![\"\"](\"http:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/greatwarssir\/files\/2018\/09\/IMG_4662-e1538162762989-225x300.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
During the United States\u2019 campaign to fight for democracy during the Great War, Americans failed to understand the implications between civil liberties and their idealistic aim for the war. While going through the pamphlet box, I was intrigued by how a pamphlet repurposed Wilson\u2019s phrase of \u201cmaking the world safe for democracy\u201d for the argument of protecting civil liberties.<\/p>\n
English economist John A. Hobson saw basic freedoms under threat from the growing power of the state in his pamphlet \u201cThe World Safe for Democracy.\u201d To Hobson, \u201creactionary forces\u201d during the war took over the state for the purpose of a mobilized public. A mobilized public meant a unified public opinion. However, the trade-off for a unified public opinion was the degradation of basic freedoms, violating the foundations of democracy. These \u201creactionary forces\u201d were dangerous to democracy. If public opinion was being influenced by a powerful state, England was no longer in line with the belief of democracy versus despotism. The people were no longer in charge.<\/p>\n
Hobson originally published his beliefs in his book Democracy After the War<\/em> in 1917. In order to combat low morale, European powers attempted to control public opinion in favor of the war. With the advent of the US coming into the war, the war was rebranded. Hobson saw inconsistencies between the justification of the war and the controlling of public opinion through centralization of power in the state.<\/p>\n Hobson referred to the issues of England in his pamphlet. However, the American Civil Liberties Bureau reproduced Hobson\u2019s sentiments for the American public. The Bureau applied the democratic and idealistic purpose of the war to the need to protect civil liberties. If civil liberties were being violated at home, then democracy cannot be adequately fought for abroad. These \u201creactionary forces\u201d were dangerous to democracy.<\/p>\n While the National Security League was promoting the war effort through its \u2018Patriotism through Education\u2019 pamphlet series, the American Civil Liberties Bureau was also advocating for protection of basic freedoms during the war. By reprinting Hobson\u2019s thoughts, the Bureau illustrated the universality of the struggle between maintaining the war effort and while holding the foundation of democracy and civil liberties constant amongst the Allied powers. In addition, and more pertinent, the Bureau connected having free public expression with being American. The Espionage and Sedition Acts gave more direct power to the government to control public discourse. Under this assumption, being American was dictated by supporting the war effort. However, by supporting civil liberties, Americans also demonstrated their Americanness as the war was about fighting for democracy according to the Bureau.<\/p>\n The violations during the war were not just an issue of exhibiting the benefits of democracy, but those violations present a danger in the future after the war was over. According to Hobson, the \u201creactionary forces\u201d would \u201cwin possession of their national government.\u201d With these \u201creactionary forces\u201d in charge at the end of the war, the war could not live up to its aims of democracy, hurting democracy and moving towards despotism.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" During the United States\u2019 campaign to fight for democracy during the Great War, Americans failed to understand the implications between civil liberties and their idealistic aim for the war. While going through the pamphlet box, I was intrigued by how … Continue reading