Thesis advisor: Charles Gallagher / The chaos of the Great Depression allowed for the rise of demagogues on both sides of the American political spectrum. On the fringes of the American right came William Dudley Pelley and Father Charles Coughlin, two rabid anti-Semites staunchly opposed to Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal. Using familiar rhetorical tropes, they marshaled their supporters and presented a violent resistance to the transformation of the American state. Railing against perceiving conspiracies involving Judaism, Communism, and international banking, these men set a precedent for extreme right-wing politics that resonated in their own time and still has consequences today. / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2015. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Departmental Honors. / Discipline: History.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This project analyzes the various opinions in the United States of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis during the 1930s and studies the amount of information that was available in the United States regarding Nazi Germany before entering World War II. Specifically, it seeks to understand why the United States did relatively little to influence German and European affairs even in the face of increasing Nazi brutality and bellicosity. The analysis has been divided into three different categories. The first focuses on the United States government, and the President and Secretary of State in particular. The second category analyzes the minority opinion in the United States that had Nazi sympathies. Finally, the third deals with the American public in general. The evidence suggests that there was enough information regarding Nazi Germany for Americans to make a reasonable judgment. Most of the United States was opposed to Nazism and the German government. In spite of this, the majority agreed that the United States should not intervene or enter war. This study is significant because it helps shed further light on a debate in the country that continues to the present day: what role should the United States have when it comes to world affairs? The research in this thesis suggests that, in spite of opposition by the American public, if there is enough verifiable evidence of a humanitarian crisis to justify intervention, the government should act.