UMBC HIST355: Unleashing the Insect War

Having read various views of the American war on insects from 1944 to 1962, what do you think ultimately was behind the war?--i.e. what motivations or values propelled these relentless campaigns of extermination? Did Americans just flat out hate "bugs" during the period? Or was there something else going on here? Other thoughts? 

 

UMW HIST300F: The New American Militarism

What does Bacevich say are the root causes of this new wave of American militarism and what are its manifestations? Thinking about some of our earlier discussions, how does this new American militarism differ from the militarism we saw in the 1890s that ultimately helped lead the U.S. into the war of 1898?

UMBC HIST355: The Horrible Wonder of the Bomb

I want to get the discussion started off with a quote that Fiege uses from one of the nuclear scientists. Isidor Rabi explained, "Physicists are the Peter Pans of the human race. They never grow up, and they keep their curiosity."

What is your reaction to this formulation of scientists? Is Rabi's view of the imaginative power of scientists and their inherent innocence simply trivializing the deeper moral implications of the work of the Manhattan Project? For instance, Rachel Carson normally got lost in the wonder of nature as a child, yet her imagination took her on a very different path, shaped by her sense of morality and protecting humanity.

Or is it not so black and white? By shedding light on this overlooked side of the atomic scientists, what is Fiege trying to do?

UMBC HIST355: The Dust Bowl

The notable African-American intellectual, James Baldwin, wrote frequently during the middle of the twentieth century about the social processes by which the "new" immigrants gradually became American. In his estimation, the new immigrants were seduced by the allure of white supremacy as they increasingly loss contact with land and with community. Regimented into the disciplines of industrial work, and having loss previous forms of independence and intimate relationships with land and soil, the new immigrants found white supremacy as the ideal method to gain back the illusion of control in their lives. As Baldwin sees it, white supremacy itself became a confining "factory" for the new immigrants without them even knowing it.

I point to Baldwin's work because it offers us an interesting angle for understanding the social transformations that helped lead to the Dust Bowl in the Southern Plains. Notably, many observers have pointed to this late-nineteenth-century development of American laborers and farmers gradually losing their sense of independence and connections to the land as they were incorporated into industrial and wage-labor sectors or who attempted independence but found little permanence (such as the "suitcase farmers" who came to the Great Plains to exploit the land but not make a home there).

Did the farmers of the Southern Plains lose a connection with the land? If they did, as Baldwin suggests about the new immigrants, what did the farmers embrace in order to gain some measure of control over their lives? In the drive to overproduce in excess and overuse the land, did farmers lose a sense of having something more than just capital invested in the landscape? What happens when we, as human beings, only see the land as potential capital?

UMBC HIST355: Roosevelt Invents the Safari

Teddy Roosevelt: After three days on safari, have yet to take quinine--real American men should go into the tropics without any anti-malarial protection. I firmly believe a sound immune system is the sign of sound physical rigor and moral character.   (May 1, 1909 at 7:43 a.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Feeling feverish. Probably just the heat. (May 2, 1909 at 1:37 p.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Laying down for just a moment to regain my strength. (May 2, 1909 at 6:12 p.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Vomited. (May 2, 1909 at 6:15 p.m.)

[also, click on the image below to see the film of Roosevelt on safari] 

UMW HIST300F: War Crimes and War Hates

This week, you have two critiques of the U.S. military occupations in Haiti and Afghanistan (one far more openly critical than the other). Compare the two takes on wartime abuses by American troops, noting similarities and differences between the particular contexts of alleged and real atrocities. Also consider the "rogue unit" theory versus critiques of systemic problems that facilitate atrocities during occupations. Is the "rogue unit" theory valid or is there more to it? Are these atrocities surprising when considering the nature of colonial occupations?

UMW HIST300F: Link to Rolling Stone Article

Hey guys-- embedded in the image below is the link to the Rolling Stone article that you should read in addition to The Nation article for next Thursday.

UMW HIST300F: Corporate Colonialisms

How do both Adams and Hotchkiss see American corporations as developers of the underdeveloped world? Do they argue that these corporations act in service of the United States? How do they consider the problem of labor on banana and rubber plantations? Other thoughts or questions?

UMW HIST300F: Making the World Safe for Democracy (Empire)?

When Progressives considered American empire-building and war, these two foreign policies challenged their specific moral visions and idealistic dreams of American-led internationalism. How and why did some reformers embrace empire, while others argued against it? Could American Progressivism and the push to spread moral democracy around the globe succeed without an aggressive foreign policy (your opinions are welcomed of course)?

UMBC HIST355: The Extermination of the American Bison

Isenberg identifies a number of critical forces that conspired to nearly wipe out American bison through the nineteenth century--what were some of these forces? We're you surprised? In our own popular culture today, how do we typically understand the factors that nearly destroyed the continent's bison populations? Does Isenberg solidify or further destroy the ecological Indian myth?

UMW HIST300F: Degenerating in the Tropics

 

After reading the first half of Hoganson's work on the Philippines, she offers us examples of how war and empire offered opportunities to American men. After considering those examples, how does Hoganson reveal the rising domestic fears that empire corrupts and causes American men to degenerate? How do the suffragettes' concerns confirm these growing fears? How does Major Sweet respond to the prostitution problem?