Gender and Race: There Influence on Women’s Rights

            Through the whole of history women have been treated as the lesser sex. The rights that women have gained have been fought hard for and should not be looked at as an easy task. Delving deeper into the issue of women’s rights the other factor has been race. African American woman have fought just as hard if not harder than Caucasian women because they not only had to overcome the issue of being the “inferior” gender, they had to contend with all the stereotypes that have been projected onto them in the last several hundred years for not being white. They had to overcome the many things that their ancestors had left for them to overcome as well as the conditions that they found themselves in. I am going to examine how women have overcome gender equality issues as well as how they are still fighting for equal rights and what effects that race has had on the advancements of women’s rights in the nineteenth and twentieth century in the United States. I will be using the resources that have been given to me to look at and examine the social, educational, political and economic feats that have been attained by African American women in the United States in the last three hundred years. 

            The start of the gender inequality issues that women in our country have dealt with goes back to the very start of the country. When the colonies were founded, there were few places were women found work other than as a mother or a teacher in the home, these issues date back to the 1600s, however the start of gender inequality in African American women follows shortly thereafter due to the initial lack of slaves until the slave trade really got started when the colonies proved that they had valuable resources and needed yet another resource, man power of the free variety to harvest the land and to capitalize on the many things that they had just stumbled across by coming to America. Men were often used in the fields and did hard labor, we have seen this in many different ways in books, historical documents and even movies. Harriet Jacobs said that, “slavery is terrible for men; but it is far more terrible for women.” [1] This is one of the things that she wrote in her book Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl: Written by Herself. She thought that slaves, particularly women and girls had a sexual vulnerability, as well as the pigment of their skin to contend with. There were many incidents where women were brought into the main house of the plantation to be house maids because the women and children of the house were less scared of having a female slave than a male slave. The issue in this is that many plantation owners found that women of “color” were something exotic and a “toy” and wanted to be the first to test out the waters of sex with a woman of a different race. Female slaves were often raped and then left for dead and some even became the mistresses of plantation owners, thus making what Jacob’s said about sexual vulnerability to be very true. Continuing through the1800s African American women were still being enslaved prior to the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. Even after the thirteenth amendment was passed men and women were still being enslaved. This was one of the first steps that African American had to overcome on their long journey to gender equality that they are still fighting for today, “black women experience a special kind of oppression and suffering in this country that is both racist and sexist because of their dual racial and gender identity."[2] This means that women dealing with the harsh and deplorable conditions of slavery were also made out to be in the wrong due to their gender. Many male plantation owners would have sex with their female slaves or have them be house maids so that they could have a little “spice and variety” in the home regardless of whether or not they were married.

Women of color had not only their gender to contend with as a factor in their struggle for freedom and rights, but the color of their skin was also working against them up through the time of World War I when there was a leap made forward in women’s rights, even if there were still people and places in the United States that refused to accept the reality that women and African American’s are real people and not just three fifths of a person as the Compromise would have lead us to believe during the creation and foundation building of the United States. One of the women who stood up for women’s rights was Maria W. Stewart, she was a freed slave who was residing in Connecticut. Stewart gave four lectures that would have very little effect on the education and right of African American women, but she was one of the first to call for a need for schools for African American women, “How long shall the fair daughters of Africa be compelled to bury their minds and talents beneath a load of iron pots and kettles….Possess the spirit of independence….Sue for your rights and privileges.” [3] She was met with opposition not only of the white population of the country, but even by the male African American’s who thought that women being educated was almost as much of a waste as white males thought. Male superiority complexes knew no skin tone at any point in history, both white and African American men alike believed that women were the inferior gender, with males being the superior.

            The last decade of the 1800s saw the emergence of the black women’s club movement come out on a national scale. White women, though fighting for the same rights as black women still did not feel that their gender made them equal, they still saw themselves as superior. This lead to the First National Conference of Colored Women which was held in Boston in July of 1895. [4] There were many things on the convention agenda, but one of which was the education of both African American boys and girls. Girls were still not being educated on the equal level of boys and the issue of making sure that both boys and girls were educated was very important to the ability and continuance of rights for African American women, educating little girls would hopefully help them become educated women fighting for the rights that the women at the conference were trying to get them.

            One of the things that women have struggled with since the dawn of time is the sexual nature that comes with being a woman. Feminine wiles, charms and the curves that come with having the body bestowed by Venus. Though these things seem silly, it is why many women were violated. It is something that has been noted in almost every paragraph of this paper and something that African American women wanted to help to control. One of the things that African American women wanted to make more readily available in the latter half of the 1800s and the first half of the 1900s was birth control. Though this was not a prevention of the sexual atrocities that were happening against women, or the inability to provide for a family it would help in the results. “Limiting the size of families was a deliberate strategy of some women for improving the economic viability and the standard of living in the black community…and by 1900 black women had significantly lowered their birthrate as well as infant mortality,” [5] The issue of birth control was helping to improve conditions of living and was only a start to the African American women’s movement to attain rights in regards to reproduction. These rights would be fought for and eventually attained in the 1960s.

Moving into the nineteenth century and the start of World War I women had been fighting and struggling hard for the right to vote which would be one more step in the advancement of Women’s rights and in 1920 with the passing of the nineteenth amendment that right was granted. Most people who examine the women’s suffrage movement often overlook the fact that there were African American women who fought hard during the suffrage movement as well. One of those women was Nannie Burroughs, she would eventually become the first president of the National League of Republican Colored Women in 1924. [6] Leading up to the success of the women’s suffrage movement was the entrance of the United States into World War I and this also provided a stage for women to enter the workforce and thus prove their value to those who doubted them. During the 1920s most African American women performed domestic work and made up about fifty percent of the labor force in the United States. [7] Most historians like to attribute the fact that African American women were not considered for other jobs such as secretarial work and teaching and White women were being considered was because of their race as well as their lack of education. The continuing of the domestic work continued through the 1960s in the United States and the passing of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 which not only gave equal rights to African Americans, but also to women as a whole. Though many would still say that the true equality that was given by the passing of this law is only on paper and is still in process of being enacted.

In the 1960s and 70s prior to the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the Black Feminist movement was coming to the forefront and gaining much attention from the media both negative and positive. Media takes on many forms not only television and radio but also in papers and books, one such paper was a position paper written by the Student Non-Violence Coordinating Committee entitled “Women of the Movement” this paper documented the thought that women of the SNCC were becoming angered by the sexism the men were showing them and that the women were realizing that the battle they were fighting was not only one of race but also of gender oppression. The paper become one of the first manifestations of the modern women’s movement. [8] It has been pointed to by many modern feminists as one of the reasons that they have joined the organizations that they work for as well as to have a basis for multiple papers that have been written since 1967 documenting the gender oppression that African American women have faced since the beginning of the United States of America as well as thoughts on where to take the fight on resolving the issue of gender inequality.

Women’s rights continued to be fought for and are still being fought for even now after the declarations that have been made and laws that have passed in the last century, because even though there are laws that state that women are equal to men, there are many women who would beg to differ. The reaches of African American women in the work place have changed in many ways since they were slaves. Black women account for fifty three percent of the black labor force according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2002. [9] More so than that is the fact that most forty four percent of black family households are headed by a single female no spouse present in the home. [10] This could be an argument that even though women have long struggled for equality in the workplace, there are women who have made such a strong impact in the labor statistics that they should be rewarded, whether or not this will actually happen is not something that statistics can determine, but it is remarkable that women, let alone African American women are proving people wrong each and every day, because they were set up for failure and are using the resources that they have been given to work and reach for the goals that they have set for themselves, even if it is purely out of necessity.

Looking at the advancements made in the workplace by African American women it should also be noted that, “of the four race-gender groups- black males, black females, white females and white males- black females made the largest occupational gains from 1940-1980.” [11] Not only did African American women change the type of jobs that they were working, making the move, as noted before, from the domestic place into clerical, retail and health care positions, [12] but they also improved the wages being made and ultimately they made a giant historical significance and impact on the economic status of not only African American’s in general, but for women in general. These numbers and statistics have been weighed against the gap of racial comparisons as well as gender comparisons of what income and economic status is and what it means to each individual group of people that were documented by the US Department of Labor.

            Taking a deeper look at the education of black women is something that changed very much after the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because an education could not be denied to anyone at that point. It is sad to think that only in the last one hundred years that education has been made mandatory and that until that point it could be denied to anyone based on gender, race or just because you did not like the other person. It was important that rights and laws were established to make sure that education was seen as important as it truly is. Though until 1964 you did not have the ability to just chose education, but one the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed it did not matter if you were a male, female, black or white, you had the right to an education and the right to do with it what you chose. Education is something that is so often not looked at as a happy thing or as a right because it is something that is required now to not only get a good job, but to get anywhere in life. Becoming equal in the workplace was pivotal, based on the education that was received. This means that even from an early age, it was important to train and educate the men and women of our country. African American women set out to make the workplace more equal and the passage of antidiscrimination laws for the workplace in the 1970s would help to finally correct and put things on par with equality. [13] The issue here was that for the most part all it did was to make sure that men were not discriminated against based on color. Which still left women both black and white without equality in the workplace and this continues today. Women everywhere will continue to tell you that even though they do the same jobs as men they are not equally compensated nor do they receive the same attention and praise that men do in the workplace. This is true for both white and black women in the United States because even though laws have been added in attempt to gain equal rights, it is the enforcement, or lack of enforcement, of these laws that makes them laws, and thus far we as a country have yet to see the total equality between genders, and this is even more true for people of the “inferior” gender and race, African American women.

With my project I wanted to examine through a research paper the different factors and thoughts as to why it took so long for women and more specifically African American women to get their “place” in society and receive equality in the United States on an educational, economic, social and political standpoint as well as examine the difference of opinions that historians have as to why it took over two hundred years to attain the equality and rights that they fought so hard for and the differing thoughts that historians have as to what the actual influence of events such as the Civil War, World War I and changes to the United States Constitution and the passing of laws in the twentieth century was. Women have made such a huge stride forward in attaining rights in the past two hundred years and it is very important that women’s rights are looked at not only from a gender standpoint but also from a racial standpoint as we were encouraged to do in this course. I think that by examining the different statistics as well as historical resources that were given to me in this class that I have successfully looked at the research and implemented it in a way that shows that gender and race have played a large part in the attainment of rights for African American women in the last two hundred years. 

Works Cited

 [1] Beverley Guy-Sheftall, Scott, William R., and William G. Shade. Upon These Shores: Themes in the African American Experience. New York: Routledge, 2000. (348)

[2] Beverley Guy-Sheftall, Scott, William R., and William G. Shade. Upon These Shores: Themes in the African American Experience. New York: Routledge, 2000. (347)

[3] Beverley Guy-Sheftall, Scott, William R., and William G. Shade. Upon These Shores: Themes in the African American Experience. New York: Routledge, 2000. (349)

[4] Beverley Guy-Sheftall, Scott, William R., and William G. Shade. Upon These Shores: Themes in the African American Experience. New York: Routledge, 2000. (353)

[5] Beverley Guy-Sheftall, Scott, William R., and William G. Shade. Upon These Shores: Themes in the African American Experience. New York: Routledge, 2000. (356)

[6] Beverley Guy-Sheftall, Scott, William R., and William G. Shade. Upon These Shores: Themes in the African American Experience. New York: Routledge, 2000. (355)

[7] Trotter, Joe W., Earl Lewis, and Tera W. Hunter. The African American Urban Experience: Perspectives from the Colonial Period to the Present. New York, New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Print. (76)

[8] Beverley Guy-Sheftall, Scott, William R., and William G. Shade. Upon These Shores: Themes in the African American Experience. New York: Routledge, 2000. (357)

[9] Trotter, Joe W., Earl Lewis, and Tera W. Hunter. The African American Urban Experience: Perspectives from the Colonial Period to the Present. New York, New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Print. (141)

[10] Trotter, Joe W., Earl Lewis, and Tera W. Hunter. The African American Urban Experience: Perspectives from the Colonial Period to the Present. New York, New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Print. (141)

[11] Trotter, Joe W., Earl Lewis, and Tera W. Hunter. The African American Urban Experience: Perspectives from the Colonial Period to the Present. New York, New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Print. (142)

[12] Trotter, Joe W., Earl Lewis, and Tera W. Hunter. The African American Urban Experience: Perspectives from the Colonial Period to the Present. New York, New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Print. (142)

[13] Trotter, Joe W., Earl Lewis, and Tera W. Hunter. The African American Urban Experience: Perspectives from the Colonial Period to the Present. New York, New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Print. (144)

First Lady: Florence Harding

Florence Harding was born August 15, 1860 in Marion, Ohio. She was the daughter of a store owner and real estate developer, Amos Kling. Florence was the oldest of 3 children, and the only female child in her family. Most people would usually associate her first and foremost with her husband Warren G. Harding, but Florence did more than just her First Lady responsibilities. She had a very interesting life prior to marriage and after the death of her husband. (NFFL)

Prior to her marriage to Warren G. Harding, Florence attended the Cincinnati Conservatory of Music. She had the dream of becoming a concert pianist, and her family supported those dreams. This also became a source of income for her in the 1880s, as a piano teacher for local families, though her dreams of becoming an accomplished concert pianist were never fully realized. She had one marriage by common law to Mr. Henry DeWolfe, with whom she had one son. He abandoned his family, and she filed for divorce, which eventually lead her to become a piano teacher for income purposes. In married Warren G. Harding in 1891, this time with a wedding, and not just as a common law arrangement.

After her marriage to Harding, the then owner of the Marion Star newspaper in Marion, Ohio, she became the business manager of the paper. This would have been a big deal for a woman to be helping to run a business at this level. She used her knowledge of cartography to map out delivery routes and plan distribution. (NFLL) She also hired the first woman reporter in the state of Ohio to work for a newspaper. As business manager of the newspaper, this gave Florence the opportunity to meet public figures and politicians as they came to meet with Warren, who would later become a two-term state senator, the Lieutenant Governor of Ohio, a United States senator and the President of the United States. Florence practically ran the campaigns, and managed the finances, fundraising, social and political gatherings and much more. She was the first wife of a US President to have such a job, and took pride in her work.

Florence was an opinionated woman, and had no qualms about sharing her opinions with her husband. She was noted for being vehemently against the League of Nations and in favor of women’s suffrage. She believed that women had a place in the world, and that place was not to sit back and do as they were told, but to strive for success. She used anecdotes of her own life to support these claims. Florence also weighed in on Presidential Cabinet appointments, and did a lot of behind the scenes work to get people to accept these positions. (NFFL) Florence wanted women across the country to understand the government that they were no eligible to vote for. It was important to her that now that women had the right to vote, that they used this right judiciously. This also lead to her hosting many women in the White House to show off the professionalism of women. Some of the guests included Marie Curie, future female political appointees and female athletes at her tennis tournament.

At one point during their tenure in the White House, Florence became very ill. It was found that she suffered from kidney disease that caused a “floating kidney.” She spent nearly 2 decades fighting this illness, and it would eventually lead to her death in 1924 at the age of 64. Florence was a major advocate of homeopathic medicine, which she used for her own treatment, and would lead to the death of her husband on an ill-advised trip across the country. There were rumors that Florence had poisoned her husband, or killed him with the help of her very own doctor, Dr. Boone, but these were never confirmed. There have also been suggestions that it was some sort of suicide, or that he died of depression, but the most common consensus is that he had a massive heart attack which eventually lead to a stroke and congestive heart failure, but nearly 100 years later, this has never been confirmed. (History Stories)

Though Florence Harding may be remembered for being a strong, independent and opinionated woman, she fought many battles for women’s rights. She had some odd views in terms of healthcare, such as her interest in homeopathic remedies, but she supported the advancement of woman’s rights in the United States, and she felt it was her job to see these things come to fruition, and she made sure that some of them did.

I chose to focus on her running the Marion Star as business manager for her husband Warren G. Harding, the owner of the paper. As previously mentioned, Florence Harding was the business manager for the Marion Star. Florence was not writing, or editing stories for the newspaper, but she did get to help make the choices on who and what made the cut for the paper. (NFFL) She also created a circulation department, and helped them to map out where the paper would be distributed as well as the easiest way to deliver the newspaper to more people, and thus increase profit for the paper. (NFFL) Florence decided not to take a salary in addition to her husbands, but they opened a joint account, something that may seem to be strange based on her advocacy of women professionals. During her tenure as Business Manager of the paper, she also hired and trained the newsboys, implemented a rewards system and made negotiations to acquire printing equipment at a lower cost. (NFFL) Florence was intent on making the paper profitable, and she instated a policy of dropping non-paying customers after 3 weeks, she handled complaints personally and she also did some of the maintenance repairs herself, because she wanted to save money and she knew how to do the work. (NFFL) Florence, as the business manager, was trusted to do these tasks. She also kept the sole records of business interests and finances. While Warren was sick, she was running the paper, and it became even more successful with her at the helm. She made several key decisions, one of which included subscribing to world news wires that would allow the Marion Star to have access to world news within 24 hours of the event, and this increased their profits. (NFFL)

The reason that Florence Harding becoming business manager is important is because at the time, 1894-1906 (NFFL) women did not have jobs like this. Women were still homemakers, teachers and did not really have many interests or holdings in the business world. Florence took over as business manager of her husband’s newspaper when he fell ill, and was battling depression and illness. She took over command of a profitable and longstanding business and implemented changes that drastically increased their profit. (NFFL) At the time, this was unheard of. It is also possible that Florence’s success as the business manager lead her to feeling like she could share her opinions with her husband. This was important as well, because it ultimately lead to cabinet positions being filled, business decisions, and some policy changes as her behest.

Florence Harding was the beginning of the face of change for First Ladies in the United States. She began to make decisions, not about china patterns and as a hostess, but as a leading lady in American history, who was taking an active role in the politics and policies of the country. Florence Harding brought her strong will and stubbornness with her into her marriage to Warren Harding, but it seems that she was a shrewd businesswoman, and this allowed her to make changes and steer America towards more openness to women’s rights and began to open the US and the world to women professionals on a world stage. She had a humble beginning, being a piano teacher from Ohio, but in her 64 years, Florence became a force to be reckoned with, and helped to advance women’s rights making her an influential public figure in not only Ohio History, but United States history as well.

 

Bibliography

Greenspan, Jesse. “The Unexpected Death of President Harding, 90 Years Ago.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 2 Aug. 2013, www.history.com/news/the-unexpected-death-of-president-harding-90-years-ago.

Deppisch, Ludwig M., and Connie Mariano. The Health of the First Ladies: Medical Histories from Martha Washington to Michelle Obama. McFarland & Compan Publishers, 2015.

“First Lady Biography: Florence Harding.” Florence Harding Biography :: National First Ladies' Library, The National First Ladies' Library, www.firstladies.org/biographies/firstladies.aspx?biography=30.

Someone Call the Midwife

            Second to the worlds oldest profession would be the world’s second oldest profession, midwifery. Midwifery is defined in the Encyclopædia Britannica as a health science and health profession that deals with pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum care, or newborn care.[1] Many historians have discussed the particulars of the profession. This is not the first time that midwifery has made a resurgence in recent memory, as it is a profession that waxes, and wanes based on social norms of the time, which is why it is so interesting to look at midwives through a historical lens. Several of the articles and pieces in this writing will discuss the ins and outs of the profession through the many different historical periods, starting with Victorian England, moving to the United States after the implementation of the Midwives Act across the ocean and what happened over the twentieth-century and finally moving in to the modern age and to the place that midwives hold within society today around the world as well as the gendering of women’s healthcare.

            In 1902, the Midwives Act of 1902 was passed by the British Parliament. This was one of the many jobs that were becoming more professionalized at the time including nursing jobs, as that profession was becoming more respectable at the beginning of the twentieth century. Susie Steinbach writes in her book, Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain, about the professionalization of midwifery and nursing. This was also an issue of status, as typically, midwives and nurses were fairly uneducated, and in 1881 the Trained Midwives Registration Society, later renamed the Midwives Institute was founded. Steinbach writes that, “…the Trained Midwives Registration Society was founded by middle-class and upper-class women who wanted professional status. But in spite of campaigns for formal training and registration, most midwives were working-class women who served their local communities. Middle-class  and upper-class women insisted on male attendants, often obstetricians rather than midwives. In 1902, formal registration was made a requirement for practice.”[2] The passage of this act was an important step in regulation of womens health, as well as a creation of formal jobs for many women. The job of midwifery had often been left to those who had experienced child birth themselves, but as Steinbach continues, “…very different types of women entering midwifery. Where before the turn of the century most midwives were older, working-class, often widowed, and usually without formal training, after the Midwives Act there was a shift to women who were younger, unmarried, from a broader socio-economic spectrum, with formal training in both nursing and midwifery.”[3] This shift to a broader spectrum of women entering the midwife profession was felt around the world, and it finally established standard for midwives around the world, not only in England.

            In an article published in The British Medical Journal in 1907, nearly five years after the passage of the Midwives Act, the board wrote about the actual implementation of the new standards. The local governments were charged with handling the trainings and certifications of these women who wanted to partake of the profession of midwifery, but they needed to have a board who had equal training and accountability, which was difficult at the time.[4] Overall, the article praised the Central Midwives Board, but many found that this was a platitude, and truly did nothing more than to endorse the passage of the law. In her article Lara Foley speaks to the marginalization of midwives across the ocean in the United States, as these women were also being watched for mistakes and shortcomings, while undergoing training. Foley writes, “In the United States, midwifery is an occupation that exists on the fringes of the mainstream medical system. Under the threat of attack by the medical profession, the media, and lawmakers, midwives often feel a need to legitimate their occupation and activities.”[5] Foley’s article examines the stories of twenty-six midwives in different areas of the United States. She asks for their opinions and stories of experiences they have had, and places them within the context of the time. She examines the force that laws exerted on these women, and how it would shape the next generation of midwives as well. Foley continues about these women and what they called different historical periods. One such period, she talks about was what these women called the “granny era.” “Scholars describe “traditional” or “granny” midwives as both black and white women who became midwives in response to the needs of their communities, especially in the southeastern United States. Typically, these women felt “called” to midwifery and learned through apprenticeship with an older midwife. Because the women they cared for often had little access to health care, these midwives attended complicated births as well as normal deliveries.”[6] Midwives around the world and across the United States played a crucial role in women’s healthcare, as many of the women who used midwives or gave birth in the home were either too poor to afford healthcare or they may not have had access to a hospital or doctor, though this would have mostly been in rural areas. These women, midwives, felt a calling to the profession, as many women did at the time. Becoming a midwife was one of the professions that was becoming more respected and less of a job that you took because you had to at the turn of the century. The professions of nursing and midwifery were becoming more highly regulated and, in many cases, required a more thorough training and certification than before. In the coming decades, there would be many questions about what changes were to come to the profession and what this would mean for the women who had already made their mark in the profession, as well as the many women and men entering this field.

            Perhaps one of the oddest things to happen to the profession was when women’s healthcare became gendered. This had many effects. One such effect was that men did not entirely feel welcome to the profession of midwifery any longer, as was the case in Australia. We still see this today, as nurses tend to be female, and a fair number of obstetricians are male. In an article written by Elizabeth Pittman and Les Fitzgerald, they discuss this change. They collected stores of forty men who entered the nursing profession between 1950 and 2000, as well as twenty additional men who entered the profession of midwifery between 1970 and 2000. They write about the changes to the midwife and nursing profession in the 1950s, “…the Nurses’ Registration Act in the states of Victoria (1958) and Tasmania (1952) that barred men from midwifery practice. Using historical documents and oral testimony, this paper outlines how John Chapman was instrumental in changing the Nurses’ Registration Act (1952) and was the first man to become a midwife in the state of Tasmania, and Christopher James and Alan Gibbons’ separate campaigns to change the Nurses’ Registration Act (1958) in Victoria.”[7] The 1950s seems to begin where the gender divide really picked up. Their article provides evidence for these men and show a struggle beyond the women working in the profession, as had been the standard for many years.

            Monica Green writes even further on this topic in her article, Gendering of Women’s Healthcare. Green is concerned with how history has shaped the view of healthcare, and midwives. She examines many aspects, but her purpose is to look at the history of women’s healthcare through a gendered lens, because it is entirely possible that such a lens is needed for people and fellow historians, to understand the full context of the changes to healthcare over time. She states, “I propose that it might be worth exploring a gendered history of women’s healthcare and fertility control, one based on the premise that knowledge about anatomy, physiology or therapeutics does not arise fundamentally out of one’s biological nature but from the experience of living in a social world where all forms of knowledge are gendered, both in their genesis and in their dissemination. As such, medical knowledge, and the practices that arise out of it, proves to be very much a part of history, continually in flux and contested. I focus on two topics that have been central to feminist studies of medical”[8] Green discusses how sexual matters and birth had been the woman’s domain, and the private sphere up until the 1800s, when men were finally allowed in the birthing room for more than just emergencies. She continues throughout her article to talk about experience, and how it is possible that a woman dominated profession of midwifery may have prevented potential advancements for many years. She continues on with a request to consider the following claim, “Childbirth was the undisputed domain of midwives for well over a thousand years. The midwives of [pre-modern] times were probably folk healers who not only attended births but generally ministered to the health needs of the common people . . . Birth was then clearly considered women’s business, a definition of the event that was shared, apparently, by all members of society.”[9] The change of domains that began to take place in the profession of midwifery is an interesting one and it brings us in to the modern age, where many men are part of the profession that had largely been considered the job of a woman.              

            Modern midwives are less common, though many women are returning to the use of midwives and doulas in place of obstetricians. In a 2005 article written by Betty-Anne Daviss and Kenneth C. Johnson discusses a prospective study and outcomes of planned home births. The study followed five-thousand and fourteen women who planned to give birth at home in the year 2000. The conclusion of the study was that, “planned home birth for low risk women in North America using certified professional midwives was associated with lower rates of medical intervention but similar intrapartum and neonatal mortality to that of low risk hospital births in the United States.”[10] In a modern age of hospitals, the certified professional midwife still plays an important role to many. In 1999, one of the requirements for recertification as a midwife was to agree to be involved in the study if asked. This lent valuable information to many and showed that the profession is still important. Perhaps it is history repeating itself, as we move back to historical methods of healthcare for women. In this case it is in the form of midwives. In many ways seems to be based on trust of the medical professional. In many cases it can be hard to form a meaningful relationship with a medical professional or doctor that you only see a few times before giving birth, where a midwife may be able to provide that companionship and a foundation of trust for their patients.

In 2017 the infant mortality around the world had a major gap ranging from 110.6 infant deaths per 1000 live births in Afghanistan to 1.8 infant deaths per 1000 live births in Monaco. Out of the two-hundred and twenty-five countries, city states and principalities the data was collected from, the United States ranked in at 170 on the list with 5.8 infant deaths per 1000 live births.[11] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also interested in these vital statistics, they track the death rates, mostly in the United States, and determine the leading cause of infant mortality and maternal mortality rates during child birth. In a first world industrialized country, one would think that the infant mortality rate would be much lower than it is, however there were 23,161 infant deaths in the United States in 2016. The leading causes of the high infant mortality rate: congenital malformations, deformations and chromosomal abnormalities, disorders related to short gestation and low birthweight: not elsewhere classified and surprisingly, sudden infant death syndrome or SIDS.[12] Perhaps another study can be conducted now, such as the study conducted in 2000, where they collect data to see if the midwives are still on par with the nations hospitals as far as birth risks at home, or in the hospitals. Though the case could be made that with such a high infant mortality rate, anything would be an improvement, and perhaps the trust young mothers had, and the relationships formed between the midwives and the patients, as discussed in the North American study, would lend itself to a lower infant mortality rate in the future.

There also is a strong tie in infant mortality rates and what is perceived as socioeconomic growth. In 2009 Hulya and Murat Arik wrote an article in The Journal of Developing Areas. In their article they discuss that infant mortality is one of the more important determining factors when considering the socioeconomic development of a country. Birth rates are directly tied to whether or not the country is developed or is a developing nation.[13] In these cases, many of the developing nations still use midwives, as the people do not have access to physicians, unless they are very wealthy, which is a limited number of people. Their article discusses developing nations and the historical context of midwives within developing nations. One must wonder if the reason that some of these developing and industrializing nations have lower infant mortality rates than others, is because of the midwives in society who help the women give birth in the best way they know how.

            Midwifery is an age-old profession that is still evolving in the modern age. The preconceived notions that a midwife has to be a woman are being challenged, as are the standard for nurses and midwives worldwide. Men are entering the profession, as are more women, and recently there has been a small shift back toward home births in the United States. The majority of these go without complication and are done with little to no risk to the mother or infant despite high infant mortality rates in the United States. This profession has made a monumental impact on history, in terms of birth rates as well as the politics of laws surrounding birth, the woman’s role in and out of the home and health standards for child birth. There has been a distinct gendering of women’s healthcare over the last four-hundred years. I expect that will continue to change. Perhaps the midwife profession will continue to evolve as well as new and innovative technology yields further answers and solutions, though I expect, based on historical framework, that the profession of midwifery will be around until the end of time.

            In conclusion the historical context of different aspects of midwifery are presented in different ways. Historians studying individual decades and the evolving of women’s healthcare and the professional midwife, rather than midwifery as a whole, will have varying opinions, as noted above. Historians like Green see the gendering of women’s healthcare, and in many ways attribute this to the age-old idea that midwives needed to be women. Other historians, such as Pittman and Fitzgerald focused more on the modern changes being made to the profession, such as men taking jobs as nurses and midwives and challenging a long-held stereotype, despite this change taking place in the last century. When examining the historiography of midwifery, it is extremely important to remember that historical context is everything when it comes to the how, the who and the why. Methods of birthing have changed over time, as well as long held beliefs about home birth versus hospital birth. It can be surprising to some that there are still so many infant and maternal deaths during the birthing process, even in 2018, but the fact is, we have to use the information that has been handed down from past generations, if we want further progress. Studies such as the 2000 study of midwives show that home birth, even in the modern age, is still on par with hospitals and is still relatively minimal risk. It begs the question, why the change at all, if midwives have always played such a significant role. Perhaps we should stop trying to make the women’s healthcare field and the birthing process so exclusive. We may be neglecting insight that could be very important to the continuation of women’s healthcare around the world.

Bibliography

Arik, Hulya Arik and Murat. "Is It Economic Growth or Socioeconomic Development? A Crosssectional Analysis of the Determinants of Infant Mortality." The Journal of Developing Areas, 2009: 31-55.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics: Infant Health. 2016. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/infant-health.htm (accessed December 14, 2018).

Central Intelligence Agency. The World Factbook. 2017. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html (accessed December 14, 2018).

Connerton, Winifred C. "Midwifery." Encyclopædia Britannica. May 25, 2012. https://www.britannica.com/science/midwifery (accessed December 10, 2018).

Daviss, Kenneth C. Johnson and Betty-Anne. "Outcomes Of Planned Home Births With Certified Professional Midwives: Large Prospective Study In North America." BMJ: British Medical Journal, 2005: 1416-1419.

Fitzgerald, Elizabeth Pittman and Les. "The Campaigns for Men to Become Midwives in the 1970s." Health and History, 2011: 158-171.

Foley, Lara. "Midwives, Marginality, and Public Identity Work." Symbolic Interaction, 2005: 183-203.

Green, Monica H. "Gendering the History of Women's Healthcare." Gender & History, 2008: 487-518.

Steinbach, Susie L. Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain. New York: Routledge, 2017.

The British Medical Journal. "The Administration Of The Midwives Act. The Training Of Midwives By The Local Government Board." The British Medical Journal, March 30, 1907: 758.

---

[1] Connerton, Winifred C. "Midwifery." Encyclopædia Britannica. May 25, 2012. https://www.britannica.com/science/midwifery (accessed December 10, 2018).

[2] Steinbach, Susie L. Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain. New York: Routledge, 2017. 300.

[3] Steinbach, 301.

[4] The British Medical Journal. "The Administration Of The Midwives Act. The Training Of Midwives By The Local Government Board." The British Medical Journal, March 30, 1907: 758.

[5] Foley, Lara. "Midwives, Marginality, and Public Identity Work." Symbolic Interaction, 2005: 183.

[6] Foley, 190.

[7] Fitzgerald, Elizabeth Pittman and Les. "The Campaigns for Men to Become Midwives in the 1970s." Health and History, 2011: 159.

[8] Green, Monica H. "Gendering the History of Women's Healthcare." Gender & History, 2008: 488.

[9] Green, 490.

[10] Daviss, Kenneth C. Johnson and Betty-Anne. "Outcomes Of Planned Home Births With Certified Professional Midwives: Large Prospective Study In North America." BMJ: British Medical Journal, 2005: 1416-1419.

[11] Central Intelligence Agency. The World Factbook. 2017. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html (accessed December 14, 2018).

[12] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics: Infant Health. 2016. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/infant-health.htm (accessed December 14, 2018).

[13] Arik, Hulya Arik and Murat. "Is It Economic Growth or Socioeconomic Development? A Crosssectional Analysis of the Determinants of Infant Mortality." The Journal of Developing Areas, 2009: 31-55.

 

Origins of the Cold War

"The Cold War was the greatest single force affecting American society during the decade and a half after World War II.”[1] The Cold War had far reaching effects for many countries after World War II. Typically, history books discuss the superpowers of the Cold War, the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. However, there were many countries that played a role in the origins of the Cold War, including the other members of the Axis and Allied powers that had fought in the Second World War. The world was changing. Two atomic bombs had been dropped to end World War II, President Roosevelt had passed away and both communist and democratic nations wanted to be the top dog on the world stage. The Cold War may have been the single greatest force on the American people after World War II, but the origins go back further than just World War II. The origins of the Cold War lie within earlier nineteenth and twentieth century conflicts, the struggle between communism and capitalism, treaties, organizations and conferences and in the differences between western democracy and Soviet dictatorship.

The Cold War had origins that went back further than the twentieth century. During the 19^th century there were conflicts between Russia and the British empire. They were fighting to establish dominion over present day Afghanistan. The Crimean War also bread tension and animosity between Russia and capitalist English-speaking countries.[2] In a 1996 issue of the Harvard International Review, authors Richard Giragosian and Peter Pavilionis discuss the collapse of the Soviet Union that had taken place only a few years prior to the journal issue being published. In their article they discuss the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, and how it meant reviving “the Great Game,” that took place between Russia and England in the nineteenth century. For the Russians and the British, they both wanted control of natural resources, land and the best access to trade routes in the East, that Afghanistan provided. these are the resources the world has seen war continue over since the collapse of the U.S.S.R., in 1991. One piece of the map that was hotly contested was present day Afghanistan. The Russian and British people wanted control over the resources that Afghanistan had to offer. Afghanistan was important to because of its many natural resources including gemstones, salt, natural gas, zinc, other minerals and most importantly oil.[3] During the Cold War, Afghanistan would be in the middle once again. In 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, in a war that would last for over nine years. The Soviet-Afghan War became the sixty-fifth proxy war to take place during the Cold War. Proxy Wars, within the context of the Cold War, can be defined as, “war between regional states that may be regarded as a substitute for direct confrontation between the superpowers.”[4] In total there were seventy-one proxy wars or conflicts that occurred during the Cold War. In a world where nuclear weapons existed, proxy wars helped to keep a nuclear winter at bay.

            Historians have concluded that, among other factors, the origins of the Cold War are deeply rooted in World War II. In his book, Consumed by War, Richard C. Hall states, “The origins of the settlement of the Second World War began during the actual fighting. This settlement is inseparable from the beginning of the Cold War, the third phase of the twentieth-century European conflict. The Cold War began as the Second World War concluded and prevented a formal resolution of that war for some time.”[5] His book breaks down twentieth-century European conflicts and argue that the third phase of the conflicts were created by the WWII and the issues that stemmed from the war. Hall was one of many historians who believed this. In 1967, Arthur Schlesinger also wrote about his belief that the Cold War was a direct result of WWII. He discusses his belief that the Cold War arose in direct response to the military blocs that the United States and Soviet Union had in place. He regards these blocs as “rigid and hostile,” and believes that this was the bedrock of the fear and antagonism that drove the Cold War.[6]

The Cold War was not born out of only nineteenth century conflict. The roots are apparent within the First and Second World Wars as well. As World War II was at its close, there were meetings that took place between the “big three.” This was the term given to Stalin, Churchill and Truman, and formerly Roosevelt. They met on multiple occasions and drafted treaties that would allow for the governing of Germany in a post-war capacity. At the Potsdam Conference, which took place in July and August of 1945, it was decided that they would put protocol in place for how best to handle Germany, in light of their May 1945 surrender. The conference was a meeting that took place between Stalin, Churchill and Truman, who had recently become president following the April 1945 death of Franklin Roosevelt. Prior to this, all the meetings had been carried out by the late president, and Truman was walking into whatever potential mess Roosevelt had left him. Truman had the opportunity to meet with Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav M. Molotov. They met at the White House to discuss issues that had risen out of the Yalta Conference, and the belief that the Soviet Union was not holding up their end of the agreement in Poland. When Molotov objected to this, it was said that Truman was very blunt, and when Molotov objected to being talked to in this way, Truman said, “Carry out your agreements and you won’t get talked to like that.”[7] Truman was establishing that he was not to be trifled with and that he would hold the Soviets accountable for their end of the deals struck with his predecessor at the Yalta conference earlier that year. The Yalta Conference had taken place in February and outlined the final stages of World War II in Germany, and how occupation would be handled. It was finally decided that Poland, and the other countries of eastern Europe would be subjected to “…interim governmental authorities broadly representative of all democratic elements in the population…and the earliest possible establishment through free elections of governments responsive to the will of the people.”[8] The Soviets advocated for a communist controlled government in Poland, and were ultimately granted a partial committee, with the promise to quickly include representatives of other political groups in the government. They failed to do this, and Truman was not happy. Several months later at the Potsdam Conference, it was decided that they needed to de-Nazify, demilitarize, decentralize and democratize Germany.[9] There were some objections made by Stalin, who was worried about the hold that the other nations would have, so they agreed to divide Germany. They decided that both Germany and Berlin needed to be divided into zones that would be under French, American, British and Soviet control and guidance.[10] The Soviets had the largest zone, and this was done to partially appease Stalin, who was worried about the capitalistic intent of his fellow conference attendees. R.A.C. Parker examines the relationship between Stalin and the other Allied leaders during WWII, and how this established the status quo during the war and after the war.[11] Stalin’s relationship to the allies was tenuous, which Parker believes that this may have led to the level of appeasement that was show to Stalin when settling the affairs of Germany after the war.  

After the German affairs had been settled by the former Allies, there were several alliances created including NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Warsaw Pact. These were alliance created by the United States and Soviet Union, respectively, to ensure that there were allies to support their goals, the spread of communism, or the opposition to the spread of communism.[12] NATO was established in 1949 after several years of conferences between the United States and the western European powers. The Warsaw Pact was created in 1955 in response to the formation of NATO. Both NATO and the Warsaw Pact were created with mutual defense agreements.[13] They made up what would be called the western and eastern blocs, which were divided by the “iron curtain.” Throughout the Cold War, these two organizations became important in prevention of nuclear warfare, because if one was attacked, it meant all the countries who had signed the treaty were attacked.

In 1946, following the end of World War II and the rise of communism in eastern Europe, Winston Churchill delivered a speech that would ultimately coined the term, “iron curtain,” which referred to the imaginary boarder between east and west, prior to the Berlin Wall’s construction in 1961.[14] His speech has been regarded as an “opening volley,” at the beginning of the Cold War.[15] He delivered this speech while in Missouri. Despite losing re-election in Great Britain, he was still beloved by the Americans, who were also very well aware of the need to ally with the British, to maintain the status quo in Europe, but also aware that the power of England was on the decline, while the power of the Soviet Union and the United States was on the rise. One year later, in September 1947, Andrei(y) Vyshinsky, a spokesman to the United Nations on behalf of the Soviet Union, delivered a speech as well. In his speech, Vyshinsky responded to the call for aid in the war-torn European nations. His remarks would later earn him the office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs under Joseph Stalin. Vyshinsky had served as an official during the Russian Civil War and went on to serve as the Procurater General, as a Soviet law theorist and a wartime diplomat all prior to giving his speech before the United Nations.[16] In his speech, he conveyed his dismay that by allowing the Marshall plan to move forward, the United Nations was allowing Europe to be placed under the control of the United States politically and economically, because they would become dependant on the United States for supplies.[17] Historians have not regarded this as a surprise, because we now have access to declassified Central Intelligence Agency documents that prove the intent the Soviet Union to pull eastern European nations under their control, and to help them by setting them up economically, improving communications and by providing them with leadership and training in order to assure a pro-Soviet attitude following the devestation of World War II.[18]

Historians believe that the origins of the Cold War, aside from being rooted in WWII, were rooted in the struggle between communism and capitalism and the issues between East and West. The Manifesto of the Communist Party was written and published by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in the 1800s. They discuss the key elements to communism and how it could influence politics and the economy. The manifesto outlines the belief that all of history has been a history of class struggles. Marx and Engels wrote, “Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.”[19] These class struggles are the basis for the communist ideology. Communism is defined as, “a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed,” or “a theory advocating elimination of private property.”[20] The principles and ideals expressed in the Manifesto were the basis for communism as it was enacted in the 1917 Communist Revolution. The goal was that private property would be eliminated, as would any sense of elitism, which was associated with the extravagance of the capitalist west.

Many historians have analyzed the communist aspect and dimension in the origins of the Cold War. In 1969, at the height of the Cold War, Joseph Starobin published an article in Foreign Affairs, a magazine that examines international relations. In his article, he looked at the origins of the Cold War. It offers a unique perspective, as it was written during the Cold War itself. He begins by stating the irony that came with younger American historians making headway in their reinterpretation of the Cold War, considering the recent overwhelming of Czechoslovakia in 1968. Historians were just beginning to place responsibility on, “…the mistakes, delusions and imperatives of United States policy…” when the Soviets surprised the world with their invasion.[21] The invasion itself was in reaction to the “Prague Spring” that had taken place in Czechoslovakia. This refers to a brief period where the people of Czechoslovakia experienced a liberalization within a communist country overseen by the Soviet Union. This period was short lived when the Soviet Union deployed around 200,000 Warsaw Pact troops, in the largest show of military force in Europe since World War II.[22] This was a significant clash of democracy and communism in a country that had turned communist by force under Joseph Stalin. John Lukacs analyzes the choices and the effects of world leaders, such as Stalin, in regards to communism and democracy after World War II. He believes that the differences in communist ideology paired with World War II were the origins of the Cold War.[23] In his book, he also discusses the different views of the Cold War from Europe. Some people saw it as a “European Civil War,” but historians seem to have debunked this idea by discussing the importance of the United States in a war against communism, rather than just European nations at war.[24] In doing this Lukacs examines not only other the views of historians, but what could be considered a more public view of the Cold War.

George Quester wrote about the origins of the Cold War by examining the public view. The public formed opinions about the Cold War, and expressed them in many ways, and even more so in the wake of the Vietnam War. The public made a shift after the Vietnam War, they were becoming less supportive of the agenda. The public was beginning to believe that the Cold War itself was equally as senseless as the policies that had been written in 1945. After losing so many of their sons to the Vietnam War and witnessing the effect it had, the American public began to see the Cold War as senseless and “…needlessly combative toward Communist-governed nations.”[25] As the 1970s and 1980s progressed, the American public became more impatient with the American government, and less supportive of the anti-Communist agenda. In his article, “The Origins of the Cold War,” Thomas Paterson elaborates on the changing views the American public had about the war. He says that, “This generally accepted view of the origins of the Cold War, then, depicted a United States forced into an activist international role by external forces, especially by the Soviet threat.”[26] This statement suggests that origins of the war were rooted in a need to play hero and activist against the Soviet threat of communism. Paterson goes on to say that the views changed over time, in light of the decline of McCarthyism, the Vietnam War and the declassification of early Cold War documents.[27] The many different documents included speeches, diaries, memoranda, briefings, telegrams and more from the highest levels of government. The examination of these documents allowed for scholars to form more educated opinions and to inform public opinion and answers to the question of the origins of the Cold War.

It is also important to remember that the way that the Cold War is taught in schools today can be from a slanted prospective. This is also true of books and other writings about the Cold War from the American perspective. In his 1995 article in The Journal of American History, Samuel Walker discusses how the Cold War origins are taught in United States history classes and textbooks. He states, “How college survey textbooks treat the origins of the Cold War is a good indicator of what students learn, or at least what they are told, about the causes and consequences of the American-Soviet conflict. The issues of what caused the Cold War and how Americans perceived Soviet behavior are keys to understanding what followed, because in the early years of Harry S. Truman’s administration, policies, programs, attitudes, and assumptions that lasted for a generation were established.”[28] Keeping this in mind can be a useful tool when writing about the history of the Cold War and its origins, which is something that Arthur Schlesinger also warns about. He says that, “With the passing of old issues and the emergence of new conflicts and contestants, there is a natural tendency, especially on the part of the generation which grew up during the Cold War, to take a fresh look at the causes of the great contention between Russia and America.”[29] It is important to consider that there are multiple historical perspectives that have been applied to the history and origins of the Cold War. Michael Leigh touches on the different schools as they apply to the writing of Cold War history, and in his conclusion, he talks about new modes of research that can be applied, including how political science is influencing the writings and discussion about Cold War history. He expects that it will continue to change the way people understand the Cold War, but warns it could lead to a potential distortion of history.[30] Writing about the Cold War with this perspective has been enlightening to some, but the warning is clear, it can cause issues if there is too much revision made, which can happen if people who lived through the Cold War use a modern perspective to write about the past.

In conclusion, there were many factors and origins that led to the Cold War period that lasted from 1945 until 1991. The causes are rooted further back than World War II, but in reading the history of the Cold War, it is hard to overlook the importance of World War II and the role it played in the Cold War and relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. There is plenty of historical evidence that shows the roots of the Cold War in imperialism and government relations in the nineteenth century between Russia and England, which would be a mantle later picked up by the United States in their desire to prevent the spread of communism. The fights over control of land and resources date back further back than the divisions of Germany following World War II, that took place at the Potsdam conference. The divisions in Germany created the perfect environment for the Cold War. On one side, you had the capitalist democracies of the West and on the other, the communist Soviet dictatorship. The conferences and divisions of land were supposed to keep both sides happy. Stalin could have the east and the west would still fall under the purview of western democracy. There has been a lot of speculation, as well as informed opinion, made by Cold War historians, as well as the public, as to the origins of the Cold War and this examination has just been the tip of the iceberg. The Cold War period did not end until the 1990s. Nearly a half of century after the end of World War II. The two superpower countries of the United States and the Soviet Union would finally come to an agreement that would allow them to co-exist, despite all circumstances and issues that had transpired. Whatever the origins of the Cold War, the end of the Cold War came with a goal. The goal was peace, and the hope was that this peacetime would prevent any potential nuclear winter. Nearly thirty years after the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall, a tenuous peace remains. 

Bibliography

Afghanistan Investment Support Agency. "Market Prospects: A Country Abundantly Rich in Natural Resources." Afghanistan Investment Support Agency. February 22, 2016. http://www.aisa.org.af/Content/Media/Documents/Mining17112014133916625553325325.pdf (accessed August 5, 2019).

Bar-Siman-Tov, Yaacov. "The Strategy of War by Proxy." Cooperation and Conflict, 1984: 263-273.

Central Intelligence Agency . Weekly Summary Excerpt, 23 August 1946, Soviet Military Policy in Eastern Europe. August 23, 1946. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/assessing-the-soviet-threat-the-early-cold-war-years/5563bod1.pdf (accessed August 14, 2019).

Churchill, Winston. Winston Churchill's "Iron Curtain" Speech. March 5, 1946. https://www.historywiz.com/primarysources/ironcurtainspeech.html (accessed August 5, 2019).

Engels, Karl Marx and Frederick. "Manifesto of the Communist Party." Marxist's Internet Archive . February 1848. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf (accessed August 5, 2019).

Gary B. Nash, Allen F. Davis, Peter J. Frederick, John R. Howe, Julie Roy Jeffrey and Allan M. Winkler. The American People: Creating a Nation and a Society. Los Angeles: Pearson Education Incorporated, 2004.

Government Printing Office. "Potsdam Agreement Protocol of the Proceedings, August l, 1945." North Atlantic Treaty Organization. August 1, 1945. https://www.nato.int/ebookshop/video/declassified/doc_files/Potsdam%20Agreement.pdf (accessed August 5, 2019).

Hall, Richard C. "Origins of the Cold War." In Consumed by War: European Conflict in the 20th Century, by Richard C. Hall, 190-207. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2010.

History.com Editors. Churchill Delivers Iron Curtain Speech. July 27, 2019. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/churchill-delivers-iron-curtain-speech (accessed August 12, 2019).

Jr., Arthur Schlesinger. "Origins of the Cold War." Foreign Affairs, 1967: 22-52.

Leigh, Michael. "Is There a Revisionist Thesis on the Origins of the Cold War?" Political Science Quarterly, 1974: 101-116.

Lukacs, John. "The Second World War and the Origins of the Cold War." In The Legacy of the Second World War, by John Lukacs, 161-191. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010.

Maddox, Robert James. "Truman, Poland, and the Origins of the Cold War." Presidential Studies Quarterly, 1987: 29-41.

Merriam-Webster. Communism. 1840. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism (accessed August 15, 2019).

NATO. What is NATO? n.d. https://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index.html (accessed August 15, 2019).

Office of the Historian. Soviet Invasion of Czechoslovakia, 1968. n.d. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/soviet-invasion-czechoslavkia (accessed August 15, 2019).

Parker, R.A.C. The Second World War A Short History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.

Paterson, Thomas G. "The Origins of the Cold War." OAH Magazine of History, 1986: 5-9, 18.

Pavilionis, Richard Giragosian and Peter. "The Great Game: Pipeline Politics in Central Asia." Harvard International Review, 1996: 24-27; 62-65.

Quester, George H. "Origins of the Cold War: Some Clues from Public Opinion." Political Science Quarterly, 1978: 647-663.

Starobin, Joseph R. "Origins of the Cold War: The Communist Dimension." Foreign Affairs, 1969: 681-696.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Warsaw Pact (Europe 1955-1991). April 9, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/Warsaw-Pact (accessed August 16, 2019).

—. Andrey Vyshinsky Soviet Statesman. December 6, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Andrey-Vyshinsky (accessed August 15, 2019).

—. Yalta Conference. January 30, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/Yalta-Conference (accessed August 14, 2019).

Vyshinsky, Andrei. Andrei Vyshinsky, Soviet spokesman, at the United Nations. September 18, 1947. https://www.historywiz.com/primarysources/vyshinsky.html (accessed August 5, 2019).

Walker, J. Samuel. "The Origins of the Cold War in United States History Textbooks." The Journal of American History, 1995: 1652-1661.

---

[1] Gary B. Nash, Allen F. Davis, Peter J. Frederick, John R. Howe, Julie Roy Jeffrey and Allan M. Winkler. The American People: Creating a Nation and a Society. Los Angeles: Pearson Education Incorporated, 2004.

[2] Pavilionis, Richard Giragosian and Peter. "The Great Game: Pipeline Politics in Central Asia." Harvard International Review, 1996: 24-27; 62-65.

[3] Afghanistan Investment Support Agency. "Market Prospects: A Country Abundantly Rich in Natural Resources." Afghanistan Investment Support Agency. February 22, 2016. http://www.aisa.org.af/Content/Media/Documents/Mining17112014133916625553325325.pdf (accessed August 5, 2019).

[4] Bar-Siman-Tov, Yaacov. "The Strategy of War by Proxy." Cooperation and Conflict, 1984: 263-273

[5] Hall, Richard C. "Origins of the Cold War." In Consumed by War: European Conflict in the 20th Century, by Richard C. Hall, 190-207. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2010.

[6] Jr., Arthur Schlesinger. "Origins of the Cold War." Foreign Affairs, 1967: 22-52.

[7] Maddox, Robert James. "Truman, Poland, and the Origins of the Cold War." Presidential Studies Quarterly, 1987: 29-41.

[8] Yalta Conference. January 30, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/Yalta-Conference (accessed August 14, 2019).

[9] Government Printing Office. "Potsdam Agreement Protocol of the Proceedings, August l, 1945." North Atlantic Treaty Organization. August 1, 1945. https://www.nato.int/ebookshop/video/declassified/doc_files/Potsdam%20Agreement.pdf (accessed August 5, 2019).

[10] Ibid.

[11] Parker, R.A.C. The Second World War A Short History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.

[12] NATO. What is NATO? n.d. https://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index.html (accessed August 15, 2019).

[13] The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Warsaw Pact (Europe 1955-1991). April 9, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/Warsaw-Pact (accessed August 16, 2019).

[14] Churchill, Winston. Winston Churchill's "Iron Curtain" Speech. March 5, 1946. https://www.historywiz.com/primarysources/ironcurtainspeech.html (accessed August 5, 2019).

[15] History.com Editors. Churchill Delivers Iron Curtain Speech. July 27, 2019. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/churchill-delivers-iron-curtain-speech (accessed August 12, 2019).

[16] The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Andrey Vyshinsky Soviet Statesman. December 6, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Andrey-Vyshinsky (accessed August 15, 2019).

[17] Vyshinsky, Andrei. Andrei Vyshinsky, Soviet spokesman, at the United Nations. September 18, 1947. https://www.historywiz.com/primarysources/vyshinsky.html (accessed August 5, 2019).

[18] Central Intelligence Agency . Weekly Summary Excerpt, 23 August 1946, Soviet Military Policy in Eastern Europe. August 23, 1946. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/assessing-the-soviet-threat-the-early-cold-war-years/5563bod1.pdf (accessed August 14, 2019).

[19] Engels, Karl Marx and Frederick. "Manifesto of the Communist Party." Marxist's Internet Archive . February 1848. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf (accessed August 5, 2019).

[20] Merriam-Webster. Communism. 1840. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism (accessed August 15, 2019).

[21] Starobin, Joseph R. "Origins of the Cold War: The Communist Dimension." Foreign Affairs, 1969: 681-696.

[22] Office of the Historian. Soviet Invasion of Czechoslovakia, 1968. n.d. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/soviet-invasion-czechoslavkia (accessed August 15, 2019).

[23] Lukacs, John. "The Second World War and the Origins of the Cold War." In The Legacy of the Second World War, by John Lukacs, 161-191. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Quester, George H. "Origins of the Cold War: Some Clues from Public Opinion." Political Science Quarterly, 1978: 647-663.

[26] Paterson, Thomas G. "The Origins of the Cold War." OAH Magazine of History, 1986: 5-9, 18.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Walker, J. Samuel. "The Origins of the Cold War in United States History Textbooks." The Journal of American History, 1995: 1652-1661.

[29] Jr., Arthur Schlesinger. "Origins of the Cold War." Foreign Affairs, 1967: 22-52.

[30] Leigh, Michael. "Is There a Revisionist Thesis on the Origins of the Cold War?" Political Science Quarterly, 1974: 101-116.