Part III-1_Notes

Part III-1_Notes - Part III David Farbers Taken Hostage...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Part III: David Farber’s Taken Hostage & Andrew Bacevich’s The New American Militarism Taken Hostage: Intro: -Iran Hostage Crisis November 4, 1979-January 20, 1981 -happened faraway and caused little immediate pain to any of the hostages -public concern, emotional outpouring, and simple fascination, the Iran hostage crisis captivated American people more than any other of the era’s difficulties -ongoing solidarity -symbol of our inability to control our fate, maintain our dignity, and pursuer out independent course in the world -ineptitude of Carter administration> U.S. lost its way economically, culturally, politically, and even militarily thesis: how the political context of the late 1970s reduced the administration’s options in managing and resolving the crisis and how Americans made sense of the crisis within their understanding of America’s predicament -people back then felt that they were being held hostage by the OPEC cartel and stagflation -outpouring of empathy shows the powerful desire for a bonded national community -Carter struggled to respond to the theocratic impulses of Islamic fundamentalism within the prevailing Cold War paradigm -saw the real battle as against secular modernism and they recognized that the US was the major force spreading this cultural and political creed throughout the world -media misrepresentations of the struggle and mass media manipulation of Americans> played on emotions Chapter 1: Crisis, Chaos, and Jimmy Carter -time of despair: inflation up, employment down, oil prices out of control, factories closed (several national difficulties) -national uncertainty and disillusionment -culture wars, economic expectations upended, radical mass movements -Cold War ideological unity was broken>hesitance to make international commitments because of failure in Vietnam -uncertainty of our role in the world as a defender of democracy -Carter portrayed as incorruptible and dedicated to serving the people of the US -fall of the Shah of Iran and subsequent taking of hostages at the US embassy in Tehran by followers of the Islamic fundamentalist marked the failure of the administration -takeover was a defensive act to protect the Iranian revolution from American interference -problems with congress because of the immense growth of the executive branch -media attacks>public discontent, opinion polls dropped unprecedently low -July 15 th speech: “crisis of confidence” & “loss of unity of purpose for out nation” -administrative reshuffling and rethinking summer 1979
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Chapter 2: The Shah, Khomeini, and the “Great Satan” -American power in full force in the form of military might, weapons sales, and capital investment -continued to play a fundamental role in maintaining the Shah in power -all over the developing world in the 60s and 70s, revolutionaries, reactionaries, and people caught in the middle castigated the US for using its economic and military might to control other nations’ destinies in its relentless pursuit of wealth and power
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 10

Part III-1_Notes - Part III David Farbers Taken Hostage...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online