How accurate is it to say that, in the years 1941-80, the impact of war and the Cold War brought

about a decline in the confidence the nation had in the presidency.

Plan:
1. Vietnam and Korea caused great distrust with the government. “Who are you going to kill
today?” outside Johnson’s window. Ho Chi Mihn Trail 1968. The decline in confidence
the president was really protecting the American people. Drafting of US soldiers.
2. The WW2 and Cold War united the presidency and its people. Trueman spoke out for
the fears Americans had of the USSR. Presidents are meant to respect and invoke the
will of the people. JFK’s resolve in Cuban Missle crisis made US and JFK seems strong
and capable. Role of the Truman Doctrine.
3. Decline in confidence as a result of the Red Scare in early 50s. Great fear of
communists. Rise of Mcarthysism, made the political elite look like they lost control.
Essay:

The Cold War and various wars the USA fought in between 1941 to 80 greatly affected the
nation’s confidence in the presidency as is common there there are times of turbulance even if
the reasons for its cause are external. Confidience in the presidency can be defined as the idea
of how much the citizens of America trust their leader as well as if they feel the leader is capable
of running their country. The cold war and warfare in general seems to have brough about a
decline of the presidency despite the fact that presidents like Truman were able to capatlise on
American fears of commiunism, we wil explore the effect of the Redscare and the distrust of
American foreign entanglement and intervention.

The Vietnam war and the Korean war to a lesser extent played a part in damaging American
confidence in the presidency. This seems to have resulted from the high death count that
presidents such as Johnson were willing to have in return for their policy of containment outlined
in the Trueman doctrine. The Ho Chi Mihn Trail of 1968 witnessed a great North Korean
offesnive that only worsened a prolonged war that resulted in 100s of throusands of casualties.
It was not only America casulaties in Vietnam and Korea that caused problems in the US
domestically, it was also the treatment of the enemy. America made use of weapons such as
napalm in order to kill off entire villages in the hope of neutralising Vietnemese gorrila forces.
While its effectivness was muted, it riled up the American public. Protests took place outside of
president Johnson’s window with them shouting the words “who are you going to kill today Mr
Johnson?”. It is clear that the 1950s and 60s saw a shift in how the president was perceived. In
the beginning of the war the period, the 40s, Roosevelt was elected president again despite his
refusal to join the Secound World War, which the USA was eventually forced into in Pearl
Harbour. Roosevelt may have lied about the reality that was quickly materialising, sending “our
boys to foreign shores” in his words, it did not seem to harm the American people’s confidence
in him substianitallly. The key difference was by the 50s 60s and even 70s, the wars, such as
Vietnamn, were part of America’s proactive foreign policy that saw them strong-arming polities
in order to stop them from becoming communist. This was not to people’s taste by 1980. They
did not seem to want their boys dying in foreign lands unless it was really important, many
people did not seem to see Vietnam was important considering the number of protests. By
1980, the people’s confidence in the presidency seems to have declined substantially as a
result of the war in the period. People were fed up with loosing their sons and brothers in wars
that they did not believe were important in contrast to the Secound World War which was forced
upon America. As such, in this respect people did loose their faith in the president’s ability to
function properly as a leader as a result of their negligence of foreign policy and the rash moves
they made in Korea and Vietnamn especially.

Some Americans felt more confidence because of the fear of communism and the USSR
especially in the 40s 50s and 60s which directly resulted from the tensions of the Cold War. In
1941 communism was not such a worry for the average American compared to the early 1950s.
By 1952 the Red Scare was in full swing and presidents had to become more hardline
accordingly. Even by the closing months of the Secound World War Amercian focus began to
shift onto the USSR. The presidents at the time, therefore, were wanted because they were
‘tough on communism’ and their approach to the Cold War reflected that. Truman, already by
1945 and 46, had began to realise the threat commmunisim posed, or was seen to pose, the US
way of life. His policy of containment, making sure communsim does not spread to other
countries, seems to have helped calm down the public in the long-term. While there was
growing fears of communists the government, there was not any fear that the presidents were
communist. Eisenhower was elected in 1952 because of his military career and experince of
foreign policy, he seemed to act as a reassuring figure as his character and background made
him a good anti-communist candidate. President Kennedy is a similar story. His resolve during
the Cuba Missile Crisis is a good example of how the role of the president had changed, yet
society had certianly not lost fiath in their leader. Kennedy commanded great loyalty partly
because of his lack of willingness to back down in Cuba. His aggressive stance towards the
USSR earned him more confidence not less. While the types of presidents changed from the
days of Roosevelt in the sense that they became more hardline towards the USSR and left-wing
politics, it was this changed that helped maintain the public’s confidence in the president as
they, as stated previously, voicing and addressing the changing concerns of the people; the
concern at the time was communism as a result of the Cold War. Yet while one could argue that
there was an increase in confidence in the presidency during the late 40s and whole of the 50s,
Vietnam seemed to fundamentally change this relationship between Americans and the
president (there was a blip surrounding the mania of the Secound Red Scare which had a short-
term impact on presidents and how they were perceived). Presidents seemed to have become
to hardline in their approach to the Cold War and their warmongering made them look as if they
saw their young mens’ lives as arbitary. The brutality of the wars that America volenterry stuck
themselves in lost many peoples’ conmfidnece in a competent president. However, this does
not dissuade from the fact that before Vietnam confidence was maintained or even increased as
a result of the presidents’ increasingly hardline approach to the USSR in the Cold War.

A general lack of confidence in the government and president as result of the Secound Red
Scare and the fear of the USSR, declined significantly in the early 1950s; however, it was a
small short-term factor that had great ramifications but not for the America’s confidence in the
president. By the early 50s there had been growing concern of potential communist (mostly
foreign Soviet) spies in the USA. When McArthur said he had evidence of 205 members of the
state department that were communist, the rising tensions reached new heights internally in the
USA. Suddenly there was growing discontent. There was a general lack of confidence in the
government, which obviously included the president as he is the head of the government. Why
would someone want to trust the state if they are worried of communist infiltration? Why would
they trust the state that seems to be falling to communisim? It is not wonder that in the short-run
there was a decrease in confidence in the presidency and the government as a whole. While not
everyone may have been convinced that there was wide spread communist infiltration as a
result of the Cold War and USSR, there was clearly the sense of uncertainty and a lack of trust
in the government. However, this uncertainty, when discussing confidence in the president, was
short lived as by 1954 McArthur’s bogus evidence was debunked in a televised trial and almost
overnight the accusations were dropped officially. While the residue of the scare remained for
several decades, the majority of its negative affect’s on confidence of the presidency and the
government as a whole were dropped. As a result, the absolute fear that was involved in the
Cold War was short lived and did not substantially affect the presidency. If one contrasts this to
the general content with the president and their changing attitudes in the 40s and 50s, it seems
that while there were some blips in these two decades, confidence remained high and even
increased for a time. Yet, these new gains that the presidents exploited were short-lived. Their
warmongering and adhearnece to the Truman Doctrine meant American boys were stuck in
Vietnam and the resulting political fallout was immense. Confidecne in the presidency was
arguably shattered. In contrast to the small blip resulting from the Secound Red Scare, this
aspect of the Cold War seems very minor compared to Vietnam or the Cuban Missile Crisis. By
1960 this small event had almost no direct impact on the confidence of the presidency, in many
ways it helped the presidents as they could say they were hardliners and get elected.

The Cold War and various wars between 1941 and 1980 saw confidence increase in the 1940s
and 1950s. The growing fear of communism and success of the Secound World War was a
banner for the president’s to rally their supporters behind. However, by 1980 the exploitation of
Amercian fears of communism came back to bite the presidents. In a bid to adhere to the
American demands for a weak USSR and unsuccessful communist states, the USA participated
in foreign interventions which led them to be bogged down in Korea and particularly Vietnam.
The overly zealous hawks that the presidents had become may have won the confidence of
their supporters early on the 1940s and 50s, yet by 1980s this confidence was clearly gone. It
would be too simplistic to say the Cold War and warfare the USSR participated in was simply
the cause of the presidents’ downfal in confidencel, the opposite was true, it was more the
overextentision and warmongering nature of the presidents that led to the drop in confidence by
1980, yet this was clearly caused by the presidents’ reaction to the Cold War and its related
wars including Vietnam and the Secound World War.