World War I and Civil Liberties

During World War I, a variety of different factors came together to push many people – especially immigrants and “dissenters” – to conform to the views of the US government and conform to the mainstream ideas about American culture, thereby limiting their free speech. Before World War I, America had always been a patchwork of people with different beliefs, ethnicities and religions, and although fights sometimes broke out, the government remained in support of the diverse range of people who lived in the United States. However, during World War I, propaganda, societal pressure and legislation combined to condemn and punish people who expressed their right to free speech by speaking against governmental policies as well as people who were simply identified and associated as “dangerous” due to misleading propaganda.

Although most government propaganda during World War I had the aim of helping the American forces in the war, it often had the unfortunate effect of causing ethnic prejudices against German immigrants as well as the effect of limiting people’s freedom of speech. Often, pro-war government propaganda had to convey the message of the need for more soldiers in a clear fashion. However, in order to convince people to enlist in the American army, this propaganda had to focus on evoking strong emotions. Strong images which had striking symbols of “the enemy” helped pro-war propaganda bring across their message in an extremely concise fashion. However, these emotion-evoking and memorable posters often had the unfortunate effect of encouraging prejudice and discrimination against certain members of society, especially German immigrants. In the poster Destroy This Mad Brute: Enlist, Germany is portrayed as a ferocious gorilla which strides upon the American coast. The gorilla, who wears a cap labelled “Militarism,” was most likely meant as a symbol of Germany and its actions during the world war (Hopps, “Destroy This Mad Brute: Enlist”). However, the strong emotions which the poster would have evoked combined with a lack of clarity to who the “MAD BRUTE” was to have devastating effects on the American population( Hopps, “Destroy This Mad Brute: Enlist”). Many Americans misinterpreted this type of unclear propaganda in the definition of “the enemy.” Since the poster does not specifically refer to Germany as a nation being the enemy of the United States, posters such as Destroy This Brute: Enlist quickly resulted in a surge of prejudice against German immigrants. Although the vast majority of German Americans had no part in the actions of Germany during WWI, propaganda rapidly became viewed as a warning against Germans in general as being “the enemy.” Although terrifying depictions of the enemy certainly helped raise a pro-war spirit on part of many Americans, it also resulted in ungrounded prejudices against many German Americans as a result. In addition to the war recruitment propaganda, propaganda which warned people against the dangers of “spies” further contributed to an anti-German American sentiment across the USA and a limitation of the ideals of free speech. The poster Spies Are Listening seems to warn Americans against the dangers of revealing information which may assist Germans in the war, although it unfortunately also causes a much larger amount of prejudice against Germans living in the United States. The poster specifically suggests people to “ASK YOURSELF IF WHAT YOU WERE ABOUT TO SAY MIGHT HELP THE ENEMY,” a phrase which again fails to define who “the enemy” is (Intelligence Officer North-eastern Dept. US Army, “Spies Are Listening”). Because of the fear of “spies,” as encouraged by propaganda such as Spies Are Listening, many people began to withhold talking freely with certain groups of people. Due to the exclusion of clarity as to who this group of “spies” and “enemies” consisted; however, many people began to develop prejudices against innocent German Americans, who they believed were possibly spies helping the Germans. Through propaganda such as Spies Are Listening, societies were driven apart as different ethnicities (especially regarding people of German origin) were no longer trusted by other groups. Spies Are Listening and other posters which warned Americans about “spies” also had a devastating effect on the freedom of speech and freedom of expression of many non-German Americans. Posters such as Spies Are Listening evoked emotions of fear in its audiences, and large warnings such as “DON’T TALK” made many people constantly scared of accidentally harming the American cause (Intelligence Officer North-eastern Dept. US Army, “Spies Are Listening”). By creating emotions of fear of speaking freely in audiences, posters such as Spies Are Listening limited the opportunities of people to freely voice their thoughts – especially about war-related matters. Due to the need for propaganda to quickly convey messages, WWI propaganda often was misleading and led to unfortunate prejudice against many German immigrants as well as a limitation of free speech for many people fearful of “spies” or “the enemy.”

Pressure from society and from figures or institutions who many people looked up to to conform to certain American values resulted in people who voiced opinions against government policies and people who did not conform to American mainstream culture to be unfairly discriminated against and publicly condemned for simply being open about their views, beliefs and culture. When WWI broke out, many people were not in support of American involvement in the conflict – and this viewpoint continued to exist in large numbers of people even after Americans had started fighting in the war. However, a large amount of societal pressure to conform was used by the government in order to “stifle criticism and suppress discussion of the great issues involved in” the Great War (La Follette, “Free Speech in Wartime”). In addition to various pieces of propaganda and legislation, society exerted a large amount of pressure on people who were against American involvement in WWI such that these people would adopt the viewpoints of the government. One stark result of this societal pressure which often went against those who seemed to not fully conform with governmental policies was the murder of Robert Prager. In response to the growing amount of societal pressure against German Americans (largely fuelled by misleading propaganda), innocent German immigrants were sometimes violently assaulted. In the case of Robert Prager, the innocent German immigrant “was lynched by a mob” (The Ogden Standard, “Lynching Taken Up in Cabinet”). For various issues during WWI, especially those which involved people who were anti-war or seemed to oppose governmental policies, societal pressure had disastrous effects on ruining or ending the lives of many Americans. Although certain Americans (such as Robert Prager) suffered brutal and ungrounded lynching, other figures also succumbed to societal pressure as their opinions ultimately ended their careers. For example, following the United States entering WWI, “the triumphant war press has pursued those senators and representatives who voted against war with malicious falsehood and recklessly libelous attacks” (La Follette, “Free Speech in Wartime”). Simply because of their willingness to freely express their doubts about the benefits of American intervention in WWI, societal pressure on politicians voting against American WWI involvement through the press caused many politicians to have their careers completely ruined. Due to societal pressure both against people who voiced opinions contrary to governmental policies and people who refused to let go of their expressions of their original culture, many people suffered terrible losses in their lives, unfair criticism and even death.

Legislation, especially acts such as the Sedition Act of 1918, contributed to a further reduction of free speech for individuals who had beliefs opposite to those of the government during WWI. As most historians and politicians today agree, the Sedition Act stands in opposition to the tenets of human rights, the Constitution and the very basics of democracy. One of the most drastic measures in the Sedition Act of 1918 is that it charges “whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States… shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both” (“The Sedition Act of 1918”). As becomes clear from the provisions of this act, being in violation of this act would contradict with the idea of freedom of speech and expression. Not only was the bar for actions which caused there to be a violation of the Sedition Act very low, but the punishments for violating the Sedition Act were very harsh. The maximum fine for violations of the Sedition Act is roughly equal to $250,000 today, and the maximum prison sentence would have consisted of at least 20% of the lives which most people lived at that time. These extremely harsh punishments for violating the Seditions Act caused most people to remain silent and not express their opinions out of fear of harsh consequences. In turn, as was argued by many thinkers and politicians at the time, the Sedition Act of 1918 was in many ways a violation of the key components of a society which embraced free speech. Although certain acts in US history were not fully executed, the Sedition Act of 1918 was very strictly enforced, such as with Eugene Debs – the leader of the Socialist Party before, during and after World War I. After stating some of his anti-war beliefs, Debs was convicted to a 10-year imprisonment due to violations of the Sedition Act. In his statement to the court upon his conviction, Debs explained the problems he saw with the Sedition Act and its seeming disregard for civil liberties. In the words of the Socialist party leader, the Sedition Act was “a despotic enactment in flagrant conflict with democratic principles and with the spirit of free institutions,” a spirit which was shared by many people termed “dissenters” who expressed opinions in contradiction to governmental policies (Debs, “Statement to the Court Upon Being Convicted of Violating the Sedition Act”). Pieces of WWI legislation, such as the Sedition Act, had a major influence on the free speech of many people who voiced opinions contrary to the policies pursued by the government.

In conclusion, propaganda, societal pressure and legislation all wielded significant influence over the level of civil liberties granted to members of society during World War I. Due to each of these key factors, the freedom of speech and expression and the treatment of immigrants largely worsened in response to the Great War. Ultimately, legislation wielded a large influence over governmental propaganda, which spilled into societal pressure against people who refused to conform to the “general” opinions of the government about WWI.