Journal Issue:
University of Massachusetts Undergraduate History Journal: Volume 3, Issue 1

No Thumbnail Available
Issue Date
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Chrzanowski, Michael
Domestic opposition to the government in Paris was a constant throughout theFrench Revolution. Although the revolutionary government repressed each instance of unrest,the various opposition movements’ motivations and goals provide a lens through which wecan re-evaluate the values of liberty, equality, and justice that revolutionaries articulated.One domestic opposition movement, the Federalist Revolt of 1793, had major significance for the course of the Revolution. The Federalist Revolt raised questions about fundamental aspects of the Revolution itself: who were the sovereign people? Who claimed to represent the people?Was violence integral to claiming sovereignty? I explore a number of aspects of the FederalistRevolt. Why did the revolt occur? Why did its participants arm themselves? Who were the participants and detractors of the Federalist Revolt? What was the impact of the Federalist Revolt on the policies and practices of the National Convention? How did signs of the Terror reveal themselves in debates of sovereignty and acts of repression during the periods of civil unrest?Distinct regional identities and the diverse effects of revolutionary policy on these regions was the essence of the tension between Paris and the provinces. Additionally, I challenge the past historiography on the Federalist Revolt and argue that armed resistance to perceived oppressive government had always been present in the politics of France. The Federalist Revolt was an ideological struggle between various levels of government authority. Historians in the past by and large accepted the viewpoint of the central government that the Federalist Revolt was a counter-revolutionary movement. Writers such as Paul Frolich, who defended the violent actions of the Jacobin leaders preceding the Terror, and historians like Albert Mathiez (Le Bolchevisme et le Jacobinisme (1920),La Révolution Française (1924)), Jacques Godechot (La grande nation: l'expansion révolutionnaire de la France dans le monde de 1789 à 1799 (1956) La contre-révolution: doctrine et action, 1789-1804 (1961) La pensée révolutionnaire en France et en Europe, 1780-1799 (1963)) and Georges Lefebvre (Classes and Class Struggles during the French Revolution (1953), The Parisian Sans-Culottes andthe French Revolution (1964),The Sans Culottes: the Popular Movement andRevolutionary Government (1972),The French Revolution 1787-1799 (1975), A Short History of theFrench Revolution (1977)), renowned yet somewhat controversial, taking hardline marxist interpretations on the Revolution, formed the general basis of thought around the narrative of counter-revolution. This paper falls in line with Suzanne Desan’s understanding of the Federalists, who said “the leaders of the Federalist Revolt were not counterrevolutionaries. They were not Royalists. They were revolutionaries.” The interests of the Federalist Revolt were closely aligned with the early revolutionary years, focused on claiming sovereignty for the nation to end the injustices of the Old Regime, rather than embracing a grand revolutionary vision.
Connors, Michael
After decades of subjugation under the British crown, India’s leaders at the onset ofthe Second World War were split on how to handle nationalist sentiment in their country. Part ofthe Indian National Congress, an independence-focused political party, these leaders werehighly aware of the reality where many common Indian citizens would shed blood for a king thatwould not validate India as an independent state. Since negotiation seemed to prove fruitless, Subhas Chandra Bose, a savvy Indian political leader, decided action must be taken to remove the British Raj. In order to weaken British authority, Bose split from the INC — forming a shaky alliance with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in order to promote anger in Indian citizens through propaganda radio broadcasts. With Axis support, Bose waged an information war on the Allies, proclaiming a “Free India” while leading a provisional army. Meanwhile, Allied efforts to dissuade Indian citizens from Bose’s rhetoric through their own propaganda countermeasures may have not been as effective as initially intended.
Lavoie, Zachary
This paper involves discovering how the lack of clarity in the American refugee policy post-World War II affected members of multiple minorities: namely Jews, suspected Communists, and homosexuals. The goal is to show that the lack of clarity in American policy and pre-established prejudice were factors that encouraged nativism and xenophobia within the American people. This has been done by examining secondary sources of analyses given by historians like Carl Bon Tempo and Torrie Hester, and by also drawing on primary news articleswritten from 1948 to 1980. Upon examination of these sources, it became clear that the uncertain refugee policy had a negative impact on the American public sphere and led to tension between foreign Communist nations. Through showing the effects of unclear policy, this research highlights the importance of decisive laws and a need for humanitarian support over self-serving American image.
Morrissey, Conor
This paper seeks to answer the question of how the development of nuclearweapons changed the nature of warfare, diplomacy, and international relations. It frames thehistorical context in which these weapons were invented, how they were used to achieve militarygoals, and asks ethical and moralistic questions about how they changed the way global affairswere conducted. The focus of this paper begins with the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, and ends with the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. This seventeen-year period marks the era of the Cold War upon which nuclear weapons had the most pronounced and profound effect. Though their influence has never left the geopolitical landscape, the historical events and actors who lived through this initial phase were operating without guidelines or precedent to steer them, and thus their ability to navigate mankind out of this tumultuous time without engaging in an open nuclear conflict is somewhat remarkable. That unique achievement will be the central theme of this paper.
Schnur, Kyran
This paper examines the historical development of the relationship between the Putin regime in Russia and the Chávez and Maduro regimes in Venezuela. Key differences and similarities in their foreign and domestic policies are explored, as well as how they interact with each other on the world stage. It makes the case that chavismo in Venezuela has lead to increasingly autocratic policies as oil prices have declined and leadership has changed hands, changing the character of Venezuela and Russia’s relationship into one that closely resembles the patron-client relationships of Latin American caudillismo.