Throughout Europe and the United States, “raising the standard of living had become the official watchword for postwar global reconstruction” (De Grazia 340). However the phrase of “standard of living” was coined before the end of the war. The question that jumped to my mind in terms of the term “standard of living” was being able to live being healthy, fed, warm, and with shelter. However, Sir William Beverage, a liberal reformer (in Britain) identified “five giant social evils -illness, ignorance, disease, squalor, and want” were the major social issues facing Britain (and arguable all of postwar Europe) (De Grazia 339).
In terms of addressing the question of “the standard living” during the reconstruction in Europe (and Japan) I would make the argument that reconstruction of the Europe could be split into either tangible materials (such as washers, cars, other materials through the Marshall Plan) or intangible rights (like the Four Freedoms or UN Declaration of Human Rights). The Marshall Plan immediately conjures images of American relief reaching the impoverished Europeans and eventually American appliances, vehicles, etc. become a staple of the European market. While the physical relief is notable and critical, I believe it to be overshadowed by the intangible ideological relief that occurred during early WWII through post war reconstruction. One extremely notably idea that fed into the idea of “standard of living” was the Four Freedoms preached by President Roosevelt. “Freedom from want” numbered first among the “Four Freedoms” followed by Freedom of Religion, freedom of speech, and freedom for fear. That President Roosevelt set out on January 6, 1941 to press Congress to send Lend-Lease aid to nations already at war against the Axis” (De Grazia 340). Now these freedoms would eventually resurface in the UN, albeit, with much more specific wording and terminology. “UN’s 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights specified…that… “everyone has the right to a standard of living for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including food, clothing, housing….” (De Grazia 340). While Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms and the UN’s declarations regarding a “standard of living” may have differed in terms of how specific they were, both were critical for establishing the basis of international talks regarding what would become an international “standard of living”.
From these readings I found it interesting that much of the Bretton Woods Conference was planning for the eventual peace following WWII and how this would be implemented for future prosperity and peace. “The Bretton Woods Conference represented both an attempt to learn the lessons of the Great Depression (in the mind of the Democratic Party, the lessons of the New Deal), and a part of the preparation for peace and the post-war order” (293 James). However, my question would be since this conference was “initially the United States and the United Kingdom, and then the other members of the United Nations” how much would the peace and prosperity would primarily benefit them. Who primarily stood to gain from this very small and inclusive conference other than the US and UK? James even cites that “the centrality of the American dollar was the real legacy of Bretton Woods.” It seems to me that the Bretton Woods Conference was created under the guise of “future prosperity and peace” and did not significantly impact those who needed a better “standard of living” in postwar reconstruction Europe.
I thought your engagement with the standard of living topic within your blog and while leading class was exceptional. Do you believe that the standard of living also could vary from person to person based on comfort level? I am like you though. In my mind, the standard of living is defined as “being healthy, fed, warm, and with shelter.” How much does want really factor into the standard of living?
You did a great job outlining the standard of living and analyzing the Four Freedoms. Want seems to be at the center of every society. The question is how to keep it in check. How much want is okay and what the cut off limit? When, if it all, is it acceptable for the government to intervene in our lives to eliminate want? Is free market capitalism the best way to eliminate want, or did the USSR’s way better?
Great use of images in this post. I really like the comparisons made between the “Social Evils” and the “Four Freedoms.” While the Four Freedoms came first it is interesting to see the issues Sir William Beverage said were Britain’s greatest internal problems. I wonder if Roosevelt’s ideals were an influence on him.
I thought the way you set up your blog post was great with the two picture and the caption links. You brought up valid points about the standard of living at the time. I thought it was intriguing how you included Roosevelt four freedoms. Do you think the standard of living should be different from person to person?
Do you think standard of living is specific to one country or it universal across the world? During war does standard of living change? After the war is the standard of living raised?