Analyzing the effect of military expenditure on economic growth has been an essential task for U.S economists. This thesis analyzed macroeconomic components for the last 70 years by estimating the ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model and vector autoregressive model. To interpret the empirical analysis, historical analysis of the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Wars in the Middle East, was made. One found the negative effect of military spending during wartime on the economic growth of the United States. This thesis suggests that the policymakers and military commanders should focus on shortening the state of war to minimize economic damage to the United States. / Includes bibliography. / Thesis (M.S.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2020. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

This dissertation is a cultural history of total war (ch’ongnyŏkchŏn) mobilization in South Korea from the 1946 outbreak of mass uprisings in the U.S.-occupied southern provinces to the withdrawal of Republic of Korea Army (ROKA) troops from the Vietnam War in 1973. It focuses more specifically on the role of cultural production in programs of anticommunist pacification in postcolonial South Korea. Following the collapse of the Japanese Empire and the division of the Korean peninsula in 1945, U.S. and South Korean elites confronted popular insurgencies in Taegu (1946), Cheju Island (1948-49), and South Chŏlla Province (1948). Acknowledging the mass character of these rebellions, anticommunist ideologues emphasized the importance of campaigns—variously referred to as culture war (munhwajŏn), thought war (sasangjŏn), or psychological warfare (simnijŏn)—targeting the home front (hubang) as a refuge for communist subversion. Cultural production would remain a central element of war mobilization in the subsequent Korean War (1950-1953) and Vietnam War (1965-1973), as well as in the militarized village development schemes of the 1950s and 1960s. In exploring the cultural dimension of unending war in divided Korea, this dissertation draws on a wide variety of documentary media, including roundtables, war correspondence, reportage, travelogues, ethnographies, memoirs, diaries, realist literature, illustrations, photographs, and oral histories, among other such sources. These genres, often sponsored or otherwise influenced by the state, functioned to investigate the historical causes of insurgency and propose suitable modes of prevention. From the mid-1940s to the mid-1970s, such investigations evolved, moving from a post-liberation fixation on repatriated “war victims” (chŏnjaemin) to studies of other displaced groups purportedly vulnerable to communist subversion: refugees, POWs, vagrants, juvenile delinquents, peasants, lepers, and, in the Vietnam War, National Liberation Front (NLF) recruits. In South Korea, documentary media was emblematic of a Cold War “exhibitionary complex” founded upon claims to a pure reality unmediated by ideology. This study argues that the peculiar conditions of divided Korea ensured that anticommunist exhibitions did not just broadcast the messages of power but served in themselves to display and facilitate punishment. I further argue that the functional nature of embedded texts—as mechanisms of identification and surveillance as well as representation—lies behind their value as historical sources. This dissertation also argues for a conception of South Korean militarism (kunsajuŭi) capable of integrating such artifacts of literary, mass, and popular culture. Building on and departing from the foundations of South Korean anticommunist ideology in the 1940s and 1950s, the Park Chung Hee regime (1961-1979) offered a vision of the North Korean enemy as invisibly embedded in the socioeconomic contradictions of the home front. The Park-era discourse of “indirect invasion” (kanjŏp ch’imnyak) projected the masses as a hotbed of potential subversion, encouraging new forms of civilian participation in the militarized development schemes of the 1960s. The participation of non-state actors—whether as philanthropists, entrepreneurs, educators, proselytizers, performers, writers, or artists—in the reproduction and justification of war at home and in South Vietnam throughout the 1960s is one critical aspect of South Korean militarism overlooked in existing studies. This total mobilization of an emergent civil society into war and militarized development, however, produced unintended consequences, obstructing reporters’ attempts to represent the Vietnam War and incentivizing the exploitation of labor export programs and support initiatives aimed at the home front. These contradictions helped fuel the re-emergence, in late 1960s and early 1970s South Korea, of documentary writing as a vehicle of anti-capitalist critique rather than state propaganda.

Edward Mallory "Ned" Almond belonged to the generation of US Army officers who came of age during World War I and went on to hold important command positions in World War II and the Korean War. His contemporaries included some of America's greatest captains such as Omar N. Bradley. While Almond is no longer a household name, he played a key role in Army history. Almond was ambitious and gave his all to everything he did. He was a careful student of his profession, a successful commander at battalion and corps level, a dedicated staff officer, something of a scholar, a paternalistic commander turned vehement racist, and a right-wing zealot. He earned his greatest accolades commanding the American troops who landed at Inchon, South Korea, on September 15, 1950, an amphibious flanking movement that temporarily transformed the nature of the Korean War. A soldier of such accomplishments and contradictions has gone too long without a scholarly biography; this dissertation will fill that void. This biography of Lt. Gen. Edward M. Almond makes a significant and original contribution to the existing historiography by examining his life in the context of the times in which he served. Almond earned tremendous respect throughout his career for his work as a commander and military administrator from his superiors, including Gen. George C. Marshall and Gen. Douglas MacArthur, but his current reputation as the US Army's most virulent racist overshadows all of these accomplishments. Almond's attitude was not unique; racism pervaded both the Army and the United States of his day. His views reflected the dominant view of the rural white South where he grew up, and did not differ much from those of his more famous peers. Almond, however, would never accept the changes his contemporaries and the Army eventually acknowledged. Almond's reactionary posture stands in sharp contrast to the rest of his career, in which he distinguished himself as an innovator open to new ideas. This dissertation will attempt to reconcile that other Almond and show that there was more to him than his bigoted command policies. Almond's career paralleled these developments in American society and changes in the US Army. His highly professional attitude yet stubborn resistance to social change typified the senior military leadership of the era. When those racial attitudes began to change, Almond represented an increasingly outdated ideology that held black men were innately incapable of becoming good soldiers. At the end of a long life and successful career, Almond was better known for his repugnant racial attitudes than for his genuine successes. First, Almond performed better as the commander of the 92nd Division than is commonly reported, despite that unit's significant difficulties in combat. This dissertation will also explore how his experiences with the 92nd Division, and the Army's later desegregation decisions, embittered him toward black soldiers. Second, both success and failure marked his command of X Corps in Korea, and his personal relationships with other officers obscured some of his accomplishments. Third, while serving as commandant of the US Army War College, Almond would tap his rich store of military experience to push the Army toward a greater commitment to joint operations. / History

Dans ce mémoire, il s’agit de développer et d’appliquer une méthode qui peut saisir le manuel scolaire comme objet de l’analyse historique et de l’analyse du discours. La méthode cible le livre seulement et combine des outils littéraires et historiques, quantitatifs et qualitatifs, en essayant de tenir compte de l’expérience du livre. L’analyse porte sur la narration de la guerre de Corée dans les manuels de six pays (Allemagne RDA et RFA, la Chine RPC, les États-Unis, le Chili et l’Argentine) de deux moments différents (1962 et 1992). La guerre de Corée a été un événement majeur de la Guerre froide entre les mondes capitalistes et communistes et a contribué à la course aux armements nucléaires. Elle a installé le modèle de la guerre par procuration comme solution de conflits entre les deux idéologies. Une comparaison large d’un événement précis peut nous donner des indications sur le fonctionnement des différents niveaux de la mémoire d’une société et expliquer des éléments du fonctionnement des cycles historiographiques. / This master’s thesis develops and tests a methodology that tries to understand the textbook as an object of historical and discourse analysis. The method centers primarily on the textbook and combines tools of literary criticism and historical research, using quantitative and qualitative analysis, while trying to capture the reader’s experience of the narrated history. We analyze the narration of the Korean war in the textbooks from six different coun- tries (East and West Germany, mainland China, the United States, Chile and Argentina) at two different times (1962 and 1992). The Korean war has been a major event of the cold war between capitalist and communist world and lead to the nuclear arms race. It introduced the model of the proxy war as a means of conflict resolution between the two ideologies. A larger comparison of a precise event can yield indications about how the different levels of social memory work and can explain elements of of the cycles of historiograph- ical paradigms.

Both the Second World War and the Korean War presented Hollywood with the opportunity to produce combat films that roused patriotic spirit amongst the American people. The obvious choice was to continue making the popular squad films that portrayed a group of soldiers working together to overcome a common challenge posed by the war. However, in the wake of various racial and ethnic tensions consistently unfolding in the United States from 1940 to 1960, it became apparent to Hollywood that the nation needed pictures of unity more than ever, especially if America was going to win its wars. Using combat as the backdrop, squad films consisting of men from all different backgrounds were created in order to demonstrate to its audiences how vital group cohesion was for the survival of the nation, both at home and abroad. This thesis explores how Hollywood’s war films incorporated racial and ethnic minorities into their classic American squads while also instilling the country’s inherent values of democracy.

Dans ce mémoire, il s’agit de développer et d’appliquer une méthode qui peut saisir le manuel scolaire comme objet de l’analyse historique et de l’analyse du discours. La méthode cible le livre seulement et combine des outils littéraires et historiques, quantitatifs et qualitatifs, en essayant de tenir compte de l’expérience du livre. L’analyse porte sur la narration de la guerre de Corée dans les manuels de six pays (Allemagne RDA et RFA, la Chine RPC, les États-Unis, le Chili et l’Argentine) de deux moments différents (1962 et 1992). La guerre de Corée a été un événement majeur de la Guerre froide entre les mondes capitalistes et communistes et a contribué à la course aux armements nucléaires. Elle a installé le modèle de la guerre par procuration comme solution de conflits entre les deux idéologies. Une comparaison large d’un événement précis peut nous donner des indications sur le fonctionnement des différents niveaux de la mémoire d’une société et expliquer des éléments du fonctionnement des cycles historiographiques. / This master’s thesis develops and tests a methodology that tries to understand the textbook as an object of historical and discourse analysis. The method centers primarily on the textbook and combines tools of literary criticism and historical research, using quantitative and qualitative analysis, while trying to capture the reader’s experience of the narrated history. We analyze the narration of the Korean war in the textbooks from six different coun- tries (East and West Germany, mainland China, the United States, Chile and Argentina) at two different times (1962 and 1992). The Korean war has been a major event of the cold war between capitalist and communist world and lead to the nuclear arms race. It introduced the model of the proxy war as a means of conflict resolution between the two ideologies. A larger comparison of a precise event can yield indications about how the different levels of social memory work and can explain elements of of the cycles of historiograph- ical paradigms.

On April 11, 1951, President Harry S. Truman dismissed General Douglas MacArthur as Commander of United Nations forces in Korea. Since the dismissal, contemporaries of the Truman-MacArthur era and historians have tried to make sense of Truman's momentous decision to relieve one of America's greatest military heroes. While a great number of studies have devoted attention to the controversy, few if any have placed the Truman-MacArthur conflict within the context of the unprecedented militarization of American foreign policy that took place during the early cold war. This study departs from the traditional "blame-casting" that has dominated Truman-MacArthur scholarship in the past and concludes that General MacArthur was a casualty who was dismissed because he failed to grasp the global nature of the post-World War II American foreign policy agenda.Chapter One analyzes the literature dealing with the Truman-Macarthur controversy and illustrates why historical scholarship has failed to grasp the larger forces at work in American foreign policy while MacArthur was UN Commander in Korea. Chapter Two traces the tumultuous events of the controversy from the outbreak of war in Korea to MacArthur's April 11 dismissal. Finally, Chapter Three analyzes the Senate hearings that followed MacArthur's dismissal, illustrates the importance of the Joint Chiefs of Staff's testimony, and explores the broader, global issues the Truman Administration faced in transforming its foreign policy while General MacArthur failed to grasp the nature of this transformation. / Department of History

The dismissal of General Douglas MacArthur on April 11, 1951, from all of his commands by President Truman furnished the impetus for this survey of editorial opinion and reaction. The newspaper editorial opinion represents five major daily newspapers with broad geographic coverage of the State of Indiana, plus a wide range of political reaction to the topic. The editorial opinion is also representative ofea diverse socio-economic base.Of the five newspapers, the Evansville Courier was one of two that retained a consistently rational outlook toward the American scene during the Truman-MacArthur conflict. It took the position early that the Korean War should not be expanded, that the chance of an expanding war with China was to be avoided. The Courier expressed its dissatisfaction with the Truman foreign policy record, including the loss of China. It supported executive privilege and roundly attacked MacArthur.The Fort Wayne News Sentinel was very conservative, expertly vindictive, and at times somewhat irrational in its editorial opinion. At other times, its tenor was completely opposite. After fighting had been stabilized at the 38th parallel, it advised moving no further north,thus supporting limitation of the war. The News Sentinel supported MacArthur to the hilt and generally, deplored American negotiations and her "cringing" under Russian communism.The Gary Post Tribune's record in regard to the Truman Administration was that it had failed in its Far Eastern foreign policy and that the policy was unclear. It called MacArthur's dismissal unfortunate, but added that the move was supported in the interest of preserving civilian supremacy and the western alliances. Early in the Senate hearings, it applauded the conduct of those proceedings but as they ground on, pleaded for their end. Imploring its readers to rational thinking, the Post Tribune insisted "Cold Reason Must Rule" and deplored the fact that it felt that negotiation was becoming synonymous with appeasement.The Indianapolis Star's production of editorial opinion was prolific, in comparison to the other newspapers. The Star maintained a consistent conservative Republican approach to all issues. The Truman Administration was condemned for loss of the World War II "Pacific victory," for appeasement and defeatism, and for the formulation and execution of its Far Eastern foreign policy. Russia was seen as the real enemy of America, and early in the Korean War, military limitations were supported but later those same limitations were attacked vigorously. The concept of limiting the war was said to encourage further aggression. The Star advocated the protection of executive privilege, and as the Senate hearings progressed, informed its readers that no new information could be gained from the testimony.Of the five newspapers, the Palladium Item was the most reactionary and irrational. Although, at times, emotionalism and an occasional case of irrationality overcame the News Sentinel and Star, the Palladium Item made a steady diet of those "entrees." In describing the toll of American lives in the Korean War, the paper revealed its nature in the editorial, the "Truman Meat Grinder." Allies were seen as worthless and Truman as a "puppet" of England. The paper insisted that Truman's "hatchet-men" were trying to smear the General's character, because he was a "champion" against "traitorous" elements in America.The editorial reaction of the five papers was conservative and condemned the Truman Administration foreign policy, especially in the Far East. The Evansville Courier and the Gary Post Tribune presented well thought-out opinions based on a rational approach to the frustrations of Americans in the Korean War and adherence to the concept of limited war. The Republican newspapers, the Indianapolis Star, the Fort Wayne News Sentinel, and the Richmond Palladium Item, adhered to the Republican condemnation of the Truman Administration.

<p>My dissertation is an interdisciplinary study of the Korean War stories in America in relation to the history of the national security state of America from the Cold War to post-911 era. Categorizing the Korean War stories in three phases in parallel with three dramatic episodes in the national security of America, including the institutionalization of national security in the early Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the bipolar Cold War system in the 1990s, and the institutionalization of homeland security after the 9/11 attacks, I argue that storytelling of the Korean War morphs with the changes of national security politics in America. Reading James Michener’s Korean War stories, <i>Invasion of the Body Snatchers</i> (1956), and <i>The Manchurian Candidate</i> (1962) in the 1950s and early 1960s, I argue that the first-phase Korean War stories cooperated with the state, translating and popularizing key themes in the national security policies through racial and gender tropes. Focusing on Helie Lee’s <i>Still Life with Rice</i> (1996), Susan Choi’s <i>The Foreign Student</i> (1998), and Heinz Insu Fenkl’s <i>Memories of My Ghost Brother</i> (1996) in the 1990s, I maintain that the second-phase Korean War stories by Korean American writers form a narrative resistance against the ideology of national security and provide alternative histories of racial and gender violence in America’s national security programs. Further reading post-911 Korean War novels such as Toni Morrison’s <i>Home</i> (2012), Ha Jin’s <i>War Trash</i> (2005), and Chang-Rae Lee’s <i>The Surrendered</i> (2010), I contend that in the third-phase Korean War stories, the Korean War is deployed as a historical analogy to understand the War on Terror and diverse writers’ revisiting the war offers alternative perspectives on healing and understanding “homeland” for a traumatized American society. Taken together, these Korean War stories exemplify the politics of storytelling that engages with the national security state and the complex ways individual narratives interact with national narratives. Moreover, the continued morphing of the Korean War in literary representation demonstrates the vitality of the “forgotten war” and constantly reminds us the war’s legacy.</p>

No description available.