The Discourse of ‘The People’s War’ in Britain and the USA during World War II

Sean Dettman, R. Toye
{"title":"The Discourse of ‘The People’s War’ in Britain and the USA during World War II","authors":"Sean Dettman, R. Toye","doi":"10.1093/ehr/ceae006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n David Edgerton has argued that the term ‘people’s war’ was not much in use during World War II and that where it did occur it was used in ‘a critical and oppositional, rather than an official-celebratory’ sense. We show that Edgerton’s conclusions are an artefact of his limited source-base and narrow reading of the evidence. The phrase ‘people’s war’ was in fact used in Ministry of Information propaganda and cropped up widely in the press, leading contemporaries to comment on its overfamiliarity. But we do not merely seek to restore previous interpretations. We show the longer history of ‘people’s war’ terminology in both Britain and America. We further demonstrate how Britain’s US sympathisers, such as the CBS journalist Edward R. Murrow, used this language to argue that British class barriers were breaking down, thus making the country worthy of American support. British policymakers consciously encouraged this, and there were consequences for US domestic politics too. The concept of the ‘people’s war’, then, was a contemporary Anglo-American co-production. It was not, as Edgerton wrongly suggests, an invention of the historians of the 1960s and after.","PeriodicalId":184998,"journal":{"name":"The English Historical Review","volume":"3 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The English Historical Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/ceae006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

David Edgerton has argued that the term ‘people’s war’ was not much in use during World War II and that where it did occur it was used in ‘a critical and oppositional, rather than an official-celebratory’ sense. We show that Edgerton’s conclusions are an artefact of his limited source-base and narrow reading of the evidence. The phrase ‘people’s war’ was in fact used in Ministry of Information propaganda and cropped up widely in the press, leading contemporaries to comment on its overfamiliarity. But we do not merely seek to restore previous interpretations. We show the longer history of ‘people’s war’ terminology in both Britain and America. We further demonstrate how Britain’s US sympathisers, such as the CBS journalist Edward R. Murrow, used this language to argue that British class barriers were breaking down, thus making the country worthy of American support. British policymakers consciously encouraged this, and there were consequences for US domestic politics too. The concept of the ‘people’s war’, then, was a contemporary Anglo-American co-production. It was not, as Edgerton wrongly suggests, an invention of the historians of the 1960s and after.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
二战期间英国和美国的 "人民战争 "论述
戴维-埃杰顿(David Edgerton)认为,"人民战争 "一词在二战期间的使用并不多,即使出现,也是在 "批判和反对而非官方庆祝 "的意义上使用的。我们表明,埃杰顿的结论是他有限的资料来源和对证据的狭隘解读的产物。事实上,"人民战争 "一词曾在新闻部的宣传中使用过,并广泛出现在报刊上,导致同时代的人对其过度熟悉进行了评论。但我们并不只是试图恢复以前的解释。我们展示了 "人民战争 "这一术语在英美两国的悠久历史。我们进一步展示了英国的美国同情者,如哥伦比亚广播公司记者爱德华-R-默罗(Edward R. Murrow),是如何利用这种语言来论证英国的阶级壁垒正在打破,从而使英国值得美国支持。英国政策制定者有意识地鼓励这种做法,这对美国国内政治也产生了影响。因此,"人民战争 "的概念是当代英美共同制造的。它并不像埃杰顿错误地认为的那样,是 20 世纪 60 年代及之后历史学家的发明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The German Right, 1918–1930: Political Parties, Organized Interests, and Patriotic Associations in the Struggle against Weimar Democracy, by Larry Eugene Jones Politics and Political Culture in Ireland from Restoration to Union, 1660–1800: Essays in Honour of Jacqueline R. Hill, ed. Raymond Gillespie, James Kelly and Mary Ann Lyons The Disappearance of Leo Africanus: Rival Repertoires of Historical Scholarship in the Mid-Twentieth Century Readers in a Revolution: Bibliographic Change in the Nineteenth Century, by David McKitterick Intercultural Encounters in Medieval Greece after 1204: The Evidence of Art and Material Culture, ed. Vicky Foskolou and Sophia Kalopissi-Verti
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1