and "destabilized balance of power in Europe in Soviet favor.destabilized balance of power in Europe in Soviet favor."
Another famous orthodox, Thomas A. Bailey, believed that the Soviet need for expansion was the reason for the breakdown of post war peace. He also believed that the Soviet Union broke their promise they made at the Yalta Conference. "From this view, U.S. officials were forced to respond to Soviet aggression with the Truman Doctrine, plans to contain communist subversion around the world, and the Marshall Plan."
The post-revisionist theory did not appeal to me with its initial statement that "it is neither the fault of the Soviet Union or United States" as I do not think it was inevitable, and I easily think it could have been prevented with some better communication on both their parts, and if both countries neglected to resort to atomic bombs. However when I found out that many post-revisionists believe that it is not neither, but both equally that I thought that this was the most convincing. .
For me, this was a process of elimination. The least convincing to me was the Orthodox, mainly because the sources seemed incredibly biased. Almost every thought given that I read about was from the perspective of a die-hard "I love America" person, or a former US president. Then it came to decide whether it was whether I was just so anti-America and anti- bombing of Hiroshima that I'd say that I'm a revisionist, or meet somewhere in the middle. The Post-Revisionist theory ended up winning out, as it the most modern and has the most "worldly" view on the situation. This idea is also I think the least bias, and has the widest perspective of ideas.
W.A. Williams, a revisionist, thought that the American government's "open door" trade policy lead to a desire to make sure other countries stayed capitalistic like America. Gar Alperovitz believed that the atomic bomb was the initiator for the Cold War, and thought that President Truman decided to drop the bomb to intimidate the Soviet Union. Revisionists also believe that the USA was always the only real "superpower" nation. Evidence that supports this part of the theory are facts such as that America still had the largest air force and navy after they demilitarized after the war, as well as had gadgets like the atomic bombs for years before the Soviets had created theirs. After World War II, America was clearly in better a state than the Soviets, they gained from the war while the Soviets had lost an abundance. With this in mind Revisionists believe that the Soviets had wanted to take a defensive stance after the second world war. They also believe that America's main goal was to fight for capitalism, not democracy.
https://ib2-historyrevision.wikispaces.com/Cold+War+Historians
www.johndclare.net/cold_war1_answer.htm
https://historyclubmagazinedccc.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/three-approaches-to-the-origin-of-the-cold-war/
http://glencoe.mheducation.com/sites/0012122005/student_view0/chapter27/where_historians_disagree.html
http://www.americanforeignrelations.com/A-D/Cold-War-Evolution-and-Interpretations-Interpreting-the-cold-war.html
Another revisionist, Walter LaFeber argued that "the Cold War had its origins in 19th century conflicts between Russia and America over the opening of East Asia to U.S. trade, markets, and influence. LaFeber argued that the U.S. commitment at the close of World War II to ensuring a world in which every state was open to U.S. influence and trade, underpinned many of the conflicts that triggered the beginning of the Cold War." (Cold War Historians)
Thomas G. Paterson believed that the Soviet's hostility and the United State's efforts to dominate the post war world were equally responsible. The post-revisionist view didn't come to play until about the 1970's. Another Post-Revisionist, Ernest May, believed that: "After the Second World War, the United States and the Soviet Union were doomed to be antagonists.... There probably was never any real possibility that the post-1945 relationship could be anything but hostility verging on conflict.... Traditions, belief systems, propinquity, and convenience... all combined to stimulate antagonism, and almost no factor operated in either country to hold it back."
John Lewis Gaddis believed that both America and the Soviet Union wanted peace, but failed because of miscommunication. Part of this theory was that he thought that America didn't understand the Soviet's fears and reasons for wanting to protect themselves after the war. Other post-revisionists (ie, Martin P. Leffler) believed that it was less neither of their faults, but more both equally, in which both countries had a desire for world domination. Marc Trachtenberg believed that the Cold War was mostly just a settlement of the "German Question" after World War II. The overall opinion of the post-revisionists is that most of problems just came from suspicion of the other country. Neither power trusted the other.