Reinventing America on the battlefields of Spain or following the party line: conflicting perceptions of the Spanish Civil War in the present and in the past

Isolationism and neutrality are two of the recurrent themes in the study of the history of the U.S. foreign policy in the interwar years. The trauma of the Great War, which had swept away 130.000 U.S. lives and had cost $30 billion, had led public opinion to strongly oppose any involvement with European affairs. Besides, the urgent need for economic recovery during the dismal years of the Great Depression did not leave Roosevelt much room for manoeuvre to influence international events. His positions regarding the intentions of the Fascist states remained, at best, ambivalent. These facts notwithstanding, about 2800 U.S. citizens crossed the Atlantic and rushed in to help democratic Spain, which was on the verge of becoming one more hostage in the hands of the Fascism. They joined the other British, Irish and Canadian volunteers and formed the XV International Brigade. 900 Americans never returned home. This alone should challenge the commonly held assumption that the American people were indifferent to the rise of the Fascist threat in Europe. But it also begs other questions. Considering the prevailing isolationist mood, what really motivated them? With what discursive elements did these men construct their anti Fascist representations? How far did their understanding of the Spanish democracy correspond to their own American democratic ideal? In what way did their war experience across the Atlantic mould their perception of U.S. politics (both domestic and foreign)? How far did the Spanish Civil War constitute one first step towards the realization that the U.S. might actually be drawn into another international conflict of unpredictable consequences? Last but not the least, what ideological, political and cultural complicity existed between the men from the English-speaking battalions? In order to unearth some of the answers, I intend to examine their letters and see how these men recorded the historical events in which they took part. Their correspondence emerged from the desire to prove their commitment to a common cause and spoke of a common war experience, but each letter, in its uniqueness, ends up mirroring not only the social and political background of each individual fighter, but also his own particular perspective of the war, of world politics and of the Spanish people. We shall see how these letters differ and converge and how these particular accounts weave, as in an epistolary novel, a larger-than-life narrative of outrage and solidarity, despair and hope.

The resilience of democratic institutions in Britain, Australia and the United States under conditions of total war

To what extent are democratic institutions resilient when nation states mobilise for war? Normative and empirical political theorists have long argued that wars strengthen the executive and threaten constitutional politics. In modern democracies, national assemblies are supposed to hold the executive to account by demanding explanations for events and policies; and by scrutinising, reviewing and, if necessary, revising legislative proposals intended to be binding on the host society or policies that have been implemented already. This article examines the extent to which the British and Australian parliaments and the United States Congress held their wartime executives to account during World War II. The research finds that under conditions approaching those of total war, these democratic institutions not only continued to exist, but also proved to be resilient in representing public concerns and holding their executives to account, however imperfectly and notwithstanding delegating huge powers. In consequence, executives—more so British and Australian ministers than President Roosevelt—were required to be placatory as institutional and political tensions within national assemblies and between assemblies and executives continued, and assemblies often asserted themselves. In short, even under the most onerous wartime conditions, democratic politics mattered and democratic institutions were resilient.

An Address of members of the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States, to their constituents, on the subject of the war with Great Britain. --

Signed by George Sullivan and thirty-three other Federalist members.

Captain Lewis Warrington and others : memorial of Lewis Warrington, Captain in the U.S. Navy, (in behalf of himself and the officers and crew of the U.S. sloop-of-war Peacock); praying that the one half of the proceeds of the Epervier and goods which went into the officers and crew of said vessel, it having been decreed to them by the United States court as captors. April 26, 1848.--

Caption title.

The claim of Amasa Stetson, of Massachusetts, on the United States, for money advanced, in fulfilling the orders of the Government while discharging the duties of Commissary General of Purchases, in time of the late war with Great Britain ; and for services rendered. --

Claim relating to the War of 1812.

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting documents relative to the commencement and progress of any acts or system of retaliation upon prisoners of war, by the Governments of Great Britain and the United States. --

13th Congress, 3d session. House. Doc. no. 13.

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting of a report of the Secretary of State, in relation to individuals selected from American prisoners of war, and sent to Great Britain for trial, and also in relation to any orders for retaliation, &c., &c.--

April 16, 1814. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States.

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting communications from the plenipotentiaries of the United States charged with negotiating peace with Great Britain : showing the conditions on which alone that government is willing to put an end to the war. --

13th Congress, 3d session. House. Doc. 6.

Report of the Committee to whom was referred so much of the message of the President of the United States, at the Commencement of the session, as relates to the spirit and manner in which the War has been waged by the enemy.--

July 31, 1813. Resolution agreed to and forwarded to the President.

A sermon, preached in Boston, August 20, 1812, the day of humiliation and prayer, appointed by the President of the United States, in consequence of the declaration of war against Great Britain /

Published at the request of the hearers.

A true and impartial account of the actions fought at Chippawa & Lundy's Lane during the last war with the United States /

On leaf preceding the t.p.: Battles of Chippawa and Lundy's Lane, by Charles Anderson, guide to the battle ground.

Letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting a return of the arms and military stores furnished to the respective states, under the provisions of the law of one thousand eight hundred and twelve

At head of title: [107]. 15th Congress, 1st session, 1817-1818. House. February 20, 1818. Read, and ordered to lie upon the table.

Message from the President of the United States, Recommending an Immediate Declaration of War Against Great Britain (1812)

"June 1st, 1812. Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. June 3d, 1812. Bill reported, declaring war ..."