US prewar politics

[OpanaPointer]

[Split from "New host in this section"]

[
Ah, a cognocenti in the complexities of US politics. Good, good.

Ow, the false accusations pile on.

I was just wondering if you thought Father Coughlin could have helped Gerald Nye with the flap over the Des Moines speech?

[Carl Schwamberger]

[
Ah, a cognocenti in the complexities of US politics. Good, good.

Ow, the false accusations pile on.

I was just wondering if you thought Father Coughlin could have helped Gerald Nye with the flap over the Des Moines speech?

Tough one. Nye remained a early 20th Century Progressive through his career & life. Although Father Coughin was a Roosevelt supporter for a while his drift into anti Semitism and Facist apologia put him on a different track than Nye. Depends on exactly when this "Des Moines speech" occured and how the public saw it.

Wait! Does this count as topic drift???

[OpanaPointer]

[
Ah, a cognocenti in the complexities of US politics. Good, good.

Ow, the false accusations pile on.

I was just wondering if you thought Father Coughlin could have helped Gerald Nye with the flap over the Des Moines speech?

Tough one. Nye remained a early 20th Century Progressive through his career & life. Although Father Coughin was a Roosevelt supporter for a while his drift into anti Semitism and Facist apologia put him on a different track than Nye. Depends on exactly when this "Des Moines speech" occured and how the public saw it.

I was speaking specifically of the Lindbergh faux pas. Good work so far, however, I agree in principle. My suspicious is that Coughlin could have played any tune he was told to if the price was right.

Wait! Does this count as topic drift???

Nope, just checkin' the new guy's dip stick.

[Carl Schwamberger]

I was speaking specifically of the Lindbergh faux pas.

Still not ringing the bell.

[OpanaPointer]

I was speaking specifically of the Lindbergh faux pas.

Still not ringing the bell.

Lindbergh made a speech in Des Moines where he pretty much blamed WWII on the Jews. Bit of shit storm from that.

[Carl Schwamberger]

I was speaking specifically of the Lindbergh faux pas.

Still not ringing the bell.

Lindbergh made a speech in Des Moines where he pretty much blamed WWII on the Jews. Bit of shit storm from that.

Probablly a bad idea to bring in Father Coughlin to the damage control plan then.

Shall we drag in Henry Ford? One of my customers published this little tract a couple years ago.

http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/July ... laug03.msp

[OpanaPointer]

I was speaking specifically of the Lindbergh faux pas.

Still not ringing the bell.

Lindbergh made a speech in Des Moines where he pretty much blamed WWII on the Jews. Bit of shit storm from that.

Probablly a bad idea to bring in Father Coughlin to the damage control plan then.

Shall we drag in Henry Ford? One of my customers published this little tract a couple years ago.

http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/July ... laug03.msp

By that time Ford had recanted his antisemitism, IIRC. Don't know how much he could have helped with the damage control. The America Firsters were going down the tubes anyway, they didn't have a coherent, cohesive platform.

[Carl Schwamberger]

By that time Ford had recanted his antisemitism, IIRC. Don't know how much he could have helped with the damage control. The America Firsters were going down the tubes anyway, they didn't have a coherent, cohesive platform.

Hmmm yes. I suppose one telling moment was when Macnider, a important leader in the AF organization, resigned & sought a return to active service in the Army. Hard to hold the organization together with that sort of thing going on.

Aside from America First what other formal organizations were advocating either nuetrality or a anti British/Soviet line? I know what my mothers Irish decended family thought of the Brits, but they were definitly not a organized group.

[OpanaPointer]

By that time Ford had recanted his antisemitism, IIRC. Don't know how much he could have helped with the damage control. The America Firsters were going down the tubes anyway, they didn't have a coherent, cohesive platform.

Hmmm yes. I suppose one telling moment was when Macnider, a important leader in the AF organization, resigned & sought a return to active service in the Army. Hard to hold the organization together with that sort of thing going on.

Aside from America First what other formal organizations were advocating either nuetrality or a anti British/Soviet line? I know what my mothers Irish decended family thought of the Brits, but they were definitly not a organized group.

America First was an umbrella group, IIRC. This was the real problem with the movement. It was a coalition of groups that had one thing in common, "No involvement in foreign wars." So, you had:

Groups that wanted to help the British, but not fight with them.
Groups that wanted to defend only the western hemisphere.
Groups that wanted to defend only the United States.
And groups that wanted some variation and/or combination of the above.

If you don't mind selling the UK weapons and the person next to you at the table believes that doing this would lead to war you get a conflict that isn't easily resolved. The literature on the topic seems to have been produced by partisans of one camp or another, giving the impression that the in-fighting has never truly died down.

[Robert Rojas]

Greetings to both brother Opana Pointer and the community as a whole. Well Opie, in reference to your entry of Tuesday - July 13, 2010 - 12:30am and your installments thereinafter, old Uncle Bob was (and is) wondering if your varied interests with the domestic political scene during the governance of Franklin Delano Roosevelt might be better served under the thread entitled as FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE UNITED STATES which just also happens to be located within the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (1919-1945) section of the forum. The thread's author goes by the nom de plume of Andy and the thread's creation date is Wednesday - December 07, 2005 - 8:38am. Chairman Wendel might go into apoplexy if he observes such incidental historical discussion transpiring within HIS all encompassing NEW HOST IN THIS SECTION announcement. It's just some administrative food for thought. Well, that's my latest two Yankee cents worth on this not so inconsequential matter - for now anyway. In anycase, I would like to bid you an especially copaectic day over in the Aloha State of Hawaii.

Best Regards,
Uncle Bob

[Carl Schwamberger]

I think Opana Pointer identified the dialoge here as something vaugely like a PhD candidates public defense of his thesis, only about twenty levels below that.

I supose if any interest/dialoge is generated a thread can be split off or merged. Till then feel free to contribute or do good works elsewhere.

[Carl Schwamberger]

America First was an umbrella group, IIRC. This was the real problem with the movement. It was a coalition of groups that had one thing in common, "No involvement in foreign wars." So, you had:

Groups that wanted to help the British, but not fight with them.
Groups that wanted to defend only the western hemisphere.
Groups that wanted to defend only the United States.
And groups that wanted some variation and/or combination of the above.

I wonder how important the left was here? Was Soviet nuetrality of any influence on the US Communist party, and on the others, like the socialist groups, trade unions, ect.. & if so then how would the 'change' of 22 June 1941 affect the number of voters favoring the America First agenda/s ?

"..had one thing in common, "No involvement in foreign wars."

Macnider seems to represent a differing group. One that was not opposed to fighting Germany, but opposed wasting' aid on Britian & the USSR. Or am I misled here?

[OpanaPointer]

I think Opana Pointer identified the dialoge here as something vaugely like a PhD candidates public defense of his thesis, only about twenty levels below that.

More like one of those rambling sophomore papers I had to grade.

I supose if any interest/dialoge is generated a thread can be split off or merged. Till then feel free to contribute or do good works elsewhere.

I'm fine with a split.

[OpanaPointer]

America First was an umbrella group, IIRC. This was the real problem with the movement. It was a coalition of groups that had one thing in common, "No involvement in foreign wars." So, you had:

Groups that wanted to help the British, but not fight with them.
Groups that wanted to defend only the western hemisphere.
Groups that wanted to defend only the United States.
And groups that wanted some variation and/or combination of the above.

I wonder how important the left was here? Was Soviet nuetrality of any influence on the US Communist party, and on the others, like the socialist groups, trade unions, ect.. & if so then how would the 'change' of 22 June 1941 affect the number of voters favoring the America First agenda/s ?

"..had one thing in common, "No involvement in foreign wars."

Macnider seems to represent a differing group. One that was not opposed to fighting Germany, but opposed wasting' aid on Britian & the USSR. Or am I misled here?

Ah, the role of the left in the non-interventionist movements is fun to study. The American Communist Party was firmly against intervention until June 1941, then for some reason they radically changed their stance. I must look into that some day.

Anyway, if you want to read some items on this you can check out http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy I've tried to get some of the more important speeches and documents online. Still a work in progress, but I have ~2,000 documents there now, and there are links to about 450,000 pages more at the Foreign Relations of the United States site at UWisc.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Ah, the role of the left in the non-interventionist movements is fun to study. The American Communist Party was firmly against intervention until June 1941, then for some reason they radically changed their stance. I must look into that some day.

There seems to be a latter day assumption the isolationists were either right wing conservatives, or drawn from the broad mass of the 'common citizen'. That the isolationists were drawn from the left or progressives as much as any where is becoming obscure.

Anyway, if you want to read some items on this you can check out http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy I've tried to get some of the more important speeches and documents online. Still a work in progress, but I have ~2,000 documents there now, and there are links to about 450,000 pages more at the Foreign Relations of the United States site at UWisc.

oooh, primary sources. Carefull, you may be threatening some folks world view