Month: July 2025

1987: Reagan at the Gate

ESSENTIAL QUESTION:

How did the Berlin Wall represent the Cold War?

CONTEXT:

Ronald Reagan (1911-2004), president of the United States from 1981 until 1989, delivered one of his best known speeches at the Brandenburg Gate, a major historical landmark in Berlin, Germany, on June 12, 1987.

After World War II, Germany was divided into four sectors, each controlled by one of the Allied Forces. Berlin, Germany’s capitol, was also divided. The Soviet Union controlled East Germany and East Berlin, and the Western Allies (US, Great Britain, and France) controlled West Germany and West Berlin. Many East Germans fled to West Berlin to find better economic and political opportunities, and this became a major embarrassment for the East Germans. In 1961 they began building a wall using concrete blocks and wire to prevent this exodus. The 155 kilometer wall surrounded West Berlin, separating families and friends. But escapes to the West continued, and East Berlin strengthened the Wall; escapees could face death if caught. The Wall became a major symbol of the Cold War and the division between Western culture and the Soviets.

Although by the 1980s the Soviet economy was weakening and nationalist movements were arising within the Soviet Union, it would be 1991 before the Soviet Union dissolved. In 1987 President Reagan traveled to Berlin to give this speech, emphasizing the US support for West Berlin and West Germany and pressuring the Soviets to end the division of Berlin and Germany.

TEXT:

…Behind me stands a wall that encircles the free sectors of this city, part of a vast system of barriers that divides the entire continent of Europe. From the Baltic South, those barriers cut across Germany in a gash of barbed wire, concrete, dog runs, and guard towers. Farther south, there may be no visible, no obvious wall. But there remain armed guards and checkpoints all the same–still a restriction on the right to travel, still an instrument to impose upon ordinary men and women the will of a totalitarian state. Yet, it is here in Berlin where the wall emerges most clearly; here, cutting across your city, where the news photo and the television screen have imprinted this brutal division of a continent upon the mind of the world.

Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German separated from his fellow men.
Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar…

…But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind–too little food.
Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.


And now—now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control.


Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty—the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace.


There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.
General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate.
Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate.
Mr. Gorbachev—Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!…

INQUIRY:

  1. The Brandenburg Gate in Berlin is located in what was the restricted zone when Berlin was divided. Why do you think Reagan chose the Gate as the site of this speech?
  2. How did Reagan describe the Wall? What tone did those terms convey?
  3. When Reagan used the term “will of a totalitarian state”, to which country was he referring? What is a totalitarian state?
  4. What was the effect of Reagan declaring “…every man is a German, separated from his fellow men. Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar…”? How did this define Reagan’s audience for the speech?
  5. How did Reagan compare the Communist world and the Free World?
  6. What did Reagan list as the results of freedom?
  7. Did Reagan believer that the Soviets were in the process of making changes? How do you know?
  8. What did Reagan state would be the main sign of changes and the desire for freedom in the Soviet Union?
  9. In what ways did the Berlin Wall represent the Cold War?
  10. The most well known line from this speech is the last one in this excerpt. Why do you think that line would be best remembered?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

https://www.stiftung-berliner-mauer.de/en/topics/berlin-wall

https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2007/summer/berlin.html

1881: Jackson’s “Century of Dishonor”

ESSENTIAL QUESTION:

Investigate America’s “Century of Dishonor.”

CONTEXT:

Helen Hunt Jackson (1830-1885), born in Massachusetts, was a poet, author, and Native American rights activist. She later moved to Colorado on the advice of her physicians to improve her poor health. In 1879 she was inspired by Chief Standing Bear (c. 1829-1908, a Ponca chief and Native American activist who argued successfully in 1879 for judicial rights in federal court), and she later wrote A Century of Dishonor, an expose of the crimes against Native Americans. It led to the founding of the Indian Rights Association (1930-1994). She died of stomach cancer in 1885.

This excerpt is from A Century of Dishonor.

TEXT: (NOTE: “Indian” is used as it was in the original text)

…There is not among these three hundred bands of Indians [in the United States] one which has not suffered cruelly at the hands either of the Government or of white settlers. The poorer, the more insignificant, the more helpless the band, the more certain the cruelty and outrage to which they have been subjected. This is especially true of the bands on the Pacific slopes.

These Indians found themselves of a sudden surrounded by and caught up in the
great influx of gold-seeking settlers, as helpless creatures on a shore are caught
up in a tidal wave. There was not time for the Government to make treaties;
not even time for communities to make laws. The tale of the wrongs, the
oppressions, the murders of the Pacific-slope Indians in the last thirty years
would be a volume by itself, and is too monstrous to be believed.
It makes little difference, however, where one opens the record of the
history of the Indians; every page and every year has its dark stain. The story of
one tribe is the story of all, varied only by differences of time and place; but
neither time nor place makes any difference in the main facts. Colorado is as
greedy and unjust in 1880 as was Georgia in 1830, and Ohio in 1795; and the
United States Government breaks promises now as deftly as then, and with added ingenuity long practice….

The history of the Government connections with the Indians is a
shameful record of broken treaties and unfulfilled promises. The history of the
border, white man’s connection with the Indians is a sickening record of
murder, outrage, robbery, and wrongs committed by the former, as the rule,
and occasional savage outbreaks and unspeakably barbarous deeds of
retaliation by the latter, as the exception….

INQUIRY: (NOTE: the term “Indian” is used in the questions as it was in Jackson’s text)

  1. What two sources did Jackson list as the source of Indian mistreatment?
  2. What role did the Gold Rush play in the mistreatment of the Indians?
  3. According to Jackson, were any tribes exempt from mistreatment? How do you know?
  4. How did Jackson characterize “the history of the Government connections” with the Indians?
  5. How did she characterize “the border, white man’s connection” with the Indians?
  6. Investigate Red Cloud, leader of the Oglala Sioux from 1865 until 1900. Evaluate his relationship with the US Government. Or choose another Native American leader to investigate, such as Sitting Bull, Geronimo, Tecumseh, Black Hawk, or Crazy Horse. Compare their relationships with the US Government during their times.
  7. The Battle of Wounded Knee in South Dakota occurred in 1890. Investigate this battle and assess how it characterized the attitude of the US Army at the time.
  8. The term “Indian” is now usually considered derogatory and offensive. “First Nations”, “Native Americans”, or other terms such as individual tribal names are considered more appropriate. Why does it matter? What value does a name have?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/a-century-of-dishonor-by-helen-hunt-jackson.htm

https://archive.org/details/centuryofdishono00jackrich/page/n7/mode/2up

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/50560/50560-h/50560-h.htm

https://aktalakota.stjo.org/american-indian-leaders/red-cloud/