Embedded Files
History, my 10th grade AP European history teacher once informed my class, is the study of change over time. While today I might quibble with the simplicity of this definition, my teacher was right that historians do pay a lot of attention to what changed and when. But historians don't just care about what changed over time. They are typically far more interested in exploring how and why changes in the past took place. What factor or set of factors caused things to change? We call that "causality" (one of those nifty cases when you take a verb and turn into a noun).
And causality--the relationship between cause and effect-is a great terrain for developing interesting research questions. We've already seen some causality questions on this site. The question of whether women who lost family in World War I were more likely to oppose aiding Britain is an example of a causality question. That question seeks to understand what caused certain people to become politically active in the fight against intervention. Causality questions might seek to determine the relative importance of various causes of an event or to develop correlations between political, cultural, or technological developments and historical change.
So let's practice by exploring some questions we might raise by juxtaposing events that took place on the road to World War II with changes in US public opinion about intervening in the war. Plan to spend 15 minutes on the content and activity for this page.
Start by looking through this exhibit created by the US Holocaust museum (click anywhere on the picture to enter the exhibit).
Now let's look at much of the same information in another form so we can more easily think about causality or correlations between political or military events and shifts in U.S. public opinion. Explore the two graphs that chart the changes in US public opinion along with the chronology of some events leading up to US entry into World War II.
1939
September:
Germany invades Poland
FDR asks for Cash and Carry Policy
National Legion of Mothers of America Founded to oppose war
1940
April: Germany invades Denmark and Norway
May:
Germany invades France
Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies Founded
May/June: British army retreats at Dunkirk
June: France surrenders to Germany
September:
US and UK make Destroyers for Bases deal
America First Committee Founded
Germany, Italy, and Japan sign the Tripartite Pact (a defensive alliance)
December: Roosevelt elected to a 3rd Term
1941
March: US adopts Lend-Lease Act
April 1: Fight for Freedom Committe Founded
June: Germany invades the USSR
August: US and Britain issue Atlantic Charter
September: FDR oks US warship attacks on U-Boats
December: Japan Attacks Pearl Harbor
Note that these graphs combine two questions. Sometimes the Gallup Poll asked resspondents whether they thought that the US should declare war on Germany; other times they asked respodents whether the US should send aid to Britain even if it meant risking war with Germany. On the second graph, the red line represents those who answered no to either question, while the blue line is those who answered yes. In other words, the red line represents anti-interventionist views and the blue line those who supported intervention.
Ok, that's a lot to take in. Let's stop and think about what kinds of causality questions might we develop based on this information? (click arrow)
First, we need to be careful not to ask questions that implies that there's a single cause for a complex event. Historians tend to be suspicious of monocausal explanations for events; they know that there are always multiple causes for any historical occurrence. Moreover, you don't need to engage in this kind of correlation of event/public opinion that I've asked you to do here to come up with questions about causality. But there are some really interesting questions one might consider based on the chronologies and public opinion information.
First, we can see that support for becoming involved in the war was at its lowest point in May 1940, soon after Hitler invaded France and right before the British army had to evacuate at Dunkirk. That raises questions about the impact of rapid German victories on American public opinion and attitudes. So we might ask: To what extent did German's early victories in the war contribute to American anti-interventionism?
To what extent did major turning points in this war--Hitler's invasion of Russia, the signing of a defensive pact between Germany, Italy and Japan--shape public attitudes towards US involvement in the war?
Did the outcome of the presidential election of 1940, in which Franklin Roosevelt ran for and won an unprecedented 3rd term, change public opinion about aiding Britain or affect the strategies of advocacy groups mobilizing for or against intervention?
The final public opinion data, taken in the week following the bombing of Pearl Harbor, asked Americans whether Roosevelt should have declared war on Germany (the US declared a state of war with Japan on December 8th, but that declaration did not mention Germany; it was Hitler who declared war on the US a few days later). A week after Pearl Harbor, 91% of Americans said that Roosevelt should have declared war on Germany. A big question we might ask about this: How did events taking place in the Pacific affect Americans' views on the war in Europe? A more specific question might be: Why and how did the bombing of Pearl Harbor lead more Americans to support going to war against Germany?
Now It's time to try it yourself! Click the button to go to the activity form for Causality/Change over Time
Page updated
Report abuse