In the United States, when we hear the word “Reconstruction,” we think about the years to follow the Civil War in our country. The South lay in ruins after the Union and Confederacy went to war in the 1860s. In the case of the American Civil War, a region of a country lay in ruins. When we look at World War II, it was not a lone region that needed reconstructed. It was not even a lone country. The entire European continent lay in ruins at the hand of the greatest war ever seen on the face of the Earth. How would Europe get back on their feet? They sought help from their friends in the West—the United States. It would take a lot of work to restore Europe to its prewar state. With a little help from their friends, this was a very obtainable goal.
As in the case of the Hiroshima Maidens, Europeans looked toward the west in hopes of a vision of how to get back on their feet. Before they looked to the west, they looked internally to find a solution. In December 1942, the Beveridge Report was published in discussion of the welfare state of Europe instead of the warfare state. The report described five variables that put Britain behind the eight ball—illness, ignorance, disease, squalor and want. It also exclaimed that everyone should have health care, employment, secondary education, subsidized housing and state insurance against sickness, unemployment and old age (De Grazia, 339). The British did not want to hold its citizens back from growing politically, socially or economically. They wanted to grow and form to the mold that the United States had. The Beveridge Report is very similar to a push that is being made in the United States right now. In recent years, there has and continues to be a push for nationwide healthcare and free higher education.
The Marshall Plan would follow suit and eventually be the European’s saving grace. The Marshall Plan gave aid to Europe in the form of credits, grants and supplies. Formally known as the European Recovery Plan, the Marshall Plan was not created to upstart a consumers’ Europe (De Grazia, 346). The plan was to upstart industry in Europe as well as rebuild the former warzones. The first order of business was to invest in infrastructures such as power stations and railroad bridges, to just name a few (De Grazia, 346.) However, not all European countries were able to reap the benefits of the plan. Britain, France and Italy were the three who were able to benefit the most from the plan, while Spain was excluded from the plan. Spain’s exclusion was due to Francisco Franco’s dictatorship and the lack of overall participation in the war. Over $13 billion was given to Europe as a result of the Marshall Plan. In modern economics, that equals out to $132 billion.
Many consider that the Marshall Plan is the boost that put Europe back on its feet. Not only did the plan benefit the European countries in their attempt to get back to how things once were, it benefitted the United States. The United States, while being the role model and major influence behind the new economic growth in Europe and at home, also planted their flag as the worldwide leader in the political spectrum. They were able to do this all while keeping the Soviet Union and communism at bay—something that may be bigger than all the previously mentioned accomplishments—especially on the brink of the Cold War.
Do you think Spain’s exclusion from the Marshall Plan had any lasting results? Looking at Pre War Spain versus Post War Spain, it is obvious that the Spanish Civil War devastated the State and any outside aid would have been greatly appreciated. Perhaps if Spain had been included in the Marshall Plan they would not have lagged behind the rest of Europe economically as they eventually did.
I liked the comparison you made between Reconstruction after the Civil War and the Reconstruction of Europe. Has Europe leaned on the United States to some extent ever since the Marshall Plan? or did they in some aspect learn to stand on their own again? Its important to remember that the United States might not have been being completely altruistic, but just trying to prevent the spread of communism by exerting their influence over Western Europe.
I’m also a fan of the two ties between US history and European politics of the time: reconstruction and the fight for greater human rights in the process. It definitely helps us to learn about both in the process. Do you think it was in the United States’ original formulation of the Marshall plan to almost force consumerism onto these countries? Or was it just a beneficial outcome?