No description available.

In the post-World War II period, the population of poor and working-class Chinese New Yorkers––most of whom lived in Manhattan’s Chinatown––drastically increased in size and so too did the range of health problems they faced. This dissertation is the first in-depth historical study of Chinese Americans/New Yorkers’ postwar experiences with health education and activism. It documents the work of Chinese American grassroots activists and medical professionals to establish access to healthcare for Chinatown residents. By analyzing the transnational and cross-class dynamics of this movement, the dissertation challenges the long-standing assumption that the more well-to-do individuals of Chinese ancestry—especially recent professional immigrants from Taiwan and Hong Kong—had little interest in the wellbeing of their poorer counterparts. It also places Chinese New Yorker history alongside the better-known community control movements and health activism in Black and Latinx communities. The dissertation draws from research at 14 archives across the U.S., rare personal papers in Chinese and English, and interviews with over twenty Chinese American doctors and Chinatown activists. Before the mid-twentieth century, Chinese New Yorkers faced inequities in medical education and healthcare due to racially discriminatory policies and practices. From the 1940s to the 1960s, the end of Chinese exclusion and U.S. Cold War geopolitical interests in Asia allowed a select group of Chinese and Chinese American doctors and nurses to enter academic medicine and public health in the city. Chinese American public health nurses attracted public and private funding for much-needed social and health services in Chinatown by leveraging their transnational backgrounds and popular beliefs in the assimilation and integration of nonwhites. Meanwhile, the New York City-based American Bureau for Medical Aid to China and other American groups launched medical aid programs to help train medical personnel for the Nationalist Party and sustain its troops in their fight against the Chinese Communist Party. A subset of Chinese medical graduates from these programs drew from their hybrid credentials, contacts, and linguistic skills to obtain competitive jobs at hospitals and academic medical centers in New York and other American cities. Many of the transplanted Chinese medical graduates had intended to return to China after a short stint of advanced study in the U.S. But they decided to stay as a pragmatic response to political and social upheavals and constraints. Starting in the late 1960s, Chinatown’s rapidly expanding population, as well as the “maximum feasible participation” doctrine of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty initiative, made it strategic for the community watchdog agency, the Lower East Side Health Council-South, to court and include Chinatown residents in the fight for a better and new public hospital—Gouverneur Hospital. Inspired by the Civil Rights movement, workers’ struggles, and health radicalism in Black and Latinx communities, the Chinese American and Afro-Puerto Rican Health Council workers, Thomas Tam and Paul Ramos, implemented community programs and organized highly publicized and disruptive events, including a summer street health fair in Chinatown. Chinese New Yorkers of diverse migratory, class, age, and political backgrounds, including Chinese medical graduates who had the credentials and resources to serve their compatriots, played an integral role in these activities. In 1971, the cross-ethnic, cross-class coalition successfully demanded the opening and hiring of more bilingual personnel at the new Gouverneur. By the late 1970s, efforts led by Thomas Tam and Paul Ramos to bring the medical exam room into the Lower East Side became institutionalized in the form of the Chinatown and Betances Health Clinics. The clinics offered low-cost, comprehensive, and multilingual services, and encouraged professionals and youths of color to serve the community.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Central Florida, 2009. / Adviser: Terri Fine. Includes bibliographical references (p. 120-123).

In this comparative policy development analysis, I utilize path-dependence theory and presidential records to analyze President Lyndon Johnson's success in passing Medicare and Medicaid and President Bill Clinton's failure to pass national health care reform. Findings support four major themes from the Johnson administration: 1) President Johnson had a keen understanding of the importance of language in framing debate; 2) He placed control of the legislative process in the hands of a small, select group of seasoned political operatives and career policymaking professionals; 3) He paid considerable attention to the details of negotiations and the policy consequences; and 4) He had a highly developed sense of the political and legislative processes involved in passing major legislation. The case study of the Clinton administration reveals five major themes: 1) There is a lack of evidence that President Clinton remained actively engaged throughout the policy development and legislative processes, instead choosing to delegate the process to the First Lady; 2) There was a naiveté on the part of the Clintons and many administration staff members with regard to the legal and political ramifications of their decisions; 3) The Clintons tried to make the plan fully their own, sharing little credit for its development with Congress; 4) Their attempts to incorporate existing corporate health care delivery structures with their vision for universal coverage proved unworkable; and 5) The extended time from task force launch to bill delivery gave opponents ample time to marshal their opposition forces. I conclude that in developing health care legislation, Johnson had the advantages of: 1) a small group of key policymakers; 2) multiple, simultaneous legislative initiatives which diffused the attention of a more limited media; and, 3) national crises which promoted an environment conducive to sweeping policy change. I suggest that major, national health care reform will not occur until: 1) an economic or geopolitical crisis sets the stage for change; 2) business interests and progressive interests find common ground; and, 3) Americans achieve a new cultural understanding of universal health care as both economically just and economically necessary. / text

No description available.

No description available.

Master of Arts / Department of History / Donald J. Mrozek / On March 30, 1972 the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) launched a conventional offensive, dubbed the Easter Offensive, against South Vietnam. In response to this act President Richard Nixon ordered the United States Air Force (USAF) and Navy (USN) to resume bombing North Vietnam. For the next nine months, USAF conducted offensive operations against the whole of the DRV in an attempt to accomplish four major objectives. First, USAF units sought to interdict sufficiently the North Vietnamese Army's (NVA's) supply lines to preclude continued conventional operations in South Vietnam. Second, President Nixon had directed the Air Force to inflict sufficient punishment on North Vietnam in order to deter further aggression against its southern neighbor. Third, as implied by the Nixon Doctrine, USAF was to establish convincingly its ability to conduct conventional operations in support of an allied nation during a major conflict. Finally, with the introduction of B-52 bombers in December 1972, the Air Force was to maintain the credibility of manned strategic aircraft as part of American nuclear deterrence policy. Historically, the United States Air Force and many civilian observers have maintained that the United States Air Force succeeded in all four tasks. However, the evidence strongly indicates that the United States Air Force not only failed to achieve all but the interdiction objective during the course of operations against North Vietnam, but that this defeat stemmed from the decision not to develop a comprehensive Suppression of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD) doctrine from 1968 through 1972. In choosing this course of action, USAF's military and civilian leaders guaranteed that American forces would be unable to bring sufficient force to bear to achieve President Nixon's goals. Furthermore, by choosing this course of action and, in addition, refocusing the Air Force on nuclear delivery rather than enhancing USAF's capability to penetrate an integrated air defense (IADS), these same leaders ignored the results of Operation Rolling Thunder. The consequence of this choice, as will be shown in the following pages, was an outcome that had serious implications for the United States' Cold War conventional and nuclear military policy.

Barbara Garson’s controversial play, MacBird!, was written and produced during the Vietnam War era and Johnson administration. The satirical Shakespeare adaptation equates LBJ with Macbeth, the villainous tragic hero who murders his king in order to gain the Scottish crown. The implication that Johnson was responsible for the assassination of JFK created a fury of controversy among critics and the public, as well as the political leaders who were parodied. The play was first published and circulated in 1966 as an underground leaflet. In 1967, it was produced off-Broadway with a cast that featured actors Rue McClanahan, William Devane, Cleavon Little, and Stacy Keach, who won an Obie Award for his performance of the title role. The show launched the careers of these actors. Critics were divided in their reviews of the play’s literary merit, but all seemed to agree that the piece was shocking and significant because it flew in the face of patriotism and of reverence for presidential authority. At the time of its production, acclaimed theater critic Robert Brustein named MacBird! “the most explosive play” of the Sixties theater movement. This dissertation presents the history of the play, within its social and political setting, from its inception through its production and abrupt disappearance at the peak of its success, which coincided with the assassination of Robert Kennedy. Relying upon methodology that includes primary and secondary sources, as well as interviews with the playwright and others involved in the play, this work presents the publication and production history of MacBird!, public and White House response to the play, a contextual analysis under a feminist lens, and a final chapter on MacBird! as a precursor to feminist adaptations of canonical works, Sixties-era Macbeth adaptations, and the notable women whose work intersected in MacBird! MacBird! was a tremendous event in theater history; it belongs at the fore of adaptation studies, particularly Shakespeare and feminist adaptation studies; it is a prime model of performance as a political tool and therefore earns a central place in performance studies; and because it is an attack on patriarchal power and a rare example of a Sixties radical play written by a woman, Barbara Garson needs to be recognized among remarkable women of theater. / text

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T18:16:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Maira Cinthya Nascimento Ezequiel.pdf: 683377 bytes, checksum: f0d27e8c791fe6f4cea2b427509e9bf5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007-03-02 / This investigation searches for the effects of meaning resultants from the use of plasticity as a method for creating the visuality in the movie Barry Lyndon, by Stanley Kubrick (1975), and, at the same time, the intersemioticity that emerges from the blending of the aesthetic languages of cinema, painting and literature here involved. Concerning the methodology, it is based on a group of aesthetic and semiotic theories which include, especially, the model for analysis of meaning in visual arts proposed by Erwin Panofsky, the bonds between cinema and painting noted by Jacques Aumont, the concept of effect of realism such as formulated by Roland Barthes and of intersemiotic translation introduced by Roman Jakobson (and later redeveloped by Julio Plaza). The aim of this research is to follow the process of production of a realistic effect on the passages between one language and another. The hipothesis risen is that the strong sense of verosimilitude that results from the final product borrows its mode of installation from some of the eighteenth century realistic French painting. The choice of the movie is due to its stated visual exuberance as a result of a sophisticated dialogue established between the careful light capture and the rigorous use of pictorial references in correspondence with the historical time of the action, precisely the works Constable, Courbet, Corot and the so-called Barbizon Painters. Finally, Por fim, it drafts na approach between Kubrick s work and the idea of Modernity as thought by Baudelaire / O trabalho investiga os efeitos de sentido decorrentes do uso da plasticidade como método de construção da visualidade no filme Barry Lyndon, de Stanley Kubrick (1975), e, em paralelo, a intersemioticidade resultante do entrecruzamento das linguagens do cinema, da pintura e da literatura aí em jogo. Metodologicamente, ampara-se num conjunto de teorias estéticas e semióticas que envolvem, principalmente, o modelo de análise do significado nas artes visuais proposto por Erwin Panofsky, as aproximações entre o cinema e a pintura feitas por Jacques Aumont, o conceito de efeito de real tal como formulado por Roland Barthes e o de tradução intersemiótica introduzido por Roman Jakobson (e depois retomado por Julio Plaza). O objetivo da pesquisa é acompanhar o processo de produção de um efeito de real nas passagens entre uma e outra linguagem. A hipótese é que o forte efeito de verossimilhança que resulta deste filme toma emprestado da pintura realista francesa do século XVIII seu modo de se instalar. A escolha do filme deve-se à constatação de sua exuberância visual como resultado de um sofisticado diálogo estabelecido entre a minuciosa captação da luz e o rigor na utilização de referenciais pictóricos encontrados na pintura correspondente ao tempo da ação, mais precisamente nas obras de Constable, Courbet, Corot e dos Pintores de Barbizon. Por fim, esboça-se uma aproximação entre o trabalho de Kubrick e o que Baudelaire chamou de Modernidade

During the 1960's Guatemalan stability began to falter due to a political and social breakdown; guerilla violence and government repression emerged from this decade as common occurrences. In response to the instability within Guatemala, the US focused on providing significant financial aid to bolster a weak economy, while simultaneously working with the Guatemalan police and military to create more efficient and modern internal security forces capable of combating Communist subversion. Despite US attempts to foster stability, in 1963 President Miguel Ydigoras Fuentes was removed from office by a military coup organized by his opponents within Guatemala. The Lyndon B. Johnson administration continued to support the Guatemalan government and continued to provide economic and military assistance. Despite US assistance, the internal social and political divisions in Guatemala continued to result in violence. In the midst of the escalating violence, elections were held in 1966 and the center left candidate Julio Cesar Mendez Montenegro was elected as the new president of Guatemala. The election of a politically left president further radicalized the Guatemalan right, which resulted in attempted coups and acts of terror. The violence from the leftist guerillas and the radical rightist elements forced Mendez Montenegro to allow the military to use harsh counter-terror strategies to bring the country under control. Despite negative developments, the US consistently tried to help build Guatemalan stability. Unfortunately, its policies ignored the socio-economic inequalities, and internal division which was the biggest problem facing the nation. The internal political division that created the violence and instability made it impossible for any US assistance to have a meaningful impact. During the 1960's these developments in Guatemala paved the way for the violence and genocide of the 1980's and solidified a policy of US involvement that was inadequate and ineffective.