Ideological Construction of Citizenship in the Post War Us
-
Upload
nindze5173 -
Category
Documents
-
view
74 -
download
0
Transcript of Ideological Construction of Citizenship in the Post War Us
AMST 3253WMidterm Exam
Ideological constructions of citizenship in the post-WWII United States
“A formulation of the political state and of citizenship that, as Marx put it in the "Jewish Question," abstracts from the substantive conditions of our lives, works to prevent recognition or articulation of differences as political - as effects of power - in their very construction and organization; they are at most the stuff of divergent political or economic interests.” – Wendy Brown1
It could be argued that far from universal, inclusive category, citizenship is always actively
constructed, defined, compromised, and readjusted in relation to political and ideological forces.
The notion of citizenship implies rights, privileges, and obligations in particular community,
typically nation-state. The history of the United States illustrates the gap between the ideal of
citizenship and lived realities of citizens. For example, Lipsitz states that in the United States “true
cultural franchise and full citizenship requires white identity (1998: 71). However, the practices of
inclusion and exclusion in the full citizenship or identity markers that bring one closer towards that
ideal are contested and changing. Post-WWII and post-Vietnam eras serve as examples of
ideological redefinitions of citizenship. In this paper I will argue that race, gender, sexuality and
class are powerfully redefined in the post-War periods privileging particular identities and
constructing “ideal citizens” that are in line with capitalist, national, and cultural politics of the
time.
In the US, the period after WWII is characterized by economic growth, prosperity and world
leadership. The economic growth has been fueled by capitalizing on the war economy and
providing various government subsidies for personal consumption, as well as large scale
infrastructure projects, such as highways and rise of suburbia. However, what on the surface
appeared as mass prosperity and social harmony, underneath it hid various exclusions and
inequalities. Women, which temporarily occupied industries during WWII were actively recruited
1 Wendy Brown, “Wounded Attachments,” Political Theory, 21, no. 3 (1993): 391.
1
into domesticity in order to make space for men to have jobs. The mass affluence was also not
accessible to all – African-Americans and various ethnic minorities were excluded through various
mechanisms of segregation. For example GI Bill, that is often cited as one of the important state
interventions which fueled economic growth and middle-class prosperity was largely inaccessible to
African Americans.2 The full citizenship was increasingly attached to middle-class consumption,
whiteness and suburban family life – idealized representations of which could be seen in the 1950s
TV shows such as The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet.
However, the economic prosperity and economic growth cannot be separated from the Cold
War logic that fueled the economy and technological innovations as well as certain ideological
constructions of citizenship. According to Serlin, medical innovations such as Dreyfuss hand and
various prosthetic devices allowed returning WWII veterans to “challenge the emasculation often
2 “One does not require a particularly acute historical sense to surmise that the GI Bill was built on premises of both
legal and de facto inequality; the certainty that blacks would encounter racial restrictions in moving to claim their benefits was surely understood by the political architects of the measure” (pg. 105) Hilary Herbold, “Never a Level Playing Field: Blacks and the GI Bill,” The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, no. 6 (1994-1995): 105.
2
associated with their amputation” (16). Simultaneous construction of femininity and domesticity
was accompanied by the construction of masculinity. Serlin states that “the two constituent aspects
of the male body – its relation to productive labor and its relation to heterosexual masculinity – took
on increasing significance”(24). Those that felt emasculated by the war injuries could now rely on
technology in order to prove their “manliness and self-reliance” (46). The hierarchies of disability
with gendered implications got established as well – work and war related injuries became sources
of pride, while the inherent disabilities remained symbols of monstrosity (35). Post-WWII was a
also a period of mass paranoia – against communists, homosexuals, and various other “deviants” –
fueled by people like Sen.McCarthy which resulted in uniformity, secrecy, social control and (self)
policing. The military’s practice to discharge those suspected of “homosexual behavior or for
otherwise unmasculine psychological or physiological traits” (39) could be seen as being applied in
the larger society as well.
All the above examples points out to particular ideals of citizenship and hierarchical value
system of which citizens are valued over others. White, heterosexual, middle-class men were
privileged subjects of the state and were used as models of ideal citizenship. Such ideals were also
used to fight ideological Cold War battles and fuel consumerism, cultural politics, and
“hypernationalism” (2) of the post-WWII.
Contrary to WWII, the US states after Vietnam War was in the very different place
politically, economically, and culturally. Vietnam War was defeat, but not only militarily, but also
socially domestically in terms of dissident and general social unrest that war has fueled. Social
ideals carefully crafter in the post-WWII period has disintegrated, those that were previously
silenced and invisible demanded rights and recognition and economy was reaching stagnation. The
1960-1970s were some of the most tumultuous years in the US history. However, by the late 1970s
the war was over, large social movements became smaller and less radical, and conservative
3
backlash was about to start. The figure of the veteran, contrary to WWII veteran who even with
disability was able to symbolize power, progress, and national unity/destiny, was much more bleak.
This has been reflected in post-Vietnam films, such as Apocalypse Now, and various media
representations – fragile, self-abusive, and depressed. Vietnam veterans reflected the state of the
United States.
With the elections of Reagan in 1980 concerted effort to recuperate white heteromasculinity
was launched. Reagan attempted to rewrite history and fuel patriotism by insisting that Vietnam
war, like all wars, was heroic and meaningful. Reagan was promising the return to idealized past –
before civil rights movements – where white men had almost total control of racialized and
gendered social order (Lipsitz, 75). Patriotism served to reassemble that identity – either through
internal or external enemies and deviants. According to Lipsitz “patriotism has often been
constructed in the United States as a matter of a gendered and racialized obligation to paternal
protection of white family” (75). Furthermore, the economic downturn and deindustrialization could
be blamed on radicalism of the previous generation and loss of American character and values,
instead of corporations in search for greater profits. Women and ethnic minorities had to be pushed
back and disciplined often being disproportionately affected by increasing privatization and
dismantling of the welfare state. The class war (which was a hidden reality of the Vietnam war)
intensified during the Reagan years. Reagan claimed that “ending government regulation would free
the private sector to find market-based solution to social problems” (92). However, the free market
solutions instead of alleviating increased inequalities, often marginalizing those that did not fit the
notion of ideal citizenship. The white heterosexual men, although not exclusively, were the primary
winners of the neoliberal and neoconservative counterattack. Lipsitz states that “neoconservatives
present people of color at home and abroad as the new enemy to be scapegoated for the lost wages
of whiteness” (95).
4
Although citizenship is a contested terrain, including or excluding certain people at different
times and for different reasons, the post-WWII and post-Vietnam citizenship and dominant identity
formations allows us to analyze complexities of the process. It can be argued that historically
dominant identities and groups (white, upper class, heterosexual, male) even if occasionally losing
power use time of the post-wars to recuperate and reassert its influence.
5