Dan Schueller

Final Paper
The first theory that will be examined is post-structuralism. The basic premise of post-
structuralism is that word meanings are never certain and altered by signs around them. They
also insist that meaning changes as we read and listen. An example of this can be illustrated by
using the word tree. Tree can mean many different things when surrounded by other words
such as jungle, forest, branch, family, house, or root. These words give the word tree a
different context and meaning. Another contribution of post-structuralism is the theory of
language. This includes any form of communication from writing to speaking. They believe that
nothing can be known independently of language. This means that we cannot make assumptions
such as men are naturally aggressive or that peoples going through a time of change feel
disoriented. Language is the only way to make sense of history, but language can vary greatly.
Historians of post-structuralism often use discourse. Discourse refers to communication in
speech or writing. Post-structuralism historians use it to refer to the relationship between
language and its context.
Post-structuralism looks at textual evidence like conventional historians, but conventional
historians believe that they can find historical reality and truth from textual evidence. Post-
structuralism believe that historical reality and truth does not exist. They see this textual
evidence as representations or portrayals by the author. They believe that nothing of any value
can be written about the past. The only information that can be read about the past is the
historians perceptions of the past.
Historians influenced by post-structuralism write about history by criticizing books,
journals, and articles by other historians. They also write about how the world and past has been
Dan Schueller

constructed. They look at how people in the past constructed their world, how historians have
constructed the past, and how concepts have been constructed in the past.
A critique of post-structuralism is that they use the same methodology as conventional
historians. Historians find truth in history by dealing with strong probabilities. They cannot go
into the past to confirm that some event took place or that some structure existed. This is similar
to how our justice system is executed. Jurors cannot go back into the past and see directly if a
crime has been committed. They can only deal in probabilities and raise the verdict of guilty only
if they have no reasonable doubt of the defendants innocence. Historians utilizing post-
structuralism believe that only what can be seen directly is truth. This is the reason that no one
can be one hundred percent a post-structuralism historian. This criticism has been recognized
most in the subject of the Holocaust. Post-structuralism theorists accept the high probability and
factual occurrence of the Holocaust as truth, but this concession destroys the premise of their
position. Post-structuralism believes that reality cannot be known.
Tears, Tantrums, and Bared Teeth: The Emotional Economy of Three Conservative
Prime Ministers, 1951-1963 by Martin Francis is an article that utilizes the theory of post-
structuralism. This is evident when he shows how the meaning of the term manliness changed
over time from the 50s to the early 60s. The man of restraint and discipline changed over time to
a man of expression and identity. To prove this, he looks at the lives of three British Prime
Ministers including Churchill, Eden, and Macmillan from 1951 to 1963. His use of the post-
structuralism theory is also evident when he provides discourse to show how the meaning of this
term changed over time.
Dan Schueller

The author acknowledges that the British man in the 1950s was defined as one who had
self-discipline and self-restraint. This was especially true for men in politics. Emotional control
was critical in the representation of British politics. The display of tears or anger was considered
inappropriate. Politicians needed to be serious, sober, and have ordered behavior.
The author begins to show how the term manliness changed over time with Prime
Minister Churchill. Churchills behavior deviated from the norm of the British man. Francis
shows how Churchills dress, speech, and personal behavior were unconventional of the British
man. He was a man who displayed emotion and self-expression. This behavior was not normal
for British man and politicians, but Churchill was accepted by the public due to the respect and
adoration the public had for his role in the Second World War. This acceptance is the beginning
of how Francis argues that the term manliness changed over time.
Eden became British Prime Minister in 1955. He was a man who exemplified the
characteristics of manliness as defined by the British public of the 50s. Eden was a man of
self-discipline and self-restraint, but many people around Eden thought that he was burying his
emotion and expression inside. Edens behavior took a turn at a cabinet meeting in 1956. Edens
colleagues told him that British military operations would have to end in Egypt and the Suez
Canal. Eden broke down crying and threw a tantrum as he stormed off to privacy. Eden resigned
within two months of this incident.
Macmillan became the next British Prime Minister. He looked to reclaim self-restraint
and self-discipline after the break down of Eden. Macmillan too was a man who exemplified
manliness as defined by the British public of the 50s. Soon many people around Macmillan
noticed anxiety and nervousness that he tried to keep inside him. The blow up of the Profumo
Dan Schueller

Scandal caused these habits to explode. The scandal was extensively covered by the media due to
the sex, politics, and espionage involved. Macmillan became ill from the tension and
nervousness this caused. He was unable to deal with a shift in British culture and had to resign.
Francis explains these incidents in the terms of Eden and Macmillan to explain for the
discourse that arose. This involved a shift from a culture of self-discipline to one of self-
expression. This was evident in the increasing consumption but also in art, media, sex, and youth
culture. Francis cites discourse on the developments in psychology that found a different
understanding of the self. This discourse advocated for one that that was childish, immature,
spontaneous, and curious. There was also a growing awareness of the health risks caused by
excessive self-discipline and self-restraint. Francis utilized this discourse to prove that the term
manliness changed over time.
The first methodology that will be examined is Marxism. The Marxist Philosophy
became widely circulated after 1918. It began to gain popularity after World War I, the
Bolshevik Revolution, and the addition of civil freedoms in the west. The Marxist philosophy of
history appealed to some historians because of its four major components.
The first major component is that history develops through stages. This component is
based on teleology, meaning that history moves to a known or predictable destination. This series
begins with vague stages prior to feudalism which then moves to capitalism and onto
communism. This appealed to historians because it provides levels of development for historians
to judge and study. The next component is the underlying economic structure. This is the belief
that the economy conditions everything else. The economy is the base of everything else known
as the superstructure. An example of this is the agriculture economy of feudalism which explains
Dan Schueller

feudalisms de-centralized politics and law. This appealed to historians because it is very easily
understood and conveyed. The third component of Marxist philosophy is class conflict. Marx
sees this as the agency for change explaining movement between the stages. This is the reason it
appeals to historians. Marxist philosophy provides developmental levels of history and society
with the agency for change or moving between the stages. An example of this is feudal lords and
nobles conflicting with the middle class and peasants. This class conflict led to a movement
between the stages from feudalism to capitalism. Marx believes that the final stage is
communism which will transition society from capitalism. The last component is scientific.
Marxists claimed that Marx discovered laws underlying the development of social history. Social
history appealed to historians because it is the popular and democratic alternative to the study of
government, law, and war. It is the history of ordinary people and connects with Marxist
philosophy in which it studies the history of oppressed people. This study can also be connected
with other areas such as government, law, economics, and religion. It can be a total and holistic
approach to history.
The main critique of Marxist historical writing is its exaggeration of the economic cause.
The philosophy is based too much on determinism meaning that the economy is the determinant
for everything. History and society does not always develop in the stages outlined by Marx.
There are many capitalist economies thriving in the world today that successfully rejected
communism. Marx would have argued that this should have been there final stage. Marxist
philosophys component of the underlying economic structure reduces every societal explanation
to the economy. This is too simple and cannot be the total explanation for every aspect of
society. Marxist philosophy also believes that class conflict is the agency for change. Societal
change cannot always be explained by class conflict. There are many factors that can elicit
Dan Schueller

change in a society. The anti-reductionist pressure and the loosening of the economy and
deterministic views in the 1980s reduced the authorization of Marxist philosophy.
Making of the English Working Class was written by E.P. Thompson and utilizes the
methodology of Marxism. This piece of literature examines the development of the English
working class during the industrial revolution in the late 18
th
century and early 19
th
century.
Thompson uses the Marxist philosophy of history in his argument. He argues that class
consciousness is the way in which common experiences are handled in cultural terms. Thompson
utilizes two principles of the Marxist methodology. These include the principle that the economy
conditions everything else and the principle of class conflict. Thompsons use of Marxism is a
creative one. He not only argues that the industrial revolution economics conditioned class
consciousness but preconceived ideas were involved as well. These preconceived ideas were the
creative aspect of his use of Marxist methodology. He also attributes the development of class
consciousness to the class conflict principle. Thompson argues that this class consciousness was
developed out of class differences and class conflict.
The industrial revolution marked the creation of large factories, impersonal relations, and
a widened gap between wealth and social status. Factory owners held an agreement not to hire
workers that quit a job with another factory owner. The work day was long, minimalizing
workers free time. Thompson argues that the industrial revolution intensified worker exploitation
and made it transparent. He further argues that workers lost their independence and were
controlled by the clock. Thompson points to this evidence to argue that this economic structure
developed the working class consciousness. Thompson further points to the evidence of workers
witnessing the French revolution and the call for liberty, equality, and fraternity. They also were
conscious of the Enlightment values and the notion of the free born Englishmen. These ideals
Dan Schueller

were part of the working class consciousness as well. The working class recognized that these
ideals were not being granted to them. This is the creative aspect of Thompsons use of the
Marxist methodology. Thompson uses this evidence to point to the development of class conflict
that arose out of these class differences. This created a worker versus employer mentality.
Thompson argues this further developed class consciousness.