|
|
|
Review
| General Eisenhower: Ideology and Discourse, by Ira Chernus. East Lansing, Michigan State University Press, 2002. 360 pp. $59.95, cloth.
|
| A popular story about President Dwight D. Eisenhower is that when he was warned he would face tough questions at a press conference he responded that he was not worried and that he would confuse the reporters with his words. Indeed, many observers have wondered about the thoughts and meanings behind Eisenhower's words. Ira Chernus, a professor of religious studies, argues in General Eisehower: Ideology and Discourse that Eisenhower's words should be closely examined to fully understand the thought process and vision of an individual whom many consider the prototypical American of his period. Through exhaustive research into Eisenhower's speeches and writings, Chernus has produced a complex and well-argued analysis about the development of an ideology that provided the core for the general's vision of the issues facing the world. It was an ideology that unified nearly all of Eisenhower's "political, economic, social, military and educational" thinking. It reflected a "comprehensive vision of human life." But, for Eisenhower, the goal and power of his vision was to produce change, "to make things happen." Consequently, in both his private letters and in his public speeches, Eisenhower sought to educate and exhort his audience not only to understand issues facing the world but to provide solutions to those issues. Chernus finds that Eisenhower chose his words carefully and sought to communicate them effectively. He also notes that Eisenhower did not always achieve this goal and on some occasions created more confusion than clarification. |
1
|
|
At the heart of his ideology was a belief that people needed to follow a path of self-sacrifice and duty, finding a "middle path" between destructive individualism (selfishness) and adhering mindlessly to the dictates of the state. Americans needed to be vigilant against the external enemies like fascism and communism, but also needed to guard against the internal enemies of complacency and creeping reliance on the government (Democrats). Formulated during the period of 1941 to 1945, Eisenhower's ideology equated fascism with institutionalized self-interest. In his private and public discourses, Eisenhower expressed the need for Americans to willingly follow the virtues of self-sacrifice and duty to defeat evil, save civilization, and provide a basis for an enduring peace. Like most Americans, Eisenhower believed that peace eventually rested on the values of the American system: capitalism, self-determination, and restrained self-interest. Its success would eventually result in defeating chaos, unreason, and the use of force. In Chernus' view, Eisenhower's ideology and frequently his rhetoric assumed an "apocalyptic magnitude." |
2
|
|
The author guides the reader through the various periods of the development and refinement of Eisenhower's vision. Beginning in World War II, it was refined and shaped by Eisenhower's experiences as soldier, chief of staff, president of Columbia University, Supreme Allied Commander in Europe (SACEUR), and contender for the presidency. In each period, Eisenhower's discourse and rhetoric changed, developing new foci and issues as he responded to new needs and responsibilities. As chief of staff and SACEUR, he shaped his focus on global visions and how the United States needed to maintain peace, defending the American system and civilization, through a strong military and international duty. At Columbia and as a presidential candidate, Eisenhower modified his words to include and emphasize that the country and peace could not be protected by military preparedness alone. In order for the nation to carry out its international duty, American society and leadership needed to promote "decent and proper" values and actions. Merging his ideology with politics, Eisenhower argued that Americans should follow a middle path that rejected unrestrained individualism and Democratic programs that carried the nation toward socialism. His public and private discourse showed that he believed that the Democrats could not bring peace or restore decent and proper values. Democrats were incapable of providing the economic, international, and political confidence necessary to promote stability and eventually peace. As the candidate who could achieve public and international confidence, restore public and private values, and place the nation and the world on the path of peace, Eisenhower argued that the election represented a choice that would determine the destiny of mankind. |
3
|
|
While other historians have concluded that Eisenhower's rhetoric was largely opportunistic and based on the realities of a specific need, Chernus maintains that the core of Eisenhower's ideology remained steady and unchanged—making him a true ideologue. Whether the reader will accept Ike as ideologue is problematic—there is a vast amount of Eisenhower literature to study—but no one can doubt that Chernus has provided new avenues to examine not only Eisenhower but also the importance of words and ideology in understanding motivating forces behind public figures. |
4
|
| | |
| Washington and Jefferson College |
James L. Gormly |
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|