tv Democracy During World War II CSPAN December 31, 2016 5:22am-6:46am EST
third world war to try to push it, he thought inevitably the forces of history would be such that capitalism would crumble and communism would succeed. and as i said before, it didn't necessarily have to be in his lifetime. >> thank you all very much. [ applause ] . now a look at the influence of american democracy after world war ii. a panel of historians look at growth of the american federal government during the war. the united nations and human rights after the war and the relief for displaced jewish refugees from poland. this is 90 minutes. the 240 session is entitled america, democracies bastion. we have five scholars to given us presentations and in order from my immediate right, james
sparrow is an associate professor of history at the university of chicago. the author of warfare state, world war ii americans and the age of big government which appeared in 2011 and received honorable mentions for the prestigeus frederick jackson turner award offered by the organization of american historians. he is working on a sequel titled new levy an than. it is a fine title and i can't wait to read that. to his right, alida black is research professor of history and international affairs at the george washington university. the founding editor of the eleanor roosevelt papers project, which highlights the former first lady's writing and pronouncements on human rights and democracy. she's a widely published author, including casting her own shadow, eleanor roosevelt and the shaping of post war liberalism and a new and reedited edition of tome is
now,el -- tomorrow is now. and in post conflict number societies, i think it is 14 different projects that you've worked on and this is an interesting presentation indeed. to dr. black's right, dr. sarah cramsey is a newly minted ph.d at berkeley, beat stanford. >> beat stanford. >> you asked and i delivered. and a professor of practice, of jewish studies at tulane university. she has been a full bright fellow and a boran scholar, she will be a research fellow at the vienna institute for holocaust studies coming up in the following year. she's received funding from the melon foundation, the american counsel of learned societies and the german historical institute and i'll be asking her for grant writing advice as she has that
nailed. and without further ado, we begin with james sparrow, and the world war ii americans an the age of big government. dr. sparrow. [ applause ] >> thank you. we live in a time defined by an abiding distrust of government. recently we've entered a moment in which even the most basic assumptions about the proper role of government, namely those pertaining to national security and national interest, have become unsettled and bitterly contested. when it comes to the mission and the mandate of our national government, the contrast between our moment and that at the end of the second world war could not be more extreme. on vj day, the federal government was proportionally larger than at any other time in u.s. history. it consumed half of the gnp and
employed over 5% of the civilian labor force and issued war contracts that built entirely new sectors of the economy. and shifted the population centers of the country toward the suburbs and what we now call the sun belt. the growth of the government was of course even more striking on the military side of the ledger. over the course of the war, the armed forces mobilized 16 million men and women out of a nation that numbered 130 million in 1940. through just one program, len lease, the federal government sent approximately $50 billion in guns, tanks and other aid to the allies. now compare that to the just $40 billion that were spent on all emergency welfare measures under the new deal in the previous decade and it gives you a sense of what we mean when we talk about big government, the warfare state was much larger and more capricious than the
welfare state. to pay for it all, the congress instituted a mass income tax that reached ten times as many taxpayers as the new deal had in the 1930s and increased borrowing capacity even more dramatically, making structural deficits permanent on a scale and in a fashion that new dealers never would have dreamt, much less attempted. and in this chart i'm showing you the proportion of taxpayers in american society and how drastically that changed in the few years of the second world war. mass income taxation, vast structural deficits, a peace time draft and a standing army to go with it, not to mention alliance. these were profound departures from the american political tradition. but during the war there were though tax revolts, no government shut down over the budget, no draft resistance and after the war these foundational structures of big government
remained in place. funding internationalism rather than a retreat to isolation. our popular memory of the second world war chalked this up to the fact that it was a good war. fought about a society united to defend american independence and liberty and a world threatened by the global threat of access powers. while this view is special not wrong. it is absolutely right. it takes too much for granted. len lease, the selective service act, the arsenal of democracy, all of these policies were hard fought accomplishments attained despite the head winds that filled the sails of neutrality for half a decade prior to the war. domestically the roosevelt administration had been back on its heels since the court packing fight of 1937 and the rise of the conservative coalition in congress thereafter. so how did the roosevelt administration manage to
mobilize a nation that had become so weary of big government by 1941. to simply say pearl harbor is again to take too much for granted. for a while, the will to avenge that surprise attack unquestionably galvanized american public purpose, it did not determine how the u.s. would wage the war that it entered. think only of the frustration of the china lobby for example, who were unhappy with the roosevelt administration's grand strategy focused on europe. nor did it decide how and why ordinary americans would comply with the war effort. in other words, legitimacy was the central challenge. it was a hard constraint on the mobilization for total war. much as one might retrofit an automobile factory to produce bombers, roosevelt in his speech writers retooled their ideological framework in the
late 1930s and 1940s and having fashionism as reform principals, a new deal for the world that atlantic charter that some mentioned and others have pointed to was part of that effort on the domestic scene. not all americans swallowed the new deal line whole. but most of them did identify powerfully and intimately with roosevelt. as part of the process of identification, they began to adopt a rhetoric ever rights and freedom and adapted to their own lives. now propaganda and war agency learned that the most effective appeals were those that personalized government messages, while down playing the overtly ideological statements. the most common strategy used to accomplish this was a rhetorical approach that the lift orran george roder has termed the homefront analogy.
this was the point of devaluation of every conceivable aspect of civilian life according to the contribution to the war effort. most often by tracing the battle front consequences of ordinary decisions at home. and this rhetorical universe, defense workers were mo proeted to production and home gardens became victory gardens and young women willing to socialize with soldiers were called victory girls. roosevelt understood the need to personalize the war and he did so recentlessly in his fire side chats. on january 11, 1944, he promised 60 million listeners an economic bill of rights that the gis had earned as their due in a war caused not only by aggression but also by want and by desperation. these rights included rights to employment, education, housing, health care, it was a comprehensive list. but what has been largely forgotten, however, was that this promise of economic rights
was tied to fdr 's insistence for a plan for service in which civilian contributions would be directly related to if not con flated with those of the gi facing battle overseas. roosevelt plans for national service followed a personalistic logic. and i'm going to read to you hear -- i'm sorry, i've advanced too soon, from his fireside chat that was broadcast on national radio. i know that all civilian workers will be glad to be able to say many years hence to their grandchildren, yes, i too, was in service in the great war. i was on duty in the airplane factory and i helped make hundreds of fighting planes. the government told me that in doing that, i was performing my most useful work in the service of my country. now, as david kennedy's talk made clear, americans, especially civilians,
experienced very little absolute sacrifice relative to other nations participating in world war ii. those charts really said it all. but in the process of mobilizing millions of workers, consumers, taxpayers and enlistees, the government had to convince the citizens that they must embrace unprecedented sacrifice. this theme was not always as uplifting as fdr's sunny language might suggest. you can imagine the guilt and the sense of obligation that images and messages such as this might have produced. well it was the symbol of self-sacrifice. this symbol, the combat soldier that provided the master key to wartime political culture. gi was a culture hero whose name stood for government issue. and in a joking reference to the standardized nature of the military in which he served. he personified the new ideals of a changing social order. his ordinariness and his common touch conveyed the democratic
and humane nature of the american war effort as opposed to the regiment and hierarchy of the var mock or the japanese dive bombers. gis were everywhere. everyone knew someone who served. and this helped reinforce a direct personal identification of the war effort. now while the image of this new culture hero was fairly uniform and virginerged on being univer. the ways in which americans responded to it were not. if we focus in on three kinds of citizens, fiscal citizens, taxes and bondholders, war workers and servicemen, we can see how divergent wartime ideas of obligation really were. now these groups deserve special attention because without them, the american war effort would have ran into a halt. researchers in the war government certainly recognize this. they found that intangible differences in moral could produce results that were all
too concrete, if you pardon the pun. the average time to lay a keel in the todd bath shipyard in maine was 76 days. whereas nearby south portland yard required 207 days on average to put out the same sort of vessel using the same kind of workers. yet between high moral and todd bath and low moral in south portland explain the difference there. similar findings explained why one person bought more war bonds than the next. and explained how troop cohesion could be strengthened or undermined. i'll spare you the details of the mountains of studies that these government researchers produced, a summary could have been used as a weapon of mass boredom. wmb against the axis. but their findings were quite significant and i'll touch on them in what follows. bondholders and taxpayers posed a special challenge because most americans were unaccustomed to
paying income tax or paying the debt which was the preserved of the wealthier upper middle class who were subject to the class taxation of the 30s but world war ii brought the mass taxation of the war. because for all of the talk about soaking the rich, the new deal fiscal regime was a feeble and repressive jerry built structure insufficient to financing total war. the second world war regime extracted vastly greater revenues on an order of roughly a magnitude greater. more than 40 million new taxpayers had to learn how to file and pay on time. it was just as aggravating and difficult then as it is today. and it wasn't made much easier by the fact of the new with holding scheme because people still had to file forms. before the war, the number of taxpayers could have fit into the -- into the borough of
brooklyn and more ownership of debt with 85 million men, actually more than that, the government stopped counting, 85 million men and women and children and who bought war bonds over the course of the war. so to meet the challenge of guiding and motivating these tens of millions of new fiscal citizens, the treasury developed a strategy centered on, as you might imagine by now, personalizing obligation. often it is most successful initiatives were the most literal minded and concrete. this kind of advertisement and campaign was incredibly popular. individual children and families could buy equipment for a family member they knew in the service. small school districts might pitch together and raise money to buy a jeep. larger metro districts bought aircraft carriers. now the treasury was also quite
savvy in enlisting the talents of media stars like kate smith whose rendition of god bless america made her both famous and beloved. smith constantly had a personal obligation to the gi in her public appearances. she conducted a radio marathon in september of 1943 that raised a record-breaking $39 million in war bonds over the course of 18 hours. doesn't sound like much now, but it certainly was then. one of her callers rang in with a moving pledge saying, quote, i give anything, all of my money or my health or my own life to buy my boy back from the war. but i'm afraid i can't do that now. you see, i got a telegram from washington this morning, my boy isn't coming back. from that point on, the new pledges surged in making it a record-breaking event. if gives you a sense of how intensely that personal connection was felt by so many americans. that is what war bonds are to every one of us, kate smith
concludes. a chance to buy our boys back. 85 million americans agreed. as they paid their taxes and bought their bonds, however, they also learned to make claim on the government to begin expecting that that claim would be returned by the federal government. that's my tax dollar, with something virtually everyone could say, once the victory tax was implemented in mass taxation had been instituted. industrial production like fiscal policy was mission critical to the american war effort. and as with taxpayers and bond holders, it was not guaranteed that workers could be persuaded to comply. in the half decade prior to the war, union levels had tripled from 3 to 9 million because of a wave of militants unleashed by measures such as the wagner act and tactics such as the sit down strike that shut down general motors plants in the winter of
1936 to 1937. although union leaders have signed a no strike pledge soon after pearl harbor, rarng and file discontent led to wildcat strikes and until the war and then peaked in a vast wave in 1946. worker moral, in other words, could make or break the arsenal of democracy and the roosevelt administration knew it. it turned out that the war workers took their image of soldiers of production and the arsenal of democracy very seriously. this kind of poster captured very -- quite vividic the worker sense that they were contributing to the war. just like taxpayers and bond holders. they took this role very personally and concept you'lls aed the moral link to the fighting front by objectifying the war material that they produced on the shop floor every
day. this powerful sense that they were fighting alongside the combat soldier not only linked the homefront to the battle front but it brought entitlement to national citizenship, guaranteed by the federal government. women and black workers pushed fair employment. they didn't get it, for the most part, during the war but a general rights and feminism em merged from the war any way. white ethnic workers enjoyed more immediate gains as over time pay and seniority rights an other labor rights were built into the economy for lasting consequences for the post war period. working class americans joined the affluent society in the 1940s viewing their upward mobility as a fitting reward for their patriotic producerism. and finally we turn to the gis. the third group. without millions of them, it would have been impossible simply to defend the continent at united states. much less win a war, two wars
actually, on opposite sides of the globe at the same time. in their case, the challenge of motivation had the highest stakes possible. the gis were walking, talking proof that the last thing you want to be in a time of war is a living symbol of national sacrifice. as everyone in in room knows, military service was a defining aspect of the war generation out look throughout the post war period. but as with the industrial workers, taxpayers and bondholders, this is not to be taken for granted going into the war. efforts to instruct the soldiers on why we fight had mixed results when it came to instilling preformist or liberal international ideas. but war propaganda did succeed in providing a clear image of the fascist enemy to be defeated. if gis were of the mind of what
they were fighting for, they were of one mind when it came to what they were fighting against. because beneath the varied political commitments ran deeper obligations to buddies fighting next to them, to their families back at home and that made the stakes of war quite personal. we can see this in the pal possible hunger that servemen expressed for any news of home. this is a photo of a navy bomber squad on new georgia island in the solomons in february of 1944 and could you see just see the intensity of men reaching out for their mail. when after more than three years of slog you through it all, the soldiers finally got to stop and reading about home and they returned to it. newly minted veterans could claim a set of benefits and the gi bill of riegtz and in many other provisions at the state and local levels as well as in the private sector and this amounted to a new kind of
national citizenship. although it was less universally applauded than the gi bill of rights which i think this post war advertisement captures the sense of citizenship and -- and home coming that the gi bill represented. although the marshal plan was less universally applauded, it was supported and sustained over a long period of time. and it, think, also revealed the legitimacy that the war effort had bestowedond big government. and while the truman administration quickly liquidated many of the war agencies, it did not bring military budgets or personnel down to the peak levels of the defense period prior to pearl harbor, which themselves were higher than for most of the new deal and into the war period. and although the public clamor to bring the boys back home was quite pronounced, it did not produce a returnto the
hemispheric ins you willarity of the earlier years. inde indeed, quite the opposite was the case. the human face of the new commitment tonight obligations was known to everyone from photos of friendly american gis trading cigarettes, candy bars and other rations with european's desperate for food and the desperate rule of law. we know from historical research that not all aspects of american occupation were friendly or even welcome. but the american people on the whole were not privy to that information. what they got was a benign vision that the gi represented. and this was a form of internationalism that americans could get behind. yet there is a mounting of hidden price to be paid for all of this. what the war was about meant too many different things to citizens whose interest could not always be reconciled. taxpayers, chafed at taxpayers that cut into the higher standard of living, that roosevelt had promised and
provided. at the same time, they began to recent pay foring for the highe wages for war workers particularly when they went out on wildcat strikes. workers denounced the high salary of management and the contracts of big business. soldiers bristled at the mere suggestion they are being played for suckers by coddles civilians and this is a sense that found viable expression in the zut suit riots. in 1946 the truman administration changed the discharge forms to keep troop levels to fall to danger lows. and so to pursue its global ambitions from 1945 on wards, the united states needed the government that could sustain the legitimacy that it had earned in wartime. that government was capable of projecting american power across the world. but only to the extent that it fostered a personal sense of national mission among its
citizenry that proved fractious in the long run. over decades it only become for difficult to agree on what national citizenship demands and who can claim it. the stronger the united states grew, the less it's citizens could agree on the ben fish yefs or the purposes of the powerful government they had created. the crisis of legitimacy in which we live today has been a long time in the making. thank you. [ applause ] i'm short. hi, everybody, i'm very grateful that you stayed on saturday afternoon. as i'm watching all of these phenomenal posters in jim's powerpoint, i can't help but give a shout out to the franklin
d. roosevelt presidential library and museum where i am a proud trustee and plead with you all with a full heart to make the trek to high park to see our new permanent exhibit and our any visitor's center. i think it will amplify the conflicting and desperate messages sort of unified by defiance that i think i've heard so far today. and i would also very much like to give a shoutout to constance who did emergency travel planning for me last night when i missed my flight, the first time that has ever happened to me in 64 years. so, but as you could tell from my hacking through jim's talk here, i beg your indulgence. i have, as my mother would have said, a honking sinus infection. so with that plea for
indulgence, i'm going to ask you to suspend everything that you've talked about so far, for the past three days. i want you to think not about military strategy, not about who won the war, not about the geopolitical outcomes of the war, or the war's economic consequences. what i want you to get in your heart and in your gut is the ricoch ricochetting, emotional ping pong ball, ping pong table that america and the world is going through at the end of the war. we ricochet from unbridled fear to almost unbridled relief. underneath all of that is a
palpable uncertainty of what kind of nation we will become, what america's role in the world will be, and how we will manage world not only bifurcated by etiology but in america that is ripped apart by÷ú anxiety and fear. we have an untested president who, by thezv middle of 1945, wl have poll numbers thatp make r herbert hubert look like the all star. we have theç harbor of holocau for which we have come anesthesiaized taunting us every day. the best÷ú academy award pictur
"best years of our live."ym . we have incredible heightened racial tension in the united states. we have wij$w cat strike. we have an untested president, who cannot seem to manageç the economy. he list rent controls while he keeps the controls on wages. he lifts food prices andu! puts controls back on rep, but still keeps controls on wages. we have massiveç dislocation i the united states. as many people left home to work in the defense industries, as when overseas toç fight the wa. we have new communities, multi racial communities that we're trying to figure out how tozv
develop. and europe hasç 60 million displaced refugees that's 6-0 times the amount of refugees that europe is dealing with nowç 60. . we have the start of the cold war. we have the start of the atomic armed race soon to become to become the armed race. we have heightened anuernational gorilla war fafare campaign tha will give rise to terrorism. so does this mean that hope÷ú evaporate? no. i ask you, how many in this room have beenp in an immediate conflict situation? please raise your hands.
it's going to shape whatç i'm going to say. okay. i've been in 14. so my conversation isu! rooted experience around the world and within the united states for people trying to define in÷ú thr own minds what human rights mean. so when we begin this conversation, i don't want you to narrow it andç put it in a x like it's the united ymstates. and it's our responsibility. we are beginning at the war, as we are today in some extent, a new world order, we're trying to get away with trustee ships and
mandate and how to manage unstable butzv hopeful host colonial democracies people are demanding change, but at the same time they are confronting th: paralysis of fear. we could make an argument in 1945, all the way through 1948 just as we can make anym argume now around the world and especially in the shadows of the election that we are a world adrift and+sq)ica is trying to find its void. in 1948 the u.s. political system is÷ú fractured. republicans and democrats have equal numbers and equal weight in states and in nations. and in the federal level. but they are also being challenged horrifically aneç
effectively from within. you have the progressives ofym harry wallace. the republicans who have trying to find their way with moderation means with doing and you have the democrats who are desperately clinging to harry truman. those fourth parties, all of america and all of the existing america political institutions assin the united nations itself, is how are we going to deal with economic and social çyminsecur. are concerned with the bomb. they totally discount the refugee crisis in europe, which will bmcnme the first defining
crisis that the u.n. has to address. theç second rebuilding the economy and how do we transition from u.s. economy that as jim so clearly showed with his zvgraph that is totally defied to war-time economy, to a peace-time economy in the ym over-arching dark tornado cloud of the great çdepression. . four years of pschool. four. roosevelt. i'm not talking postop, i'm not talking about graduate school, z5 not talking all the stuff that everybody up here want. i'm talking about four years of school, totally self educated
but taught herself sixzv languages. and with conversant with every major religion in the world. she was placed on the american reason, by september of 1945 she had raised her voice againstç harry truman. his poll numbers were in the toilet. in in his words wanted some of that roosevelt,ç let's put eleanor on the delegation, get her out of the country, and low and behold we can have franklin's widow going to theç first meeting of the general assembly. herp secretary looked at her an said are you flippant crazy you have met all the leaders of the world.zv you're the only head of state who has actually traveled to conflict zones. you lost your hearing and ym
all know by now, is the committee for÷ú humanitarian an cultural concerns. what was the most presshtingym are we going to do with the refugees. the soviets want to repatriot them toç rebuild the 40 millio citizens that were lost in the war. none of the american delegation, austin,zv dulles, et cetera, kn how to÷ú debate that it makes t front page of pragda. that, the conversation
within the u.n. turns to how will they execute a sentenceht the preample charter to the u.n., which says, we must reaffirmç faith in fundamental human right. people are clueless on what human rights mean. people are clueless on what democracy means. we have an idea but we don't have an inglingp of the hard wok and sacrifice that it takes to build local institutions from the ground up. we talk aeáeñ right. we don't talk about responsibilities. and the charter says that we must find wordsu! to respect th dignity and worth of each human person, the rights of men and women and nations large and
small. minute, this is not politically correct language. we are in the shadow of the mos; horrific war the world has ever seen and even though the 51 nations whomy then formed the united nations object to the form have one thing in common and that is by god they beat thç germans. >> they don't believe the currency exist, they don't share
the some god, they don't believe that god ex[st. they don't share the same government. they don't share the same concepts of citizenship. they don't share the same conceptcç of nationality. the only thing they have in common even among our allies is that we beat theç germans. the united states has very grave concerns. oh my god what are we going to do about economicç social and rights. you know, are we going to have to give everybody a job. the soviets go, oh my god, what are we going to dozv about the right and the right to çvote. india is secretlyzv sabotaging. india is trying to figure out
how to create a vision that's not ideal zvvision, but a natio that is at war within itself and war with its÷ú occupying nationn terms of what they'll fight for. they're awakeningç middle east with fight for palestine israel. the war in southeast asia is g# beginning. i was so struck by the car tune that you put up there of whatzv did you do today for freedom. eleanor resident prayer in her wallet that i contii% to perry in mind, ern though this is the prayer,ç dear lord, less i
forgot -- sorry, dear lord, helú me to remember to add. . sorry, my drugs areç kicking i. dear lord, help me to remember that somewhere someone diedu! f me today and if there continue to be war, help me to remember tov: ask and answer am i worth dying for. this is the strategy thatç she took in in the negotiations. in the four minutes that i have left. i would like toym give you the thumbnail negotiating strategy, why i believe that was right and leave you with the so what questionsym that i hope we can
pick up in questions and ÷ú answers. that it was evil. that it was awful. that we would never end war and that we would live in theç shaw of the holocaust forever. or we could say i am not going to go downzv that road.ç to and that is the simpleym approach isç to know the opini of your fiercest critic, as well as you know your own and treat
them withç respect afrtd -- an stay at the table. she made to separate theç negotiation so that you would create the declaration whichp would be a vision an then figure out how to do the implementation. the covenants were ratified in '66. they were adopted in '66 by the the united states ratifiesv: th is the challenge of our time. it is not just about÷ú dignity. it is not just about sovereignty. it's not just about what rights
mean,ç it's the challenge to negotiate with respect and thep challenge as eleanor would say we're all on trial to show what democracy needs. i would likeç to leave you wit article i, which is the absolute hardest article to negotiate. it took more thanç 3,000 hoursf debate and it is the first time in the history of the world that governments came together toç adopt it. they're all bornç preand equal. they are with reason and
>> i thank you for waking the audience up for me. i will do my best to keep them awake. thank you. i'd like÷ú to thank, first, dr. miller and jeremy collins for inviting me to be here today. i would like toç thank the dr. bishop who was under to be here. he has introduced me to this fabulousç museum and i think y very much for your attention. i teach, 18, 19, 20 years old at 9:00 in the morningç every monday, wednesday, and friday which means that i use a lot of images. so forgive me if i'm bombarding you. i'd like to begin by shownn you some images that are very familiar. here we have an image, one that's liberated by the red armú in 1945. here we have an image -- in april of 1945, this picture was made fam%mj because a young man
named gazelle is in one of these bunks. you can barely see him sticking hisp head out. here is a picture of david who is the chairman of the jewish we're veryç familiar with this story. the camps and occupy germany, specifically in the american zone,÷ú all of these jewish displaced people or dps pulling in the american zone in an
effort to put pressure on the british to open thesgates of palestine to legal immigration. we know about the haralson report from the summer and fall ofç 1945, and in a sense when think about the name of our panel today, the united states is beingsdemocracy, this is, in part, true, but i think of the story that i'm going to tell and demonstrate, as all good history is, it's a bit÷ú more complicat and today what i would like to do is slow down ourym kri nonn and foreground that of what is exactly isht happening in the years prior and i would like to recap the lens that we use to tell the story of displaced people.
>> it looks different to different population, that's number one, homecomings are staggered and incomplete and they÷ú do not end, as we've already learned. in the wakeu! of betweenç 1945. -- my numbers are between 30 and 50 millionl &he was talking about 60 million, it's hard to know exactly how many people are displaced by thisv: war.
as people are changing their location, this is going to impact the course of liberation and how certain people experience it. i'd like to propose it's simply and i use this in quotation marks, arriving in a çdisplace person's camp and occupied germany. it's nothing simple about it. and it's highly contingent journey from liberation tov: ending up in these displaced persons camp and there's not a straight line from the holocaust to the eventual yule establishment of the statemy of israel in april of 1948. and today we're going to focus on arguably a very small group.y before i launch into this particular groupççym -- of whe
is and what home looks like,ç i'll get back to that. surviving jews collect and occupied germanyç in 1945, 194 1947 and onward, there are tens of thousands upwards of hundreds of thousands of jews in dpç cas throughout the american zone in particular, these numbers are changing and they're growing. the number of jewish ÷úymvps.
and the united nationsç relief and rehabilitation administration. and finally, and this brings you i wouldç like to speak about today, the majority of jews living in poland, serve in 1939, survive se-9 they spent the war living sprinkled throughout the soviet in the context of labor camp and weç have upwardszv who survivee war in occupy poland. when i'm talking about this ç
group. -- polan"9 as we know, is divided and a part of poland is attached to the soviet union and with this attachment comes the promise that÷ú upwards of 1 million -- 1.5 million polls $r'to the soviet union in order to work into labor camps. this translates intoym scores a scores of settlements, many of them have close to 90% of jus as these po lishç living in these settlements, those of you that are interested, interestingly of the process by which polls are deported into the÷ú soviet union -- polls in soviet union and i want us to try to÷ú understand exactly what soviet
exile and work in all of these different labor camps looks like and what they really ymmeans. now, there are elements, of course, of this exile that are horrible, there is hunger, there's cold, there's constant ! displacement just because you're deported to kent, does not mean you're going to stay there for one or two years, you could very quickly beu! taken . what's interesting about the group of peoplezv and po lish js that survive is experience, is they survive often with the returning to poland after the war and i'll find that there are three, four, five children with their parents in one family that hasç survived. there's some time to put down root as evidenced by this picture. now these arep pictures fresh ç
clean we can see here that they're memorializing their own in this public. they have spaceç time to put togetherç -- here we have an exampleç from -- the route 19 throughout 194 there are hugeç commemorations for the uprising of 1943, again, keeping in mind that in many of these camps the majority and almost exclusively these are peopleç of jewish ba glounds, at least a dozen camps a commemorativeç÷ú on and
and we have -- the construction have a chance stand on the center of warsaw, know that this is the place that general 1939 were -- as jews in 1939 were killed. we're seeing that home is not just a place you return çto, is also all of these other elements. in in fact some small towns that lose their population, be it jewish or÷ú nonjewish simply cee to exist. anyone who has read the wonderful book, everything is illuminated or seen the movie, know about this townzv that onl
has one person living in it after the war. and besides that, poland, oland, there are massive population movements going on from 1945 onward, millions of ethnic germans have talked aboutç brandon, we also have population exchanges and then forced deportation and yellow russians and polls around the eastern border. of course,ç professor talks abt this as well. and this is building off a society that's already suffered massive displacement during theú war. those of you that have had a chance to read the wonderful diary who is polishç medical doctor constantly threat that he is going to be displaced because perhaps his town will be used as a settlement only forç ethnic german, and thus polish christians live under the constant threat of displacement themselves. what we have for this group of
polish groups that have survived the war in the soviet union, liberation beginning in january of 1946. let's keep in mindç it's quite few months after peace in europe is concluded. so we begin to see in january citizens of bothç jewish and nonjewish background forwarding retray tree yotism across the soviet union and making their way back home. six-month span in 1946 and these are the polish jews for the most part who are experiencingç eves like -- which happens on july 4th, 1946. some of you might be familiar with that. now, what's very interesting to upwards of 80,000 of these jews stay in poland and they settle o-called recovered territory and they build jewish lives there.
he taught me yiddish is0o these people who were born in yiddish school until her family left in 1956. more jews come from group joined something called the semi legal movement ofç european jews towards çpalestine. it's a very interesting example, population of jews living fromz zero to about 15,000 in february and march, in february of 1946. these towns are beingzv swarmed with people and the constitution of these towns are changing and are most of these towns are able to take on so many people because they'veç recently ethn germans or the towns themselves have been destroyed.
it literally means slight and the idea is that zionist operative from mandateym palestine come bk to europe secretively, in order to endeuce or encourage people to live and to try toç live li in palestine. and i use induce or encourage to give us a spectrum because depending on who you are, you're going to have a differentzv vie as to who exactly the zionist operative were and whether or not this was a forcedç choice. according to british law, this is an illegal movement because there shouldn't be this type of immigration into the palestinian mandate. according to po lish law, this is÷ú legal they leave the borde
between the two states open to p]m onwardçç through now the are different ways÷ú one of the most interesting things about studying the second world war is that there seem to beym of how people end up in certain places. i can -- thank you, i can recommend the wonderful book under ground palestineym if you would like to understand a little bit more of how people were able to move onward --ç a
if we were there, this is what we would have seen, we would have seen droves and droves of people, these pictures were takenmy in 1946. notice the interaction with local shopkeepers, how the town itself is changing as itym flood with these refugees, some who stay for a few hours, others who stay for a few weeks and use the hills and÷ú the fresh hair. here weç see jewish children a the main train stationç in 194. according to reverend robert ym smith. when i gave the presentation to the professor who is director of
theç museumç while i have abo two minutes left and i have two slides and i would like to get into how and the why and if i must, i'm happy toç take more questions during the q and a or afterwards. according to his wonderful surplus of memory, she detailsy the reaction of po lish government officials particularly in july ofç 1946 after the, who was in control of the borders at the time simply picked up the phone, made a phone call and said the borders should remain zvopen, and that s simply how the borders opened, according to the çmemoir.
begins to accumulate making÷úu$ flow of these refugees increase and continuing, what's very interesting about studying what's happening on the ground, work at a variety of levels. so what extent are the united nations released and they are, what's really interesting is that one associate from it has one idea and another person comes in and &em that she's wrong and the first woman has to leave. the jewish joint distribution committee and american ç nonprophet is highly involved in their director in czech is working tireless to inform the ministries of what's phappening. but in my mind the most important players are people like u!ed.
and their shared desire to create european policiesht that are based on ÷úethnicity. -- uncertain citizenship, the ethnic revolution and jewish belonging in poland and czech pinpoints the process by which wartime and÷ú poland, czech and germany rewrote citizenship laws so that one so-called ethnic÷ú group, strangely, these but they're also enabled by a vmq% norms that make massive population transfers permissible and this signals a conclusive
end toym the state of the land the former monarchy. what'sç fascinating in the mkn with no project. whey e down the krinn nolg a÷ú little bit. they're both small stories and big stories that areym happenin to nonprofits to international agencies. if we really want to understand the emergent of the state of israelç in 1948 i suggest thate turn to the wonderfully
complicated and fascinating laboratory of essential europe for moreç nuanced answers. thank you very zvmuch. >> we have time to take a few ú questions. >> discuss the role of the un to resell between 30 and 60 million refugees in europe post war. my questioniñis, how exactly di they do it or did they do it and how did that work zvçout.
>> was able to helpym people outside germany better than those who were -- rather than those who are resettledç. i think the most effective part, which is the one that's been the least reallyym looked at which why i add the other ten million to the to the total this week. refugee populations in africa. we look primarily at the÷ú refue populations in central jurp. they did a great job in france.v they did an okay job in italy. but i think they really did an extraordinaryç job÷ú -- when y
look at some of the -- the other side of the÷ú mediterranean something.zv this is where unicef really takes off. you have a very bankrupt give way to çunicef and to the worl health organization and they begin to really takeç on -- an really honest i'm really rusty on this and so i have to go back and pull out all my documents. i will argue that there's aç greatest impact that was ever had was in africa and in the creation of the direct agencies
displacement dissolved quicklyu to a certain ix tent because there are open houses that that there are exchanges that people hen you have three to three-and-a-half germans living when you have millions and millions of ethnic germans leaving what hasç beco poland after 1945, you have displaced to bring people that's something for us to keep in mind if i canym speak to the contextf jewish organization, jewish, throughout the english÷ú speaki world and, of course, in palestine and later israel worked as well to attempt to resolveym displacementzv.
>> here. >> this question is toym sarah, great talk. >> thank you. >> in terms of --ym >> i think when youym talk abou infrastructure in poland, we have to keep in mind when the united nations assembled in april of 1945, poland was not÷ú officially represented because the allied still cannot agree on which polish government will be official d8polish government. so we have an issue of legitimacy that is still permeating the entire camp well through the beginning of the÷ú summer of 1945. as far as infrastructure on the ground, what always strikes me
files or reading tt remembranceç is how much people seem to be working, how passionate people are about their job once they're able to get there. we have to keep in mind, especially in the case of polanú what we're dealing with a country that arguably is the most stripped apart of any country in europe, so that we're also just dealing with the÷ú simple task of cleaning up rubble in the biggest cities and more so in other cities as well. it's interestirx to keep this in mind. my experience working with the team in czech has led me toç a lot of laughter in so far as it's a wonderful example of how individuals in bureaucracies cannot get along and we'll use certain personal alliances against other people.
when we talk aboutç something like -- when we talk about, you know, large nonprofit, we have to keep in mind all of the different personalities that are involved and the ideap that one person do you have anything to add to that. % >> no, i'm good. >> in the very back to your right. thank you. >> thank you to all three÷ú presenters for excellent presentations informative and provocative, i have a÷ú comment dire directed dr. black. >> i figured it was çççcomin.
>> as i child she and other children were schooled at home by a very goodym teacher. >> by an awful teacher, sir. an awful teacher. do not believe eleanor's version of tpa9 >> i mean it was eleanor could not write a grammatically correct sentence in english when she worked with madame rosel. >> is that right? >> yes. >> then that was not much education,p was ÷úit?
>> well, -- she made up for it. >> andç i didn't seem. >> back to your left with pjame. >> extraordinary efforts that were taken to prevent and allp sorts of things in japan now you get to 30, çto 60, to 50 milli people moving around in jurp. what did we see in terms of starvation and disease and so forth. how do these people just, you know,dfbuju do they survive, really, given those numbersko.
>> there was great debate within the american government and within with÷ú unicef, and withi enra, for example, how many calories a dayç constituted a good diet. it was based totally on the political, the suspected political÷ú affiliations of the group, i mean, eleanor herself was very involved in a debate where she said i amnb happy wit the thousand calories a day. that's one bureaucrat tick andh political issue. the other is the infrastructure and the deliver issue and what i would like to÷ú do, because sar can talk about this much more concretely than i can because my work now has turned into much
more on the ground, how do you delive%#m opposed to, you know, what we did in the war, but the one thing that i would like to say is thatzv also apart of the delivery was impacted becausezv that greatly delayed the essential blankets, pants and ÷ú medicine, which spurred greatly the development of a new refew %-pthe who and gave addeç noterd
informa, depending on which side you are on, about the role for un peace force and ÷údispla camp. >> now, a look at how germany, china, japan and u.s. remember and commemorate their involvement in world war ii. !áable was part ofç a conference at national world war ii museum in new orleans. it's an hour andç ten minutes. >> my great joy to introduce the last session today. we have something a little bit different and maybe something wç want to do more÷ú in i think yo can see who i have sitting across the table. mueller, the president and ceoz of the national world war