Welcome to Pre-IB World History Blog, 2008-09 School Year
Hey Freshies!
A blog is where you can have a virtual discussion and debate on key issues. This blog is specifically centered around the unit of study we are covering. Hence, the first postings will deal with the End of the Cold War.
This is a tool for you to use to challenge your own thoughts, students as well as your teacher. Please, be RESPECTFUL of other perspectives as well as INSIGHTFUL on your own!
Good Luck,
was
posted by Was @ 11:04 AM
22 Comments:
What is the purpose of the Revolution in '49? What was it's impact?
What is Gustav Husak's role in the Cold War?
Hey was i think this is a cool way to get to think about a subject from many different perspectives.
The purpose of the Revolutionof 1949 was the de facto overthrow of the Chiang's gov. With that, Mao was able to solidify a communist China in the city of Beijing. To cement this state, Mao orchestrated the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution.
Husak was like a "Little Brezhnev" in Czechoslovakia. He brought any hope of economic or political reform found in Prague Spring to a humiliating defeat.
Thanks Jessica T. The goal is to get you guys thinking without my leadership. Independent thought is much better than my thoughts
Would you say that the US made a mistake of ignoring that Mao Zedong was the new comm. leader? (Open to anybody.)
Im not sure. that is a good question. was?
let me explain. if we reconized zedong,the ussr would not have left the security council. this means that we would not have participated in the korean war and south korea would be communist. on the other hand, the soviets would not have felt so hostile toward us because we accepted communism. i cant decide which is better. anyone else have any ideas or info i left out?
well Riahz and meg if any other president but nixion would have recognized red china then they would have been accused of being communist. so i think that the US waited until the right time to recognise it. but Meg the fact that South Korea is not communist is better because our policy was containment....correct me if im wrong Was.
Here's my blurb: According to Was, CKS was a pretty bad guy, but since he wasn't a communist, the US was okay with his government. As for Mao, he was a communist, and according to containment, if you recognized the Mao's government, you'd be accused of being a communist. So, with ping pong diplomacy, Nixon was able to talk to Mao, and was able to understand his perspective, and that ended up leading to Red China's recognition in the UN. Unfortunately, that meant Taiwan was unrecognized, since it was (and still is) "enemies" with China. Currently, Taiwan is trying to get back in the UN, but since China is on the security council, the US is scared to re-recognize it, because it would be a declaration of war, so as of now there's no chance for them. =/
PS: I'm Taiwanese, so don't hurt me for a little bit biased toward the tiny island of the coast of China.
thatt makes since. but if the us did reconize zedong, wouldnt the SU have more respect for the US, which would ease the tesion, and possibly even end the cold war over time? and didnt china have a thing or two to do with the korean war?
Actually, I think one of the causes of détente was the US recognizing Red China. There was definitely an ease of tension since a democratic country recognized a communist country.
well honestly if we would have recognized red china then it would go against the policy of containment. and the only reason we did finally recognize them was so they would sign SALT 1 leading to the process of detente...so actually we did recongnize them in order to get "respect" or kinda trick su into salt 1 and also plus the socialist china was only in taiwan so it really wasnt the gov't of "CHINA" it was red china and Taiwan was just rebelling.
In the Cold War, yes, China did have a part in it. Korean war: they were for the North(communist) along with the SU.
And Emiy that was not biased at all in my opinion.
so we still havnt decided which was better?
exactly the soviet had to back off a little because of the fact that we did recognize them
If as in better, you mean the 2 different governments of China, I'll have to go with CKS. Yes, Mao was kinda the stepping stone for how China is now, but honestly to me CKS made China seem a lot more relaxed. But hey, that;s just me.
I agree with Emily. Though there was tension with the Soviets, CKS did have a more "space of freedom" in a since. Especially compared to Mao.
Also recognizing Mao in my opinion is somewhat of a stalemate of containment vs enforcement. Would we take the chance? And would it heighten the oh-so-fragile balance? If you get my drift. But yes that would be considered undecided.
Random fact: he(Mao) had a book after himself "the red book" and the citizens had to have it with them at ALL times. That to me is pretty ridiculous.
On China: don't forget that China was recognized for ECONOMIC reasons as well. Those Chinese loved our goods. Today, ironically, we are addicted to each other.
Hey Was
i really like how u have different ways for ur students to understand and learn about history
THANKS!!!!
Was how did we break that bond of tension? China no being one of our main trades/business? Or is that a whole different topic?
What is the conservitive historian's perspective on the Cold War?
Hey guys this is my first post...it's Leanna. Was I just want to say thanx for the blog. It's soooo cool and really helpful.
Post a Comment
<< Home