The Personal is Political. The Political is Personal.

 
why did World War II end?

Or, put another way, why did it end when it did?

In the USA, during war time, being "Commander-in-Chief" allows for great expansion of "emergency" executive powers and confers great benefits -- to the CiC and his/her team.

Some would say that the GWoT is unique, and therefore such expansions of power are not benefits but necessities, in a war that may never "end."

But why did past American Presidents not advance similar claims about the wars of their eras? Or did they, unsuccessfully?

Why would any Prez in the US system allow any war to end, ever? Why have they in the past?

For example, Truman and his advisors allowed WWII to end. Moreover, they were in such an apparent hurry to end it that they insisted on doing so with the most unmistakable display of horror against Hiroshima they could possibly have chosen. Why? Why not somehow keep the whole thing going as long as possible?

I don't know, but I did find an interesting bit about a lecture given in 1945 by Walter White, author of the "pre-'Civil Rights Era'" civil rights book, The Rising Wind. The lecture suggests a little about the discontent, fault lines and barely contained conflicts that were surfacing among the the American working/fighting class during WWII's last years*.

[* or, as the implications of some neocon theories might have it, "during the years leading up to the V-E/V-J Day parties, soon after which began WWIII (the "Cold War"), which dovetailed almost straightaway into our current WWIV, which will never end, meaning that in fact 'war' and 'emergency' have been perpetual fixtures of the American system for generations, and will continue to be."]

posted by TiR at 7:19 AM