Historical lenses are fantastic means through which historians can analyze a historical event in different ways. In the article "The Historiography of Hiroshima: The Rise and Fall of Revisionism," Michael Kort uses the political aspect of historical lenses. A political lens does not solely reflect on politicians, but it also centers on the relationship between countries. The historical lens is particularly critical in helping historians find answers about the power dynamics throughout history. Consequently, later generations will have insights into past events. Kort begins his article by highlighting the President's Truman's critics following the bombing events at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thus, the author shows the power plays that defined World War II. For example, the author quotes the criticisms by Norman Cousins and Thomas K. Finletter to show political reasons for the attack. According to the two critics, the US bombed Japan as a way of limiting Soviet influence in East Asia (Kort, 2007). From this, one acknowledges the political struggles between the US and the Soviets in the 1940s.
From the political lens, the author successfully establishes an argument that draws a reader into the geopolitical wars of the 20 th century. In the article, Kort explains the dynamics of WW II, its progression, motivation for the bombing, and the entry of the Soviets. Principally, the entry of Soviet into East Asia happened two days after Hiroshima and a day after Nagasaki. From a political perspective, one questions the motive of the bombings. The events were not motivated by a need to defeat a weakened Japan that could have surrendered by the end of 1945(Kort, 2007). Kort thus manages to show that the US bombed Japan due to its political differences with the Soviet Union. The political lens used by Kort is collaborated by the cold war that ensued between the US and the Soviet Union.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Kort, M. (2007). The Historiography of Hiroshima: The Rise and Fall of Revisionism. The New England Journal of History , 64 (1), 31-48.
