announcer: next, despite international concern about adolf hitler and the radical nazi government, the 1936 olympic games were held in berlin, germany. in an online event hosted by the u.s. holocaust memorial two scholars discuss his propaganda goals for the event on how black and jewish american athletes competed and earned many metals despite racism in germany and at home. american history tv visits the national constitution center in philadelphia. to learn about the life and legacy of john marshall, the fourth chief justice of the united states, who served on the supreme court from 1801 to 1835. historianm. eastern, mark depew details the u.s.

a lot of people have compared hitler and stalin, the same typology even though they understand themselves on the opposite ends of the political spectrum. he argues given this better understanding of politics, where do you need to be? you need to stay in the center, right? because if you move too far to the left or the right, you end up creating deep problems. when you read this, how many of you had heard of him before reading this piece? did you think he was a conservative or a liberal? or were you not sure? >> i'm guessing liberal. >> okay. how come? >> probably just because in that time period, if you were conservative, you wouldn't be afraid to just claim everyone on the left is a communist. >> given that he's advocating for what's the theory, i don't think he was desired. >> somewhat liberal. he's obviously making a strong case for the center as the place to be. but he fancies himself, if you read the piece closely, as a person of the liberal left, the non-communist left. his model, when he's looking to europe, are the non-communist social left. it's his idea about where we should be,

it's hitler. it's hitler's behavior that americans are responding to. august of 1939, gallop asked the public, if hitler's claims against poland that we talked about last week were justified, 86% said no. what he's demanding is wrong. if a war therefore comes out of this, it will be his fault. and then a couple of weeks later when the war did begin, 82% of the american people said it was germany's fault. virtually no one blamed england or france or poland. it was germany's fault. they are the ones who started this. there is a clear-cut aggressor in this war. this is not a case of both sides. germany is at fault. germany is the aggressor, britain and france are defending the victim. so we don't actually feel neutral about that. these two sides are not the same. there's significant difference here. once it was an actual war instead of a theoretical war, american opinion shifted a little bit. they still don't want to be involved in the war. they still want to avoid most of the mistakes that took place in the first world war. but they're not completely neut

this is an article you should be familiar with, like a lot of people have compared hitler and stalin, even though they're on opposite ends of the political spectrum. he argues given this better understanding of politics, where do you need to be? >> center. >> you need to stay in the center. if you move too far to the left or right, you create deep problems. when you read this, how many of you had heard of schlessinger before reading this piece? those of you who hadn't heard of schlessinger, did you think he was a conservative or a liberal? or were you not sure? >> i'm guessing liberal. >> okay. how come? >> probably just because of that time period, he was conservative, he wouldn't be afraid to just claim everyone on the left is a communist. >> sam. >> given that he's advocating for what is essentially the theory, i don't think he was too far to either side. >> somewhat liberal, but he's making a strang caong case for center as the place to be, but he fancies himself as a person of the liberal left, the noncomninonco non communist left. he actually was very involved in democratic poli

this is an argument you should be familiar with like a lot of people have compared hitler installing over the years, saying they're basically the same type apology even though they understand themselves to be opposite ends of the political spectrum. he argues, given this better understanding of politics, where do you need to be. you need to stay in the center, because if you move too far to the left of the right you end up creating deep problems. when you read this, how many of you had heard of schlesinger before beating this piece? so this of you haven't heard of schlesinger, did you think that he was a conservative or a liberal? or were you not sure? >> i'm guessing liberal. >> how come? >> part because in a time period if you are conservative you wouldn't be afraid to complain that everyone on the left as a communist. >> sam? >> given that he's advocating for what's essentially -- i don't think he was too far out of the place either. >> so somewhat liberal but he obviously makes a strong case for the center is the place to be. he fancies himself a safe if you read closely, as a pe

this is saying to people in 1938, hitler is in power, fascism is on the rise. most people think there will be another war and the question is, what should american do? and this is an antiwar point. remember what happened last time. and that's going to be a way -- that's going to be a memory that's very influential in terms of how the united states responds to the second world war which -- a war in which we also stay out of for two years until pearl harbor, until we have that attack on a ship that is going to bring us into the war. i want to end the lecture by sort of reiterating what i think the message of this painting is which is really that in a sense, the first world war like all wars is at its core the story of countless personal tragedy. all right. thanks, you guys. now, i think we want to have a few minutes for questions. as they're finishing up what they need to do with taping. anybody have any questions or comments? now is the time where you're allowed to actually talk. you're trying so hard not to say anything. i'm sure you have to have at least somet

this is an argument you should be familiar with, like a lot of people have compared hitler and stalin over the years and said they're basically the same typology, even though they understand themselves to be on opposite ends of the political spectrum, right? and so, he argues, given this better understanding of politics, where do you need to be? you need to stay in the center, right? because if you move too far to the left or the right, you end up creating deep problems. when you read this, how many of you had heard of schlesinger before reading this piece? okay. so, those of you who haven't heard of schlesinger, did you think that he was a conservative or a liberal? or were you not sure? [ inaudible ] okay, how come? >> probably just because in that time period, if you were conservative, you wouldn't be afraid to just claim everyone on the left is a communist. >> sam? >> given that he's advocating for what's essentially -- theory, i don't think he was too far either side, but i would agree somewhat liberal. >> somewhat liberal, but he's making a strong case for the center is the plac

a lot of people have compared hitler and stolen and said they are basically the same technology even though they understand themselves being at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. the argument is given this better understanding of politics, where do you need to be? >> the center. >> you need to stay in the center right? because if you move too far to the left or right, if you end up creating deep problems. when you read this, how many of you had heard of schlesinger before reading this piece? those of you have not heard of schlesinger, do you think he was a conservative or a liberal? >> or were you not sure? >> i'm guessing maybe liberal. >> okay. how come? >> probably just because of the time period. if you are conservative you would not be afraid of just claim that everyone on the left is a communist. >> sam? >> given that he is advocating for what is essentially cultural theory, i don't think he's too far neither side but i would think he's liberal. >> he makes a strong case as the center being the place to be but he's a person of the liberal left, the non communist left,

by the way, henry ford is the only american named by hitler in in mein kampf. the results of what these people believed and other people believed is very restrictive legislation for immigration in this country. despite the fact that the lady with the lamp was in new york harbor, and you know the words, give me your poor, you huddle masses learning to be free. there was a temporary act in 1921 that restricted immigration. but then there was another one in in 1924, the national origins act. and what this did was to have a quota based on the population in 1890 and the purpose of it was to freeze the country ethnically. to freeze it ethnically. to say whoever was here already, we want -- we will allow in a percentage of those people to enter the country. and, by the way, not very many. 150,000 a year. and asians were excluded. now what that meant in practice was that the people who were allowed in were not necessarily the people that wanted to come. they came from northern europe. they came from western europe. the people who wanted to come were mostly catholics, j

people have compared hitler and stalin, saying they are basically the same typology even though they understand themselves to be on the opposite ends of the spectrum. he argues, given this understanding of politics where , do you need to be? stay in the center. if you move too far to the left or right, you end up creating problems. when you read this, how many of you had heard of schlesinger before reading this piece? so those of you who have not, did you think he was a conservative or liberal? or were you not sure? >> i am guessing liberal. prof. lebovic: how come? >> because of the time period, if you were conservative, you would not be afraid to claim you were on the left and a communist. >> given he is advocating for [inaudible] i don't think he was too far to either side but i also think liberal. prof. lebovic: he is making a strong case for the center is the place to be. he fancies himself as a person of the liberal left, the non-communist left. he is looking at europe, the non-communist social left. it is his idea about where we should be. he was very involved in democratic po

it is hitler. it is hitler's behavior. that americans are responding to. august of 1939, gallup asked the public, if polish corridor are justified, 86% say no. >> if a war therefore comes out of this, it will be his fault. a couple of weeks later, when the war did begin, 82% of the american people said it was germany's fault. virtually, no one claimed they -- were with poland. it was germany's fault. they are the ones who started this. there is a clear cut adjuster in this war. this is not a case of bowl sides, germany's at fault. germany is the aggressor, britain and france are defending the victim. so, we did not actually feel neutral about that. these two sides are not the. same thinness significant difference here. one was an actual one status theoretical war, american opinion shifted a bit they still want to be involved in the war, they still want to avoid most of the states that took place in the first world war. they are not completely neutral. not really. they favor britain in france, they oppose nazi germany. they don't want to fight. they don't w

. >> we talked a lot about hillary and germany compared -- talk a lot about hitler and germany compared to america. >> going back to the cold war. particularly after world war ii, you had all these in asia, latin america, and certainly in africa. you had these two great superpowers, the united states and the soviet union, who in many ways the cold war itself was about these two forces not only battling themselves -- battling each other for supremacy, but also seeking to woo these newly created and sovereign nations around the world. of course, part of america's pitch was that it is the land of what? freedom. it is the land of equality. kykyjmt nations who after world war ii saw soldiers -- black soldiers who fought in world war ii coming back to places like georgia and getting lynched, or all the ways in which that black woman who tries to degas -- who tries to desegregate the university of alabama in the mid-1950's, when they saw the treatment, when they saw the brutality, because this treatment, particularly in the 1950's and 1960's, were being circulated in newspapers around the worl

hitler is not so crazy as to take us on unless we deliberately push him into it. prof. byrnes: just an average guy in new york, but speaking common sense, what the average person thinks. this is basically a man on the street interview. you don't have to be a foreign policy expert to have an opinion on the war. if this is what you think, it is a valid opinion. >> the america first committee brought you the opinions of seven patriotic citizens from different parts of the country and different walks of life. these seven represent the beliefs of a vast majority of our people. prof. byrnes: different places, different walks of life. somewhere you heard somebody who is at least a little bit like you. this is a really different way of trying to shape public opinion, not by telling people what they should think, but telling them, here is what you already think, from someone just like you. another technique that was fascinating introduced by america first, there was a representative who thought the most important thing was to hear from the veterans of the last war. about the to

i put myself in hitler's shoes. in it, he argues that hitler never knew about the holocaust. he tried to stop it. that's what he writes in the late 1970's. he revises the book in the late, early 1990's, and then all mention of the holocaust disappears. not only that hitler had nothing to do with it but it is gone is being mentioned. but historians were interested in the documents he found. it wasn't he had so much respect, but he had history for suing people and being very litigious. i, of course, was one of his victims. >> you briefly touched on this in the book. you mention how at first he starts not as a full-on denier. he gradually falls into this denying. how do you think that happened? prof. lipstadt: here i'm speculating. i do not know for a fact but it seems to me that as time went on, he was getting less and less attention. people were saying, what's this craziness claiming hitler did not know about the holocaust? what is this extreme view of one thing or another? and it was a way of being, it seems to me, a way of being outrageous. of getting attention. and when he

hitler knew how to schmooze. hitler knew how to treat older people. chamberlain -- hitler ran down the steps and said you're older than i am. i should have come to see you. i'm so sor -- i mean, we knew how to bplay it. so, lloyd george says whatever one may think of the methods, and they're not the methods of a parliamentary country, there can be no doubt he has achieved the marvelous transformation in the spirit of the people, in the attitude toward each other, and their social and economic outlook. and later he says the germans who resist to the death every invader of their own country but they have no longer the desire themselves to invade any other land. this is 1936. they've broken the military causes of versailles. they have introduced the nuremberg racial laws in 1936. the prisons and concentration camps are full of political appointments, and people are running to lead germany who are not capable or willing to be part of a national socialist state. they intervene in the reinland in 1936 and send tanks and planes and soldiers to spain. is this

hitler in "mein the results of what people believed was very restrictive legislation for immigration in the country. despite the fact the lady with the lamp was in new york harbor and you know the words, "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be act", there was a temporary in 1921 that restricted immigration. then there was another in 1924, the national origins act. what the national origins act did was to have a quota based on the population in 1890. the purpose of it was to freeze ethnically, to freeze it ethnically, to say whoever was here already, we will allow in a percentage of those people to enter the country. by the way, not very many. 150,000 a year. and asians were excluded. what that meant in practice was that the people who were allowed in were not necessarily the people who wanted to come. they came from northern europe. they came from western europe. the people who wanted to come or fromy catholics, jews eastern europe and southern europe, italy, greece, poland, russia. but there were severe restrictions on those people because there were not a

of course at every headquarters area we found that the germans had a picture of hitler, and our boys are using it as a pin board but the americans had a way of amusing themselves. here is the first official ceremony held in france when general collins presented the flag made out of parachute clothe to the may i don't have of cherbourg holding the microphone. our boys were given clean uniforms for the occasion, and soon the people that came back to cherbourg after the fighting stopped came to visit us. here we see ernie pyle in the center and talking to a colonel of the signal car and this is burt brandt who we saw earlier shooting for ap, cecil cons and john maglency and here is, oh, gosh, 25 years has done a lot to my memory, but the troops began to move in the opposite direction to attack the enemy on the line, and we were passing through the city of valone and of course it was completely destroyed. i was there several times since the war and it's been rebuilt beautifully, but the germans tried to make a stand here and wherever they did try to make a stand we had to knock them out

and hitler backed away. by 1938, they are so close that in the middle of all of this, the british and the french have different conceptions of the impact of the war. the nature of foreign policy, the nature of what should be done, the meaning of the treaty, and even the role of germany in europe. at least until 1936, france was somewhat more independent. and it attempted to have an all europe policy. to stay in line with the states on the east of germany in some ways to be able to cut germany's freedom of movement. so too the french. the existence and independence of the czech state with whom they had an alliance was very important. and the soviets also had an alliance, as i mentioned before, with the czechs. the french also had alliances with yugoslavians and romanians. but the british didn't view that as significant. they had a western system of defense. england's defense begins on the rhine. france itself. the british were not against the revision of the portions of the treaty of versailles that were abho

when chamberlain would go see hitler, chamberlain ran down the steps -- hitler ran down the steps of chamberlain and he said, oh! older than i am, i should have gone to see you. i'm so sorry. how to play it. so lloyd george says, whatever of his methods, and they are certainly not the a parliamentary country, there can be no doubt that he has received the marvelous transformation in the spirit of the people, in their other, andward each their social and economic outlook. and later he says the germans the death every invader of their own country, thethey have no longer desire themselves to invade any land. this is 1936. they have broken the military clauses of versailles. they have introduced the nuremberg racial laws in 1936. the prisons and concentration politicalfull of appointments and people are running to leave germany, who willing to bee or part of a national socialist state. rhine landene in the in 1936 and send tanks and planes and soldiers to spain. wonderfulrt of the public spirit that had been in germany? separateou possibly what is going on in germany from what germany is

at the headquarters, we found that the germans had a picture of hitler, and our boys are using it as a pin board. the americans had a way of amusing themselves. here is the first official ceremony held in france, general collins on the right presented the tricolor flag made out of parachute cloth to the mayor of cherbourg, who was holding the microphone. our boys of the seven corps were given clean uniforms for the ccasion. soon the people who came back to cherbourg after the fighting stopped came to visit with us and talk to us. here we see ernie pyle again in the center and talking to the colonel of the signal corps. this is burt brandt who we saw earlier shooting for a.p. cecil cannes, and john mcglinchey. here is -- oh gosh, 25 years has done a lot to my memory. the troops begin to move in the opposite direction to attack the enemy on the same low line. we were passing through the city of rologne and, of course, it was completely destroyed. i was there several times since the war and it has been rebuilt beautifully. the germans tried to make a stand here, and when ever they tried

tom hanks would storm off the beaches to defeat hitler from a higgins boat. higgins was an industrial entrepreneur. interested as anything in patriotic and profit-based motivations. roebling is not looking to make a buck. but higgins, when approached by a marine corps officer, then a captain in the marines, he would identify in these early model amphibian tractors like the one in the picture, the suspension was problematic. they were prone to overheating. the vehicles broke down too quickly. there were a host of deficiencies with roebling's designs. he said, maybe instead of a tractor design, because there are so many moving parts in which sand can infiltrate and jam up the roller bearings -- did you build a wheeled vehicle? higgins on his own dime will build several prototypes. this photograph captures some of the trials of the higgins industry agents and members of the armed forces were investigating. the challenge for higgins at this moment, he's got a design, and by all reports the navy and marine corps name his design is superior to donald roebling's. ca

this is saying in 1938 when hitler is in power and fascism is on the rise, "is there going to be another war in europe?" most people think there will be. the question is what should america do? this is clearly an anti-war painting. it is saying, "remember what happened last time." all of the promises. war means just the needless deaths of our men. that will be a memory that is very influential in how the u.s. responds to the second world war. a war we stay out of for two years until pearl harbor. until we have that attack on a ship that will bring us into the war. i want to end by reiterating what i think the message of this painting is. the first world war, like all wars, is at its core the story of countless personal tragedy. thanks you guys. i think we want to have a few minutes for questions. or comments. now is the time you are actually allowed to talk. you've been trying so hard not to say anything. i am sure you have to have something. >> when the germans created the line of war in the oceans saying do not come through here, had hoover already worked out his plan to get through th

the second world war, hungry was one of the satellites of [ null ] germany after the declaration by hitler of war on the united states in december 1941, the hungarian ambassador was forced to reveal to the americans that he now found his country in the state of what with the americans, and when he found a spokesman for the state department in which he wanted to in part this information, and where is your country? this not being known to everyone at the state department. this is one of those impossible stories that you don't know rather not for sure it is true. but the united states inherited the enemy so to speak of its associates. remember, they are not allies. that does not mean that the u.s. however declared war on all of them. the u.s. did not declare war on the ottoman empire. a seemingly accidental effect that has huge consequences that lasts to this day. america and turkish relations have always rested on a fairly sound footing. the countries were not actually at war in the 20th century and never was. if you are in turkey as i was in fact during a recent rock conflict, you notice a

a little-known factor that people don't recognize as hitler had this policy which translate to living room, he was a science denier, he had a lot of -- he was actually a science denier, he did not believe that you could grow things more efficiently, that you could have modification of crops, so in theory they decided they needed more land to grow food on. so part of the [null] strategy and conquering these different areas was in addition to the principal goal of creating an aryan race and eliminating cultures that were not part of the [null] philosophy, they also needed food. and it was very much a part of the whole strategy of world war ii. based on the tariff they -- there was lots of histories of world war i that describe this. the judges at nuremberg basically found that what had happened there was that the general's orders were extreme but they were not a war crime which is unusual given what had happened. but the decision was based on something called the lieber code, this was a code developed during the civil war. which basically allowed starvation in hastening military victori

a team of film industry veterans and army technicians show how the british defeated hitler's air force at the cost of more than 40,000 civilians and vast destruction on the ground. saturday night at 10 pm, and sunday it's oral history. this weekend we continue our week series of interviews with former congresswoman helen who served in the u.s. house of representatives from 1985 to 1995. a republican from maryland, she was a member of the -- she talks about her career for the baltimore sun covering maritime issues and her appointment as chair of the federal maritime commission which made her the highest ranking woman in the nixon administration. oral history, sunday morning at 10 am eastern. american history tv every weekend starting saturday morning at 8 am eastern through monday morning at 8 am. sunday night on afterwards, economists discuss the book edge of chaos. why democracy is failing to deliver economic growth and how to fix it. she is interviewed by jason furman former chairman of the council of economic advisors during the obama administration. >> you wrote a book about politi

hollywood director frank cap ra and a team of veterans show how the british defeated hitler's air force at a cost of more than 40,000 civilians and vast destruction on the ground. saturday night at 10:00 and sunday afternoon at 4:00 eastern. and sunday, it's oral histories. this weekend, we continue our eight-week series of interviews with former congresswoman helen delich bentley, served in the u.s. house of representatives from 1985 to 1995. a republican from maryland, she was a member of the appropriations and merchant marine and fisheries committee. she talks about her appointment as chair of the federal maritime commission, which made her the highest ranking woman in the nixon administration. oral histories is sunday mornings at 10:00 eastern. american history tv, every weekend starting saturday morning at 8:00 eastern through monday morning at 8:00. sunday night on afterwords, economist dambisa moyo discusses her book "edge of chaos: why democracy is failing to deliver economic growth and how to fix it." she's interviewed by the former chairman of the council of economic advisers

he will later also be i am applicable ated to the front to assassinate hitler. how many have seen that movie? it was a movie on this scheme that was eventually hacked right? he at this point is not of the opinion and you've heard me say this before for the russians staalengrad is the most important campaign for the war. for the americans and british normandy is the most important campaign. if we had lost here the war would have looked very different. let's think about what he's thinking at this point in time. he is no longer of the opinion germany will have a complete victory in world war ii. that's gone. the russians have been on the offense, germans have lost millions of soldiers and no longer believe there's a complete total victory in this thing. however if you can win at normandy if you can stop the americans and british in the landing then what you can do it will be six months to a year before they can recharge to start this thing again. so if we win in the beaches on d day i can then take my 60 divisions move them across europe stablize the front against

a little-known factor people do not recognize is that hitler's had a policy of "living room." he was a science denier. he did not believe you could grow things more efficiently, have modification of crops. so, in the theory, they decided they needed more land to grow food on. so, part of the nazi strategy of conquering these areas, was in addition to the principal goal of creating an arian race and eliminating cultures that were not part of this nazi philosophy, they also needed food and it was very much a part of the whole strategy of world war ii. that's based on the terrace that -- terror they had faced in world war i of the lack of food. nuremberg at basically found what had happened was that the general's orders were extreme but a , war crime. which is unusual given what had happened. the decision was based on something called the lieber code. this allowed a starvation if it hastened military victory. that is something to consider that starvation was included as military tactic. if it could be used to make the war shorter. i don't think we would agree with it today. let m

a little-known factor that people do not recognize, that hitler had this policy, which translates to "living room." he was actually a science denier. he did not believe you could grow things more efficiently, that you could have modification of crops. so, in their theory, they decided they needed more land to grow food on. so, part of the nazi strategy of conquering these areas, was in addition to the principal goal of creating an aryan race and eliminating cultures that were not part of this nazi philosophy, they also needed food, and it was very much a part of the whole strategy of world war ii. based on the tariffs they have faced in world war i, of a lack of food. there are lots of histories of world war i that describe this. the judges at nuremberg described what had happened there -- it was that the general's porters were extreme, but not a war crime, which was unusual given what has happened. something called the lieber code, which basically allowed starvation if it hastened military victory. that is something to consider, that starvation was included as a military tactic if i

a little factor people do not recognize, that hitler's had this policy of translating into "living room." he was a science denier. he did not believe you could grow things more efficiently, have modification of crops. so, in the theory, they decided they needed more land to grow food on. of part of the nazi strategy conquering these areas, was in addition to the principal goal of creating an arian race and eliminating cultures that were not part of this not see philosophy, they also needed partand it was very much a of the whole strategy of world war ii. terrace thaton the they had faced on world war i. are lots of histories of world war i that describe this. they found that what had happened there, the generals orders-- the general's were extreme but not a war crime. the decision was based on something called the labor code -- lebor code. this allowed a starvation if it hastened military victory. that is something to consider that starvation was included as if ittary pack if -- pact could be used to make war shorter. we won't agree with that today, but i want to give you the history. l

it is more akin to what happened under hitler's. i thank you not to force me to do this. this is what i have been talking about. this is the thing, i am no longer fighting for myself because i will tell you, frankly, that i am the most completely ruined man that you have ever seen. principal, i for a think. america is involved in this particular case. this is what i have been talking about. i do not believe it benefits this committee to force me to do this. i do not believe it benefits this committee, or its purposes, to force me to do this. it is my honest feeling about it. these are not people that are a danger to this country. they are people that i knew. they are people like myself. >> i direct the witness to answer the question. not refuse to answer the question, but i feel the committee is doing a really i do notthing that believe the american people will look at kindly. this is my opinion. it will not consider this in the spirit of fair play. >> when you just answer the question please? >> you can watch this and other american history programs on our website, where

there are a lot of things wrong with america but hillary is not hitler is not going to fix them. again and again, he changed it from america's record on race to nazi's germany's record on race. encouraging black americans to prioritize destroying fascism first and then turn their attention to correcting american racial abuses. lewis did his basic training in a segregated unit and spent the rest of his enlistment promoting black recruitment and fighting in exhibition fights in bases around the world. but despite his celebrity status, he was no stranger to the humiliation experienced by black soldiers. segregated facilities, lack of resources, racial epithets. the reality of joe lewis and his military service makes it clear that democracy and white supremacy could and did coexist. dorie miller came to fame through his courageous actions at pro harbor. as a japanese planes were sweeping over the uss west virginia, he carried his wounded captain to safety and took over manning a machine gun. that would've been a courageous action under any circumstances, but it was even more so becau

. -- hitler. they are marking a ballot. they look like people engaging in what we recognize as the behavior of people in an election. we recognize people getting up for a seventh-inning stretch as people at a ballgame. but let's say they are going into that election ready to remove the vote, the natural rights, from the people around them. they no longer respect the equal rights of other human beings to the same vote and the same protection of the law. and i think you have his point. they are going through all the motions. they are behaving in the way people behave, but in a certain critical way, they have seized to have a soul of the democratic people. that was the whole point of the house divided speech. what is at issue is whether we are going to make ourselves officially in different to the enslavement of some of our people. if so, we cannot find a limiting principle. it is going to have to go one way or the other and become national in scope. we are going to sleep in illinois as a free country, a free state, and we wil

in 1941, they editorialize the fact that himmler had adapted jim crow ds -- hitler had adapted jim crow laws proved how terrible they were. -- by the way, we are raising a new generation of fascist right here in new jersey. black americans attempted to use reports coming out of germany to spur their white countrymen into doing soul-searching on race. they did not just sit around and wait for the soul-searching to take root. he sees the opportunity of the war to create change. d?s doubled th >> it is the notion that to defeat not see as him, we have sm, we have to win the war at home. prof. titus: as a strategy it was laid out a month after pearl harbor in a letter printed in the "pittsburgh courier," a widely read black newspaper. two v's.posed and a vvictory without for victory within. and hea cafeteria worker asked some questions that resonated very deeply with courier" readers. how they should respond to this crisis? should i enlist, should i buy war bonds? should i make sacrifices to support the war effort even though i am not totally free myself? should iompson put it, " sacrifice