1 / 0

American Identities in a Divided America

American Identities in a Divided America. Outline. The 1950s sense of unity The (Dis)integration of national identity? John Higham’s argument (1974) What happened to homogeneity ? Technology and the question of American character An increasing sense of division?.

janina
Download Presentation

American Identities in a Divided America

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. American Identities in a Divided America

  2. Outline The 1950s sense of unity The (Dis)integration of national identity? John Higham’s argument (1974) What happened to homogeneity? Technology and the question of American character An increasing sense of division?
  3. The 1950s sense of unity
  4. The “homogeniety” of the 1950s Homogeneity? The 1950s Cold War Consensus Class convergence (?) Liberals All John Kouwenhoven and David Potter
  5. David Potter,People of Plenty 1954 US shaped by special circumstance Excess land, food, Grew faster than other economies 1776-1950. National traits shaped by plenty Optimistic, “can-do,” future orientation Mobile - opportunity seeking Work will bring success Reject state as solution Embrace and develop advertising
  6. Kouwenhoven Focus on architecture & material culture A National Style - design characteristics Vernacular, not high style Grid Improvisation within a structure Process not product Modularity
  7. 1960s: Critiques of Kouwenhoven and Potter White Americans Civil Rights Movement Social class Women? Ethnic minorities Tend to assume national unity and describe it, rather than prove it exists Shift toward studies of smaller groups Community, not the nation Diversity, not unity
  8. The (Dis)integration of US History?
  9. John Higham, “Hanging Together” 1974 American Historical Association presidential address Against backdrop of shift to micro-histories (ethnic-labor-women, etc.) Searching for general patterns to explain unity But young scholars focusing on diversity
  10. Higham 1. Primordial unity 17th c. Americans bound to neighbors, to kin Linked to a specific place Not necessarily an ethnic feeling Settler communities in mid west Distinct Indian tribes (not Pan-Indian ethnicity) “modern ethnic group is a federation of primordial collectivities”
  11. Higham, pp 7-82.0 Ideology Ideology is nottradition Ideology not mythology an explicit system of beliefs that provides A shared identity A common program of action A sense of history A standard for self-criticism
  12. Higham 2.1 Religious ideology Evolves from 18th century Specific beliefs for each denomination Endless debate and splits, e.g. about transubstantiation Inclusive truths Free choice of Xtian faith, but should be Xtian Providential guidance of the nation toward a better society - I.e. Kingdom of God was secular Ritual form: the camp meeting
  13. Higham 2.2 Political ideology Also evolves from middle 18th century Multiplicity of groups Checks & balances Collective mission to improve nation Passion for individual liberty Against strong central power Ritual forms: political conventions
  14. Higham 3Unity through technology Developing from early 19th century Embrace of rationalization Diffusion of technical values
  15. Higham 3.1 “In subjugating matter through the aid of mechanism, human beings come more and more to resemble God.” Substitution of technique for principles Technical integration as unity Realization of perfection in material world Technological sublime
  16. Photograph by Lewis Hine, 1930
  17. Technology and homogeneity?
  18. 1950s and 1960sDid Technology Homogenize? Fears of standardization Ford Telephone Levittown & Suburbia “Little Boxes” "A Day's Output of Model Ts, Highland Park," 1915.
  19. Life MagazineLevittown House and family, 1948
  20. Levittown today Houses transformed Retain high real estate value http://tigger.uic.edu/~pbhales/Levittown.html
  21. Modified houses
  22. Homogenization? Supermarket Multi channel e-marketing Food at Ellis Island
  23. An Increasing sense of Division
  24. US House Seats, after 2010 election
  25. Who supported which party in 2010? Democrats Republicans Cities of 500,000 or more 50,000 – 500,000 10,000 – 50,000 Less than 10,000 Whites in South Aged 18-29 Source: New York Times,10 Nov. 2010 65% 34% 53 47 44 56 36 64 27 73 58 42
  26. American Anti-urban Tradition Jefferson Thoreau, Emerson Middle landscape Flight to suburbs, from c. 1840 Cities viewed as corrupt, dangerous But, Rural US in 19 c not always conservative Emerson, Thoreau, etc. supported abolition
  27. Democrats Women African Americans Hispanic Americans Asian Americans Educated whites Under 35 Unions Urban Is this a Coalition?
  28. Republicans Evangelicals Conservative Catholics Wall Street “Dixicans” Elderly Rural areas Suburban whites Is this a Coalition?
  29. Conclusions
  30. Conclusions (1) Americans exaggerate their differences War and Crisis forge (temporary) consensus World War II and Cold War During Vietnam divisiveness reasserted Polarization increased after 1990 Persistence of older patterns – eg religion Edwards and Franklin
  31. American polarization Love of mechanical perfection Multicultural Value Diversity Ecumenical State needed as regulator Want Social Security, Medicare Philanthropic Support gun control Pro-choice Pastoral (anti-urban) Melting pot Value Standardization Fundamentalist Religion Local control, anti-statist Individualistic Resistance to Welfare Right to bear arms Anti-abortion
  32. aftertheamericancentury.blogspot.com/
More Related