Obama Sings: The Other Benefits of Television

In the 1950s, the television helped create support for the Civil Rights Movement as people witnessed the racism for themselves. 

In the 2000s, television allows us to gather clips of Obama's speeches and compile them into popular songs, as the youtube channel barackdubs does.

Uptown Funk

Shake It Off

Call Me Maybe

Oklahoma Thinks AP US History is Unpatriotic

In October 2012, College Board revised the curriculum of AP US History to implement Common Core ideas that utilize critical thinking that has been put into effect this fall. These changes asked teachers to go more in depth in fewer topics, and ask students to think more deeply about this topic. They want students to consider all sides to make an argument, rather than learning a specific pointing view. Before College Board had a list of recommended topics, but others not listed would be on the exam, so teachers would try to cover everything. Now, they introduce wider topics and teachers should focus on specifics in the topic. 

This a chart of Common Core skills that should be taught in APUSH as advised by the College Board.

This revision caused opposition from certain states such as Georgia and Oklahoma. 

Georgia 

Earlier this month, the Georgia Senate threatened that if College Board did not revise the material taught, then the state would cut funding for AP US History, for they claimed that the course wasn't teaching material that would promote patriotism like it should. 

Oklahoma

A more recent action involved 11 Republicans on an Oklahoma legislative committee approving a bill over four democrats to cut funding of teaching APUSH. Dan Fisher started the bill saying that APUSH focuses on “what is bad about America.” 

Above, you can see the breakdown of the amount of time College Board believes should be spent on each topic. When reading the new curriculum, Larry Krieger, a retired high school teacher, said he “saw a consistently negative view of American history that highlights oppressors and exploiters,” and took it upon himself to become an opponent of Common Core. Specifically, he finds the depiction of Manifest Destiny as the belief of cultural superiority, rather than an expansion of democracy, to be upsetting. He also highlights the emphasis on minorities as an unpatriotic historical interpretation. 

States, such as Georgia and Oklahoma, feel that Common Core and College Board are imposing an unpatriotic curriculum in their education system. On the opposite side, many students and teachers feel that it is unfair for the state to deny the right to learn, and that learning the history of our country, even the bad is actually beneficial, and not harmful. In fact, a petition, started just a week ago already has over 20,000 signatures and can be located here: https://www.change.org/p/oklahoma-lawmakers-don-t-ban-ap-courses.

As Mr. Stewart always makes sure to do, history classes primary present the facts. Teachers and the College Board are not imposing their opinions on us, that is for us to decide. I think Matt Holtzen sums up it up perfectly when he says:

“[APUSH] teaches about America. Both the good and the bad. It teaches the parts that we like to focus on, that we can be proud of, but it also shows areas where we stumbled and, importantly, where we’ve been able to correct mistakes of the past,” - Matt Holtzen

I want to know what you guys think about the APUSH controversy.

If you are more interested in the consequences of these actions, you should read about the student response as well as the claims some in favor of the ban are making against College Board and the founder of Common Core.  

Sources: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/02/why-oklahoma-lawmakers-want-to-ban-ap-us-history.htmlhttp://hechingerreport.org/new-ap-u-s-history-really-anti-american/http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/ap-us-history-course-and-exam-description.pdfhttp://www.newsweek.com/oklahoma-teachers-are-not-too-pleased-about-bill-ban-ap-us-history-308129

Interview with John Lewis on 60 Minutes

Here is an interview with John Lewis on 60 Minutes.  Lewis was featured in the Civil Right Clips from today's class and was a key member of the Civil Rights Movement.

If interested.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-lewis-reflects-on-selma-marches/

The Baby Boom

The documentary that we watched in class mentioned the post World War II Baby Boom, but didn't go into a whole lot of detail.

The Baby Boom was possibly the greatest population changing event in American history, and began almost exactly nine months after the war ended (you can probably figure out why). 1946 saw the most babies born in American history: 3.4 million, which was a 20% increase from 1945. The trend continued upwards, and at least four million babies were born every year from 1954 to 1964. The beginning of that phase just so happens to correspond with the end of the Korean War. The year that the Boom peaked, 1957, saw over eight babies born per minute. The influx of young people was so large that by the end of 1964, 40% of the population (over 76 million) were Boomers.

The Boomers, aside from being known for their numbers, are known for their achievements in advances. Socially, the headed up much of the Women's Liberation movement, were the main protestors of the Vietnam War, and were a big part of the hippie movement (but we'll get to all of that later in the year). Technologically, Baby Boomers are credited with most of the innovations regarding computers and digital technology; it's thanks to them that Silicon Valley is Silicon Valley.

In the end, we'll spend many weeks later in the year learning about what those born in the Baby Boom did as adults, but it's interesting to realize how great a change they were part of just by being born.

Sources:
http://www.history.com/topics/baby-boomers
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/06/us/baby-boomer-generation-fast-facts/

Sexism in the 1950s

The documentary we watched in class today described the 1950s as a "couples society," with very few women in the workforce and 97% of all marriageable men and women (meaning they were in their 20s and finished with their education) married. This era was perhaps one of the most sexist in American history, with an emphasis on women's roles as housewives who existed solely to clean the house, prepare food, bear and look after children, and keep their husbands happy. In researching the culture of this era, I came across the following print ad, which I think encompasses both the extreme sexism and the avid marketing and consumerism that dominated the fifties:

Ads like this would cause an uproar today, but I think they tell us a lot about the society in which they were produced, because real people in the fifties probably came across them without batting an eye, and they actually went out and purchased this and similar advertised appliances! 

The following link includes nine other ludicrously sexist print ads from the 50s, if you're interested:

http://www.businesspundit.com/10-most-sexist-print-ads-from-the-1950s/?img=21450

Recently Deceased Veterans

If of interest!

http://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-ken-moore-20141225-story.html

http://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-leon-kent-20150219-story.html

And this guy is actually from the D-Day Documentary...

http://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-richard-hottelet-20141218-story.html#page=1

Syngman Rhee

The Korea documentary made some brief mentions of Syngman Rhee, the first president of South Korea. It noted that he wasn't as benevolent as his genial appearance made him out to be. Based on what the documentary said, it seemed like Rhee was heavy-handed in his tactics, so I was curious about what kind of government he led in South Korea, the supposedly democratic half of Korea.

Rhee was most definitely anti-communist, but he was also a strongman who ruled for three terms, lasting from August 1948 to April 1960. He was born in 1875 and moved to the US in 1904. He returned to Korea in 1945. By this time, he had already led a very eventful life, such as being arrested in plots to assassinate the Korean emperor and empress and becoming president of the Korean Provisional Government in Shanghai.

After World War II, Rhee was the only Korean leader known by Americans, so he returned to Korea before the other members of the new Korean government. Once there, he campaigned for immediate independence and unification of the country. He built up a massive political organization that was supported by strong-arm groups and a following among the police. The assassinations of the major moderate leaders made Rhee the most influential leader remaining and allowed him and his party to win the elections in South Korea. He was elected President of the Republic of Korea in 1948.

Soon after assuming the presidency of the new Republic of Korea, he enacted laws that curtailed political dissent, setting the tone for his authoritarian regime. He did not tolerate opposition to his program. Not only did he curb criticism, he also allowed the detainment and torture of suspected communists and suspected North Korean agents, as well as several massacres.

He used his dictatorial powers to purge the National Assembly of members who opposed him; outlawed the opposition party; and controlled the appointment of mayors, village headmen, and chiefs of police.

There was widespread discontent in the National Assembly with his corruption and political repression, so to ensure his re-election in 1952, Rhee pushed through an amendment that would allow the president to be elected by direct voting instead of by members of the National Assembly. Actually, the National Assembly had rejected it at first, but Rhee ordered a mass arrest of opposition politicians and then got it passed.

Despite his authoritarian policies, Rhee was ousted in 1960 over claims of election fraud. Student-led demonstrations, heavy casualties, and the unanimous vote by the National Assembly and by the United States all contributed to his removal from power. The United States snuck him and his family to Hawaii, where he lived in exile until his death in 1965.

Operation Wetback

After the war’s finish, people began to focus their concern more on domestic affairs instead of international ones. At the end of the 1940s and early 1950’s, many people began to spend more time on the debate of illegal immigration. 280,000 illegal immigrants were captured by Border patrol in 1949, but that number increased to 865,000 by 1953. Because of this steep increase, government was under lots of pressure to acknowledge and make changes to the immigration policies. In 1954, this change came around under Joseph Swing, the commissioner of the Immigration and Nationalization Service, with Operation Wetback.

Joseph Swing was in charge of border patrol as well as organized officials with the police. Under the intensity of his program Operation Wetback, Swing heavily enforced the fact that “illegal aliens” could not cross the border. However, in doing this, he made life very uncomfortable for all Mexican citizens on the US border states. Police would go through the Mexican American barrios all along the southeastern states. Many Mexican citizens would flee back to Mexico due to the threat of potential violence due to the militarization. By the end of 1954, these aggressive agents discovered about one million illegal immigrants.

There is a lot of controversy surrounding Operation Wetback because of the legality of the brutality as well as the deportation of American-born Mexican children back with their immigrant parents. As the children were born in the states, they would technically be considered US citizens by law, but this was all gray area since their parents were typically illegal immigrants. Agents would also take to interrogating anybody they believed looked like a potential immigrant. They would stop people on the streets and ask for their identification. Many Mexican Americans were outraged by this policy, and many complained in both the US and Mexico because of these “police-state methods.” Due to this, Operation Wetback was abandoned. However, even through this, these problems with government policy in immigration policy are still issues that affect us today.

More Information:
http://www.pbs.org/kpbs/theborder/history/timeline/20.html


Pictures:
ospace.otis.edu
1950immigration.wordpress.com

GI Bill

Once the war ended, many veterans returned to a prosperous America. One of the biggest changes made for returning veterans before the war's end was in 1944 with the Servicemen's Readjustment Act. This act, also known as the GI Bill of Rights or GI Bill, was created because of the widespread concern that the employment markets wouldn't be able to take back the 15 million soldiers once the war ended in the Pacific. The solution to this, government decided, would be to send the veterans back to school, paid for by government funding. Upon the soldiers' return, about 8 million of them took up this opportunity with the GI Bill and went back to school. Many went to technical or vocational schools, but there were about 2 million that went to colleges and universities for an even higher education. Schools continued to get more crowded as veterans flooded back into schools. The students and former GI's were able to have their tuition and living expenses covered by the allotted $14.5 billion in tax payer dollars.

In addition to these benefits, the Servicemen's Readjustment Act also allowed for the Veterans' Administration to spend around $16 billion in loans so that the soldiers could buy homes, businesses and farms to get their new beginnings. The bill also covered things such as making Veterans' Hospitals and providing vocational rehabilitation. The veterans also had low-interest mortgage rates available to them. These educational provisions all lasted until about 1956, and the Veteran's Administration offered its last insured loans until around 1962. Later the Readjustment Benefits Act of 1966 extended the program to all veterans, even those who served in peacetime.

Overall, this act has been accredited with changing the entire 1940's by raising the educational levels while adding significantly to the construction industry. The GI Bill was a great way for the US to solidify its economy and allow the country to propel itself out of the wartime sorrows.


For more information:
AP chp. 39 pg. 861
History.com

Pictures from:
www.lessonpaths.com
www.flickr.com

Standardized Tests in America

     Today a number of people took the ACT in California, just at my testing center alone, there were around three hundred students who underwent the brain-draining trial. It might appeal to some to know that this form of torture originated a little more than a hundred years ago, specifically in 1901, a year after the original college board formed. Soon after this event occurred several institutions such as universities, bureaus, etc, started using them as an attempt of evaluating individuals, onto an intelligence system called the IQ.
      The IQ tests were first developed in 1905 by Alfred Binet, a French psychologist who wanted to determine the mental ages of "slow" learners. He classified people who score below 70 as a victims who had Intellectual Development Disabilities. From these early tests, the words idiot, moron, and imbecile gained a foothold in ways of belittling others. Eventually the tests became a means of evaluating individuals within in the military. Specifically this change occurred when Woodrow Wilson, decided to send troops over to the Western Front in WWI. Prior to the war the usage of these tests weren't common, yet the war effort coerced the practice into a staple of evaluating individuals.
     For a surprisingly long time the tests were used to tests the intelligence of immigrants, and some of these tests were designed to be impossible for immigrants to answer. The purpose of this was due to the passage of the Immigration Act and Tests of 1924. These test favored an ethic and social understanding rather than a typical tests which students today are associated with.
     In 1926 the infamous SAT was conceived, and while it wasn't a required test to take at that point to enter college, soon after Harvard started to enforce the tests in 1934, other schools followed ensuite. By 1943 the tests were being distributed to over 316,000 students, and the distributions of such tests only increased from that point. Finally in 1959 the ACT takes the scene become the SAT's most successful rival since its debut.
     Pretty much all other changes after 1960 haven't been foundation shattering, and most of the changes going on right now, the test reformation, can be explained in much greater detail by more professional institutions, till then, what changes do you believe will happen if any, and will the reign of such tests be dethroned, or is that just impossible at this point in time.

Spies in the Manhattan Project

Spies in the Manhattan project are accountable for why Russia was able to produce an atomic bomb so quickly--nearly 4 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Contrary to popular belief, there was no lack in recruits for spying, whether they were motivated by communist beliefs or nuclear parity (they thought that if no nation had a monopoly, a nuclear war would be prevented).  For many years, until the US and Britain deciphered the telegraph code, the governments did not know the extent of Soviet spying.  Here are three of the instrumental figures in helping the USSR work on atomic energy:

John Cairncross: 

John Cairncross was part of the Cambridge Five, a group notoriously known for becoming passionate communists and eventually soviet spies during and after World War II.   Cairncross, secretary to the chairman of Britain's scientific advisory committee gained access to a high-level report in the fall of 1941 that confirmed the experimentation and feasibility of a uranium bomb.   He then leaked the information to other agents who notified Stalin.  After the war in 1951, when British agents tracked down and interrogated, Cairncross' documents on the bomb were discovered.  In the end, he was not charged, but instead asked to keep quiet.  He continued denying his involvement and claimed that the information he passed on was harmless.  However, when KGB files were made public under its new democracy, Cairncross was revealed to be the agent who provided proof to Stalin that the British government was working on atomic energy and helped Soviet Russia organize and develop the work on atomic energy.

Klaus Fuchs: 

Klaus Fuchs was born in Germany and joined the Communist party as a student.  He fled to escape the rise of Nazism in 1933.  Before he became a British citizen , he had already offered to be a spy for the Soviets.  He first worked at the Los Alamos lab, handing over information about bomb construction and size (he included sketches and dimensions in his reports).  When he returned to England, to work at Britain's nuclear research facility and passed information on creating a hydrogen bomb to the Soviet union.  Although he was caught later, he sent the Soviets information describing important scientific processes related to the construction of the atomic bomb, helping the Soviets develop their own in a short period of four years.  He is considered the most important person that supplied information that helped in the building of the bomb

Theodore Hall: 

Theodore Hall was the youngest scientist on the Manhattan project.  When he was recruited to work at Los Alamos, he constantly thought of how to spare humanity the devastation of nuclear power.  In October 1944 he contacted the soviets and volunteered to tell them about the bomb research to make sure that the US didnt have too much power.  Even if they did have more power, the Soviets would know about it and would be able to recreate their own.  In December, he sent an update on the creation of the bomb, most likely the first secret of many that were divulged from Los Alamos.  Decades later, when code declassifications confirmed his spying, he said in a written statement that it seemed that an American monopoly was dangerous and should be prevented.  Therefore, he felt a duty to alert the Soviets.

Is is uncertain how many, but there are certainly more scientists and informants that contributed to the creation of the atomic bomb in the USSR.  But these men are the most infamous for supplying crucial information to Stalin, allowing him to bypass many experimental processes and expediting the quest for the atomic bomb.

The Uprooted Germans (1945)

Why did the Germans allow themselves to be uprooted so easily (when the eastern section of Germany was given to Poland after the end of World War II)?

Background: We just saw in the video that Stalin and the Soviet Union took the eastern section of Poland.  In exchange, Poland was given the eastern section of Germany.  The Allies, in a sense, shifted Poland westward.  And like Mr. Stewart said in class, nobody had very much sympathy for the Germans because they were viewed as the aggressors and the Polish as the victims for so long during the war.  But why was there so little opposition?

About 12 million Germans were expelled from the area from about 1945 until 1950.  But there wasn’t a popular demand by these people to regain their homeland.  One source I found hypothesizes that the people had romanticized their homeland, “beautiful in [their] recollection, as it resides in [their] memories1.” Believing that they would not be able to return, they resigned themselves to life in the west with their memories.  This helped them cope with the migration.  

Another idea is that because of the German’s guilt for the Holocaust and other atrocities, the Allies could get away with the mass expulsion with little argument.  The writer from the main website I found says, “Without question, the recognition of the Holocaust’s central role remains essential for gaining an accurate picture of how subsequent collective traumas, such as the expulsion, became possible.” It seems like the Germans felt that they could not argue after what Hitler and the Nazis did.

Finally, some people believe that the Eastern Germans who were relocated simply forgot about their homeland.  But, this is the least likely explanation because of the number of German tourists in that area and because of the idea of the “Lost Germany” and the “Heimat” (which I believe means “homeland”).

I don’t know how helpful this is, because I couldn’t find very much about the German perspective.  But check out the website (below) because when I read the whole thing it made way more sense and I found it quite interesting.  

1http://www.cambridge.org/asia/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9781107634350&ss=exc

Tehran Conference of 1943

On November 28, 1943, Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt all had their first official meeting together in person in Tehran, capital of Iran. During this four day conference, the powers decided to create a joint-statement about "enduring peace" after winning the war in Asia and Europe.

Here, they also famously decided on opening Stalin's "Second Front." Though they didn't put down on paper the exact places where the front would be open, they did make it clear that they wanted Germany attacked from the South, East and West. Stalin would reveal that he really wanted that Second Front coming from France, much to England's disappointment. This ended up actually happening in June of 1944 (though it was scheduled for May) through Operation Overlord which we learned about in our video about a week back.

The foundations of their conference had been established about a month prior to the Tehran Conference by their foreign ministers. They released joint statements about their international goals after the war saying,

"We expressed our determination that our nations shall work together in war and in the peace that will follow."
and
"We came here with hope and determination. We leave here, friends in fact, in spirit and in purpose."

From this conference, Stalin also had confirmed that he would help with the war on Japan as well if necessary, much to Roosevelt's relief, once the war with Germany had been done for about three months.

Several other topics were additionally discussed like the division of Germany after the war, Turkey's involvement in the war, the future of Poland and Finland, and Iran's postwar independence.

FUN FACT! They also celebrated Churchill's birthday (on the 30th of November) during the conference. There was a special dinner at the British Legation that Stalin and Roosevelt both attended. Stalin even raised a toast to Churchill! (And Roosevelt, because you know, don't want people to feel left out or anything.)



http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/585632/Tehran-Conference
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/1/newsid_3535000/3535949.stm

Katyn Forest

Hey guys! For those of you who wanted a bit more information or missed the part about Katyn Forest in class yesterday, here is some extra research that I found which expands a bit on what they said in the video.

As a bit of a debrief again, Katyn Forest in the home of mass graves of many Polish officers that are thought to have given the Russians trouble. About 4,300 bodies were dug up by the Germans who used this information to try to cause problems between the Allies. Like Mr. Stewart said in class however, even though the Germans had lots of legitimate evidence to prove that Russians had killed all these men, the Allies continued to ignore the proof as to not succumb to conflict amongst themselves. The Russians instead blamed the Germans for the murder of the officers which the rest of the Allies went along with.


The Germans found Katyn Forest mass graves in 1943. All the officers there were prisoners of war from the Soviet invasion into Poland into the Eastern Polish Provinces between 1939-1941. Many were kept in prison camps until they were eventually murdered in around 1940. The rest of the around 20,000 bodies are buried in other locations.

Until the 1990's Russia denied that it was the one to be the murderer behind the Katyn Forest mass graves. Around this time official documents were finally released from the Soviets which proved their involvement.

If you wanted to see parts of the documents released by the Soviets, here is a link which shows a confidential doc which proved their involvement. It's pretty interesting to see the proof!
http://www.warsawuprising.com/katyn.htm

General Background/Review on Stalinist Era

One of the major topics discussed in the documentary today was Stalin and Soviet international decision.  In order to understand the background of these decisions and Stalinism in general, here are a few facts (probably review from last year) about living in the USSR during Stalin's rule.

• no freedom 
• had to read, see, and listen to what the state allowed
• anyone who did not was severely punished
• total control of the media
• idea/thought of the labor camps was a deterrent (gulags)
• communist leadership and armed forces were purged
• NKVD (secret police)
• 1936--stalin's constitution
• mainly focused power into Stalin's hands
• gave all rights to vote (limited), work, rest, health protection, housing, education
• personality cult
• Stalin continually glorified himself through pictures
• wore white suit in order to stand out from the crowd
• "Uncle Joe" was the image of a kind man and father of the Russians
• people could only write/illustrate in a way that glorified stalin
• education control
• 1932--new program was introduced
• examps were reintroduced
• subjects laid down by the government (especially history)
• Stalin's part in the revolution and relationship with Lenin
• russification was enforced--acceptance of Russian language and customs
• Youth organisations
• Octobrists (8-10 yrs), Pioneers (10-16 yrs), Komsomol (19-23)
• "good communist"
• Religion
• Churches were attacked and leaders were arrested
• Stalin thought that God challenged his position of authority
• people should only worship Stalin (personality cult)

**Interesting note--women enjoyed more liberal status under lenin

• Stalin put an emphasis on family because so many homeless children
• stain on the perfect communist society
• effective equality with men in the work place
• all jobs open to women
• image that Stalin created made working women less apparent

This is a simplified and condensed version--

read the full article here http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/Stalins%20Russia.htm

~~the living conditions section (near bottom) is interesting.

If the Warsaw Uprising succeeded, what would have that meant?

The Warsaw Uprising was a massive operation by the Polish Underground to take Warsaw back at the same time as the Soviet forces would roll in, so they could not only liberate their own capital but also keep control of the government.  But unexpectedly Russian forces stopped at the outskirts of the Polish capital and let the lightly armed Polish resistance duel it out with the air and artillery forces of the German Wehrmacht for amazingly 63 days.  The expected support from Moscow never arrived, and the Soviets didn't allow Allied forces airlift supplies into Warsaw, leaving the Polish Home Army, stranded against heavily armed, experienced soldiers.

                                                               

The political implications of the failure of the Warsaw Uprising are enormous.  With the failure of the Home Army, the major military organization of the Polish government in exile in London was squashed, leaving Poland open to control to the Soviet forces.  With the failure of support to the Polish rebels, the Soviets succeeded in creating another Soviet state in Eastern Europe, and thus succeeding in their mission to expand communism across the world.

                                                   

If the Home Army, had succeeded, (an impossible task without support), the Polish government may have stayed in power, a democratic nation on the other side of Berlin.  This would have been a major change in power compared to what happened in real life where a distinct line could be found between democratic and communist.  Would Poland still have buckled to the pressure?  Or would they have stood strong in the face of all the communism?  Would it have become a source of conflict between the two ideologies and begun another war?  But like so many things in history, we can also so what if?

FRQ Question #2

Here are some notes from today's discussion on FRQ question #2 (During the war, how did America evolve into the "arsenal of democracy"? Specifically refer to four pieces of evidence that provide an economic, a societal, and a political evolution to show how America changed to meet the demands of the war.)
*Note: some of the examples can go under more than one category

• economic evolution
• military officers wanted to deal with familiar, reliable, large manufacturers
• largest corporations garnered the lion's share of military contracts
• US steel, Ford, General Motors/Electric, Du Pont
• smaller companies cant produce as much --> govt turns to bigger corps --> bigger corps grow --> more profit --> bigger corps grow more
• firms with fewer than 100 employees accounted for 26% of materials in 1940 and decreased to 19% by the end of the war
• after tax corporate profits grew from $6.4billion before the war to $11billion after the war ended
• Revenue Act of 1942 provided for $7billion in new individual income taxes used to fill the treasury's vault and soaked up potentially inflationary purchasing power
• more money to pay for the war (deployment of troops and ESPECIALLY manufacturing war supplies)
• accounted for arround 45% of the total war cost
• individuals payed more income taxes and the government included 13million new taxpayers into the system
• for the first time, individuals payed more income taxes than corporations
• many did not protest this because of strong patriotism--their income tax money went into the war effort to save citizens and build bombers/other war materials
• social evolution
• need workers to fill in for soldiers--> gender/racial minorities migrate to urban areas
• conflict--detroit race riots/zoot suit riots
• especially big effect on ship&aircraft production--kaiser ship, willow run plant
• Bracero program--brought Mexicans over the border to fill in agriculture positions
• led to many disagreements/fights in towns
• Executive order of 8802--prohibited discriminatory employment practices by federal agencies, unions, and companies engaged in war related work
• FEPC (Fair Employment Practices Commission) enforces the policy
• 19million women went into the labor force
• worried about standard of living for citizens (Donald Nelson
• what would people live off of it all the materials and labor were contributed towards the war effort
• politiclal evolution
• set of policies to lever the economy onto a war footing 
• tax inducements, financial enticements, market mechanisms, incentives in tax codes, selling raw materials allocations and transportation priorities
• sometimes, outright seizure of industrial and transportation facilities temporarily and in extreme measures
• tax legislation fueled war economy by using incentives to nudge industries onto war basis
• industrial retooling by allowing full amortization of investment in war related plant and equipment over just 5 years, a provision that sheltered otherwise taxable profits (doubles tax deduction)
• companies could claim tax deductions for more than they actually deserve (if war does not last for 5 years)--pay no taxes
• allowed private people to use public capital to make guaranteed profit for self
• cost-plus basis: government paid for cost of turning factory into a war plant --> paid for materials --> paid for finished products --> paid for reverting back into the original plant (read more on page 623)
• war manpower commission
• charged with planning to balance labor needs of agriculture, industry, and armed forces
• for increased productivity in each sector, no extra food, no extra supplies, no extra men (no more then necessary amount so that nothing would be wasted)
• "work or fight" order to make most of the citizens and machine power 
• Controlled Materials Plan
• gave the major government contracting agencies the power to allocate the key metals of copper aluminum and seel to their suppliers
• new measure of order to economic movilization
• run through center source so much more efficient and less waste (allocated only needed portions)
• advantaged largest contractors (because military and naval bureaus liked them and they could produce more)--> smaller producers couldnt gain access to neede materials
• concentrated questions about trade-offs--more expeditious and efficient

These are the main ideas, but you can also look up...

• strikes and labor disputes (AFL and CIO)
• Office of price administration (inflation, wage/price freezes
• individual factories (henry kaiser--1 ship in 17 days instead of 355)
• willow run by Ford (mile long assembly line that produced 8,500 B-24 bombers
• "An American Dilemma" --Gunnar Mydral
• GI bill

Good luck on the FRQ tomorrow!!!

**Don't forget to define key terms in the question in order to lead your reader where you want**

FRQ: World War II

Here is some possible evidence for each of the FRQs (except Number Four because I didn't get a chance to work on it yet). The formatting was weird so I made it a picture.