Silvia Filip 3rd year American Studies - Russian Response Paper Week 3 After more than 200 years

rs of isolationism, America suddenly became one of the two major actors on the international scene; what is more, it was involved with its counterpart in the Cold War the war of no weapons but of ideologies and economy. Since the U.S.S.R already had a number of allies and of economically dependent satellites, the US also needed supporters. This need was to be fulfilled in a very elegant way: the Western European countries, which were not under Soviet domination, were suffering heavy damages from the Second World War. George Marshall, the American Secretary of State, spoke about the urge to help these countries, and thus the European Recovery Plan (ERP, also known as the Marshall Plan) was created. The western part of Europe was reconstructed with American financial aid and started turning to American standards. One example of these standards is the regime of mass consumption. This new model would bring ideas such as consumer democracy as opposed to planned economy and set new barriers of affordability those of income and power of consumption rather than those of taste. In President Wilsons view, the old order ignored the needs and favored a social hierarchy (the tastes) which was now obsolete. Slowly, this ideas started to be applied in Western Europe, sometimes reluctantly. In my opinion, for most of the European countries, switching to the American model was not easy because it meant giving up centuries of beliefs only to embrace the vulgar mass culture. However, these countries did not have another model to turn to. They needed to avoid Soviet influence, and at that time, there was no other major power that could come up with a model of social order and private life style. Also, they could not resist the American influence because of their lack of unity and solidarity. For instance, siding with Germany against American products would have been unthinkable for the French people. Another point is that these countries were indirectly obliged to accept whatever America brought together with money. Probably the most clear case of resistance was the one of Coca Cola in France. French political leaders who opposed the Americanization (mainly communist ones) tried to ban the most American thing in America and by refusing one of the most well-known American symbols, they somehow defied the power of the US. However, if Europe lacked solidarity, the United States did not. The government intervened in this case and eventually had it its own way.

Silvia Filip 3rd year American Studies - Russian What is interesting to notice is that the communist propaganda against Coca Cola in France did not relate to the fact that the drink was an American product. Probably the common people knew of the US as the big country that helped them with money and saw no problem in consuming American products. Instead, they focused on health and economic issues, which would sensitize the public opinion to (some of) the dangers of accepting this product. It cannot be said that the US was not seeking for influence. However, the main difference between the two superpowers is that, while the Soviet Union imposed everything from political regime to architectural style, foreign languages studied in school and holiday destinations on its partners, America created the empire by invitation. Nevertheless, it was obvious that once the invitation was refused, all mechanisms were set in motion to somehow fix the situation. Also, even though the American model proposed freedom of choice, it did set patterns and standards that were supposed to be followed. Another crucial difference between the two is the approach. If the Soviet one was from above, the capitalist one was from below more subtle and appealing directly to the public. American experts reversed Marxs theories and presented their products in terms of hours of labor needed to buy rather than to produce. I think this is a far more efficient persuasion mechanism and this is why America imposed itself less than the Soviet Union did, despite the fact that it eventually gained more influence (if we think up to our days, for instance). In what concerns foreign policy, I think the Soviet method was very clever: they established cultural relations (maybe the most solid ones, because they are peaceful, not imposed and they are accessible for the public) with countries from all over the world, and many of these relations are still effective today. Despite an apparent cooperation between Soviet Russia and America (in term of official delegations), I think every delegation was sent to spy, to make sure the enemy was not preparing something that could not be defeated. In my opinion, the best way to illustrate the bad relation between the two superpowers is to analyze the situation in Berlin, where a concrete wall was needed in order to divide a nation according to two ideologies.