| Revision as of 01:44, 17 January 2020 editEshaparvathi (talk | contribs)158 edits →Openly-admitted Bias by Misplaced Pages editor: new sectionTag: 2017 wikitext editor← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 09:41, 6 January 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,321,635 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 7 WikiProject templates. Merge {{VA}} into {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 6 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject European history}}, {{WikiProject Socialism}}, {{WikiProject Politics}}, {{WikiProject United States History}}, {{WikiProject United States}}, {{WikiProject National Archives}}. | ||
| (37 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Talk header}} | {{Talk header}} | ||
| {{Article history | |||
| {{ArticleHistory | |||
| |action1=PR | |action1=PR | ||
| |action1date=12:00, 15 September 2005 | |action1date=12:00, 15 September 2005 | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| |maindate=April 22, 2006 | |maindate=April 22, 2006 | ||
| |currentstatus=FFA | |currentstatus=FFA | ||
| |otd1date=2004-04-03|otd1oldid=3478716 | |||
| |otd2date=2004-06-05|otd2oldid=3963293 | |||
| |otd3date=2005-04-03|otd3oldid=12414386 | |||
| |otd4date=2006-04-03|otd4oldid=46690094 | |||
| |otd5date=2007-04-03|otd5oldid=119966147 | |||
| |otd6date=2008-04-03|otd6oldid=202969208 | |||
| |otd7date=2009-04-03|otd7oldid=281449286 | |||
| |otd8date=2010-04-03|otd8oldid=353776339 | |||
| |otd9date=2015-04-03|otd9oldid=654760821 | |||
| }} | |||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject European history|importance=high}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Socialism|importance=high}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid}} | |||
| {{WikiProject United States History|importance=high}} | |||
| {{WikiProject United States|importance=mid}} | |||
| {{WikiProject National Archives}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Law}} | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject European history|class=B|importance=high}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Socialism|class= B|importance=high}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Politics|class= B|importance=mid}} | |||
| {{WikiProject United States History|class= B|importance=high}} | |||
| {{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=mid}} | |||
| {{WPNARA|class= B|importance=Top}} | |||
| {{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=B|category=History|importance=Mid}} }} | |||
| {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-04-03|oldid1=3478716|date2=2004-06-05|oldid2=3963293|date3=2005-04-03|oldid3=12414386|date4=2006-04-03|oldid4=46690094|date5=2007-04-03|oldid5=119966147|date6=2008-04-03|oldid6=202969208|date7=2009-04-03|oldid7=281449286|date8=2010-04-03|oldid8=353776339|date9=2015-04-03|oldid9=654760821}} | |||
| {{Refideas | {{Refideas | ||
| |free=yes | |free=yes | ||
| Line 43: | Line 52: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{archives|auto=long|search=yes|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=100}} | {{archives|auto=long|search=yes|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=100}} | ||
| {{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/George_Washington_University/Public_Opinion_about_US_Foreign_Policy_(Fall_2017) | assignments = ] }} | |||
| {{annual readership}} | |||
| {{Vital article|topic=History|level=5|class=B}} | |||
| == Public opinion data on the Marshall Plan == | == Public opinion data on the Marshall Plan == | ||
| Line 65: | Line 74: | ||
| ==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
| {{reflist-talk}} | |||
| <references/> | |||
| == "Most reject the idea that..." == | |||
| The sentence "Most reject the idea that it alone miraculously revived Europe since the evidence shows that a general recovery was already underway" appears 3 times in different sections of the article. A bit redundant, no? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| It also applies to section of "Modern criticism", it could use a sentence how some critics miss the point saying that free market reforms and economic cooperation and Ludwig Erhart were more important, when in fact, the Marshall plan outright demanded opening of the markets, economic cooperation between countries, planning of international railroad and highway networks, and that each recipient of the money must also lower trade barriers and deregulate, etc. Immediately after hearing the Mashall plan speech on the radio, the french and british ministers had a phone call about it, how are they going to make plans. The purpose of the Marshall plan was to, quote "give hope", and hope for a better future is what drives the economy. As far as Germany goes, it was the Marshall plan which DOUBLED the German steel quotas and pushed for coal mining to drive industries of the whole europe, it also SAID that economically strong Germany was key to the stability of Europe (Germany being the source of specialist and high-tech industry and machinery), and exactly that has happened. In the end, the announcement and existence of the Marshall plan helped Czechoslovakia and Poland, who were driven to make advance plans for their economies, latter of which received huge support from the Soviet Union because of later public rejection of the plan. They wouldn't have got it if it were not for the plan. There was also the soviet response with their own plan later, which also would have not existed were it not for the original. And once more about the Germany: Ludwig Erhart was also a part of the Marshall plan, he was executing the whole idea behind it. It was the Marshall plan that ended the previous punitive measures, which would cause 25 million more people to be out of jobs. But I guess some critics like to forget that. The previous measures limited food to 1000-1500 calories a day, Marshall plan was what ended it, and let me tell you, being fed well is what gives you strength to build the economy. | |||
| Marshall Plan<ref>https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marshall-plan.asp</ref> | |||
| German economic miracle<ref>https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/german-economic-miracle.asp</ref> | |||
| == Neutral Point Of View == | |||
| This entire article does not use original sources. For example, if Molotov made a statement, they should say, "Molotov said," ________". Instead, they use this source: Wettig, Gerhard (2008). Stalin and the Cold War in Europe. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-5542-6. | |||
| However, this source is not trustworthy with regards to the USSR since he has appeared in multiple CIA conferences including this one on . <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:22, 15 January 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :{{u|Eshaparvathi}}, See ]. Misplaced Pages works from reliable independent secondary sources, not primary sources, and that is by design. This is a book from a reputable publishing house and appears to be by a respected author (we don't have an article here but there's ]). ''']''' <small>(])</small> 16:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :{{u|JzG}} Are you saying that a SECONDARY SOURCE that cites the exact words of Molotov is less reliable than an interpretation of what Molotov felt? This is objectively insane. | |||
| :: A republishing of Molotov's words in a CIA document would be primary - it's not analytical. But you haven't identified the page you want to cite so who knows? ''']''' <small>(])</small> 23:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Non-Neutral Language == | |||
| {{archive top|]. Please be much more specific in the sense of "change X to Y using Z source" or "add X using Y source". There's nothing we can do with this lengthy monologue. Misplaced Pages summarises reliable independent secondary sources and is ]. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 23:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)}} | |||
| ===Nonesensical Metaphors === | |||
| How can Washington realize things? Was it members of the Truman administration? Who? | |||
| <blockquote>By July 1947 Washington realized that economic recovery in Europe could not go forward without the reconstruction of the German industrial base, deciding that an "orderly, prosperous Europe requires the economic contributions of a stable and productive Germany." In addition, the strength of Moscow-controlled communist parties in France and Italy worried Washington.</blockquote> | |||
| === Only One Side Presented=== | |||
| Marshall's direct statement is there. | |||
| <blockquote>After the adjournment of the Moscow conference following six weeks of failed discussions with the Soviets regarding a potential German reconstruction, the United States concluded that a solution could not wait any longer. To clarify the American position, a major address by Secretary of State George Marshall was planned. Marshall gave the address at Harvard University on June 5, 1947. He offered American aid to promote European recovery and reconstruction. The speech described the dysfunction of the European economy and presented a rationale for US aid. | |||
| The modern system of the division of labor upon which the exchange of products is based is in danger of breaking down. ... Aside from the demoralizing effect on the world at large and the possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned, the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all. It is logical that the United States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health to the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace. Our policy is not directed against any country, but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos. Any government that is willing to assist in recovery will find full co-operation on the part of the United States. Its purpose should be the revival of a working economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist.</blockquote> | |||
| However, Molotov's direct statement is missing. Therefore, it favors one side over the other. | |||
| <blockquote>Therefore, the question of American economic aid of which indeed nothing definite is yet known has now provided an occasion for the British and French Governments to seek the creation of a new organization standing over and above the countries of Europe and interfering in their internal affairs down to determining the line of development to be followed by the main branches of industry in these countries. Furthermore, Great Britain and France together with the countries close to them are laying claim to a predominant position in this organization or in the so-called “Steering Committee” for Europe as it has been named in the British draft. | |||
| Verbal reservations are now being made to the effect that this organization would allegedly not intervene in the internal affairs of these states and would not encroach upon their sovereignty. But it clearly follows from the tasks which are being set before this organization or before the “Steering Committee” that the European countries would find themselves placed under control and would lose their former economic and national independence because it so pleases certain strong powers | |||
| </blockquote> | |||
| Shouldn't the side which opposed the Marshall plan also be included with the side that supported it? Or else, it paints the USSR as ridiculously evil. | |||
| ===Highly opinionated language === | |||
| <blockquote>Along with the UN, '''many humanist''' ideas were circulating over the five-year period that ensued its formation. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) date from this time. One of the ideas proposed in 1947 at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment (UNCTE) was the International Trade Organization (ITO). The GATT was first conceived around that time too. | |||
| </blockquote> | |||
| Why is the IMF and the World Bank described as humanist? | |||
| Why is GATT described as humanist? | |||
| What is a humanist idea? | |||
| === Mind-reading === | |||
| ==== Stalin opinions ==== | |||
| How do you know what Stalin thought? How did we know that he changed his outlook? | |||
| <blockquote>Stalin only changed his outlook when he learned that (a) credit would only be extended under conditions of economic cooperation and, (b) aid would also be extended to Germany in total, an eventuality which Stalin thought would hamper the Soviets' ability to exercise influence in western Germany.</blockquote> | |||
| ==== Manuevering ==== | |||
| <blockquote>Initially, Stalin maneuvered to kill the Plan, or at least hamper it by means of destructive participation in the Paris talks regarding conditions. He quickly realized, however, that this would be impossible after Molotov reported—following his arrival in Paris in July 1947—that conditions for the credit were non-negotiable. Looming as just as large a concern was the Czechoslovak eagerness to accept the aid, as well as indications of a similar Polish attitude. | |||
| == ] == | |||
| </blockquote> | |||
| # "Kill the plan OR at least hamper it by means of destructive participation" sounds extensively like an opinion or speculation. | |||
| # How do you know he quickly "realized" something. | |||
| #"Looming as a large concern" for whom? | |||
| No idea where to work this in, but from that article: The CED has been credited with helping to create the ], the ] (and therefore the ] and the ]) and the ].<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|last=Mudge|first=Stephanie L.|date=30 May 2019|title=Commentary: An Alliance Between Big Business and Democratic Socialists Isn’t as Unlikely as It Sounds|url=https://fortune.com/2019/05/30/capitalism-democratic-socialists/|access-date=2022-01-30|website=]|language=en}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=Allott|first=Daniel|date=2020-01-21|title=Capitalism must meet the challenge: Prosperity for all Americans|url=https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/479179-capitalism-must-meet-the-challenge-prosperity-for-all-americans|access-date=2022-01-30|website=]|language=en}}</ref> ] (]) 17:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC) | |||
| ===Factually incorrect assertions=== | |||
| ====== Economic Recovery ====== | |||
| <blockquote>Most of Europe's economies were recovering slowly, as unemployment and food shortages led to strikes and unrest in several nations. Agricultural production was 83% of 1938 levels, industrial production was 88%, and exports 59%</blockquote> | |||
| {{reflist talk}} ] (]) 17:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC) | |||
| This is misleading because it varied from place to place. | |||
| ]<ref>{{Cite journal|last=De Long|first=J. Bradford|last2=Eichengreen|first2=Barry|date=1991-11-01|title=The Marshall Plan: History's Most Successful Structural Adjustment Program|url=http://www.nber.org/papers/w3899}}</ref> | |||
| ====== Conflicting Statements====== | |||
| <blockquote>The United States was already spending a great deal to help Europe recover. Over $14 billion was spent or loaned during the postwar period through the end of 1947 and is not counted as part of the Marshall Plan. Much of this aid was designed to restore infrastructure and help refugees. Britain, for example, received an emergency loan of $3.75 billion.</blockquote> | |||
| Earlier in the document, it mentions $12 billion and now it is $14 billion? Which one is the real number? | |||
| == "Its role in rapid recovery has been debated." == | |||
| === Anti-Communist Bias === | |||
| Why is a communist insurgency a threat? It should be a communist insurgency fighting in Greece. Also, it is Truman's opinion that capitalists are "free" and communists are not free. | |||
| <blockquote>With a communist, although non-Soviet, insurgency threatening Greece, and Britain financially unable to continue its aid, the President announced his Truman Doctrine on March 12, 1947, "to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures", with an aid request for consideration and decision, concerning Greece and Turkey. | |||
| </blockquote> | |||
| {{archive bottom}} | |||
| never underestimate the psychological fuel you give to a desperate population with the knowledge that someone is helping you. (no refs required). on another note, the article repeatedly says france and uk received less aid than germany, yet when one totals up the figures from the two tables one gets the following: '''grants/loans''' - germany 1,390.6, france 2,713.6, uk 3,189.8. | |||
| == Openly-admitted Bias by Misplaced Pages editor == | |||
| '''expenditures''' - germany 1,448, france 2,296, uk 3,297. | |||
| '''totals:''' germany 2,838.6, france 5,009.6, uk 6,486.6. germany received 57% of the aid given france, and almost 44% of the aid given the uk. what am i missing? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ==Broken File== | |||
| A wikipedia editor says,"Something about history being written by winners" AKA that wikipedia's policy is having pro-western bias. Therefore, not being neutral or trustworthy. http://archive.is/wip/KNOPV | |||
| PDF file for Public Law is broken. Idk why or how. ] (]) 17:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 09:41, 6 January 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Marshall Plan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Marshall Plan is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 22, 2006. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Category | The following sources contain public domain or freely licensed material that may be incorporated into this article:
|
 Archives | ||
|
||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Public opinion data on the Marshall Plan
Notes
References
- Lukacs, John. “A LOOK AT . . . THE LEGACY OF THE MARSHALL PLAN.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 25 May 1997, www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1997/05/25/a-look-at-the-legacy-of-the-marshall-plan/47b5b44c-e1eb-4c68-bd46-5a29c5c76c73/?utm_term=.b758f5822e5f.
- Machado, Barry. “Selling the Marshall Plan.” The George C. Marshall Foundation, George C Marshall Foundation, marshallfoundation.org/library/digital-archive/selling-the-marshall-plan-chapter-2-monograph-collection/.
- National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago. Foreign Affairs Survey, Jun, 1952 . USNORC.520327.R16. National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago . Cornell University, Ithaca, NY: Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, iPOLL , accessed Oct-13-2017.
- National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago. Foreign Affairs Survey, Mar, 1949 . USNORC.490164.R11. National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago . Cornell University, Ithaca, NY: Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, iPOLL , accessed Oct-13-2017.
- Gallup Organization. Gallup Poll, Feb, 1948 . USGALLUP.030348.RT07C. Gallup Organization . Cornell University, Ithaca, NY: Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, iPOLL , accessed Oct-13-2017.
- Gallup Organization. Gallup Poll (AIPO), Sep, 1941 . USGALLUP.41-248.QKT09. Gallup Organization . Cornell University, Ithaca, NY: Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, iPOLL , accessed Oct-13-2017
Committee for Economic Development
No idea where to work this in, but from that article: The CED has been credited with helping to create the Bretton Woods Agreement, the Employment Act of 1946 (and therefore the Council of Economic Advisers and the Joint Economic Committee) and the Marshall Plan. valereee (talk) 17:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
References
- Mudge, Stephanie L. (30 May 2019). "Commentary: An Alliance Between Big Business and Democratic Socialists Isn't as Unlikely as It Sounds". Fortune. Retrieved 2022-01-30.
- Allott, Daniel (2020-01-21). "Capitalism must meet the challenge: Prosperity for all Americans". The Hill. Retrieved 2022-01-30.
valereee (talk) 17:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
"Its role in rapid recovery has been debated."
never underestimate the psychological fuel you give to a desperate population with the knowledge that someone is helping you. (no refs required). on another note, the article repeatedly says france and uk received less aid than germany, yet when one totals up the figures from the two tables one gets the following: grants/loans - germany 1,390.6, france 2,713.6, uk 3,189.8. expenditures - germany 1,448, france 2,296, uk 3,297. totals: germany 2,838.6, france 5,009.6, uk 6,486.6. germany received 57% of the aid given france, and almost 44% of the aid given the uk. what am i missing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.36.71 (talk) 21:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Broken File
PDF file for Public Law is broken. Idk why or how. A. Rosenberg (talk) 17:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages former featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in History
- B-Class vital articles in History
- B-Class European history articles
- High-importance European history articles
- All WikiProject European history pages
- B-Class socialism articles
- High-importance socialism articles
- WikiProject Socialism articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class United States History articles
- High-importance United States History articles
- WikiProject United States History articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class law articles
- Unknown-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles