This paper discusses the European Marshall Plan in three subsections: the impetus for its creation, its logistical implementation, and the results to both Europe as a whole and theUnited States. The consequences of the Marshall Plan are further broken down into three pieces: direct economic effects, indirect economic effects, and political effects. I argue that there is little evidence that direct economic effects account for the Marshall Plan’s success. Instead, the indirect economic effects, particularly in the implementation of liberal capitalistic policies, and the political effects, particularly the ideal of European integration and government-business partnerships, are the major reasons for Europe’s unsurpassed growth.
Cite this paper
Magid, J. (2012). The Marshall Plan. Advances in Historical Studies, 1, 1-7. doi: 10.4236/ahs.2012.11001.
 Crafts, N. (2011). The Marshall Plan: A reality check. University of Warwick Working Paper Series, 49, 2011.
 De Long, B., & Eichengreen, B. (1991). The Marshall Plan: History’s most successful structural adjustment program.
 Duignan, P., & Gann, L. H. (1997). The Marshall Plan. Hoover Digest, 4, 1.
 Gubin, E. (1948). How to do business under the Marshall Plan. Kiplinger Magazine, 5, 5-16.
 Hitchens, H. (1968). Influences on the congressional decision to pass the Marshall Plan. Western Political Quarterly, 21, 51-68.
 Hogan, M. (1987). The Marshall Plan. New York: Press Syndicate of The University of Cambridge. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511583728
 Kindleberger, C. (1968). The Marshall Plan and the cold war. International Journal, 23, 369-382.
 Mallalieu, W. (1958). Origins of the Marshall Plan: A study in policy formulation and national leadership. Political Science Quarterly, 3, 481-504. doi:10.2307/2146027
 Marshall, G. (1947). Commencement speech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
 Truman, H. (1947). Address before joint session of congress. Washington DC.