World War I: War Propaganda


Figure 1.--This World War I "Captain" magazine from February 1915, very early in the War, has a suitably patriotic cover. Note the Allied (English, French, and Italian) scout uniforms. Note that the Russians who undoubtedly saved France in 1914 are not included. The Americns were not yet in the War. The illustrator was M.R. Whitwell.

The major contending powers in the War were the Central Powers (Germany and Austria) and the Allies (France, Britain, and Russia). Italy had signed a treaty with Germany and Austria Hungary, decided not to honor it and later entered the War. Turkey had signed a defensive alliance with Germany in July 1914 and seeing an opportuity to make major gains against their historic enemy Russia joined the Central Powers. The British, in particular as the War dragged on, sought to involve America which had proclaimed its neutrality after the outbreak of hostilities. British propaganda played up the German invasion of Belgium. The Germans harshly administered occupied Belgium, but British propaganda painted a vicious pictures of the Germans--an image they wereto live up to in World War II. The British painted the War has a conflict betwen the Allied democracies (Britain, France, and Italy) and the authoritarian Central Powers (Germany, Austria, and Turkey). This played wll in America. The only problem was that Russia, the most autocratic country in Europe was a key member of the Allied coalition. It was Russia in August 1914 that prevented the Germans from bringing the full weight of their Army to bear against the French and winning the War at the onset in August-September 1914. The Russians through 1915 and 1916 kept large German armies tied up in the Eastern Front. Almost certainly the Allies would have been unable to hold in the West had it not have been for the Russians. The Russian presence in the Allied coalition, however, was an embarassment. This was not just a matter of British propaganda in America. It also affected domestic public opinion. The British hesitated to accept the Tsar and his family in 1917 when it was still possible to save them.

Background

We note on source arguing ghat war propoganda was basically a creation of the French Revolution (1789). We would argue that it was a major actor in the earlier American Revolution (1776), but would agree that the French Revolution had a much greater impact because Europe at the time was the cnter of world power. War propaganda was not invented by American and French revolutionaries. We see examples of propaganda, for example, during the European religious wars (17th century) there was extensive propaganda made possibke by the spred of printing. A major topic was the horrors perpetrated by religiously motivated leaders such as the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre. The tortures of the Spanish inquisators was a running propganda theme. What made the American and French Revolutions different is that they were not fought by small professional armies, but rather large numbers of citizens. In fact the term 'citizen' was revived from clssical times. The term for the population of a monrchy was and is 'subject'. And suddenly propaganda beomes important when you need to motivate and cincince citizens rather than a paid professional force. And World WarI was the first major European conflict after the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars. And propaganda became a major factor in the War, playing a critical role in drawing neutral America into it.

Nature of Propagnda

The common view of propaganda is state sponsored activity to influence public opinion, both domestic and foreign. In an tototalitarian or even authoritarian state this is the bulk of opinion making activities what are described as 'top-down' approaches. Therea re many approaches such as censorship, press conferences, the 'bully pulpet' as President Roosevelt phased it, propaganda posters, publishing reports, staging events, ect. In a democtatic state, however, there are other sources of opinion forming activities. The Government can be important. The British Government was highly effective in its war propganda. And the American Government got very involved after declaring war. There are many opinion influences that can play an important role besides the government. The media including letters to the editor; poems, other literature, and images, teacher comments, speeches by opinion makers (industrial leaders, trade unionists, university professors, pastors and others), war-themed merchandise, and much more. In a free society people had a range of motivatuons, including ideology, morality, religion, commercial interest, nationalism, family, personal well being, and other concerns.

Central Powers

The Central Powers were led by Germany and included Austria and subsequently joined by Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire.

Austria


Germany

German wartime propaganda was often ham fisted compared to British propaganda, generally seen as the most effective propaganda of the War. The propaganda durected at foreign audiences, especially the all important American audience was nothing short of disaterous. This was perhaps inevitable given tht the war began with the German invasion of small, neutral Belgium. But there was one German action after another (starving the Belgians, war crimes in Belgium, sinking ocean liners, unrestricted submarine warfare, introducing poison gas, the Zimmerman Telegram, sabotage, etc, for which no amount of propaganda could answer. Thus what mattered most was German domestic propagada designed to justify the War and maintain support for the war effort. Here Germany held an advantage. There were social and cultural influences that predisposed the German people to support Kaiser Wilhelm’s call to arms. Compare that to the overwealming American predisposition to stay out of the War. And the fact that the war began with invading a small neutral country (Belgium) does not seem to have impacted public support of the War. The Prussian monarchy and military had acgieved what Germany was unavle to achive for more than a mellinum--unification. This confered enormous prestige to both and a willingness to obey and support both. Historians describe how Germany’s dominant bourgeois society saw obedience, loyalty, bravery and discipline as laudable characteristics and as both patriotic and appropriate for the German Volk. [Rohkrämer, p. 761] Socialist voices question this national view, but they were not the dominant national view. Nationalist and Social Darwinist views also influnced Germans perrceptions that conflict was inevitable. [Nübel, pp. 23ff.] Here a major factor was the widely held view that Germany was not being given its due (such as colonies) and suffiently respected by the other great powers. Here the legacy of Bismarck, the Iron Chancellor and his 1862 Blut and Eisen speech had a profound influence on the German psyche. (Unfortnately his more moderate diplomay was less influential.) The idea that political power is based on struggle led to the widely held outlook that only armed conflict could guarante Germany's security, even survival. [Nübel, p. 23.] Many will recognize these attituds as central to Hitler's thinking helping to explain his appeal two decades later. The French-Russian Entente fed into the idea of a concern with threat and encirclement by dangerous neigboring states. [Mai, p. 585.] These attitudes were most prevalent among conservatives, but such was the power of nationlislm, there was support for them among the socialist-oriented working lass as well. The Social Democratic Party (SPD) split on such issues and arms spending before the War. This was the atmosphere in which German war-time propaganda operated. Only terrible losses and privations would change such strongly held attitudes. One phenomnon that played out in Germany was that the Germans believed that with the collapse of Russia that they had won the War. Then suddenly because of the Kaiser's incredably incompetent foreign policy, over the spaves of only 4 months, Allied armies in the Wet bolstered by the Americans defeated the German Army and forced a humiliating armistice.

Ottoman Empire

Turkey had signed a defensive alliance with Germany in July 1914 and seeing an opportuity to make major gains against their historic enemy Russia joined the Central Powers.

Allies

The Allies were France and Russia joined at first by Britain when Germany invaded neutral Belgium. Serbia was already at war wih Austria. America, Italy, Portugal, and Romania eventually joined the Allies.

America


Britain

The British, in particular as the War dragged on, sought to involve America which had proclaimed its neutrality after the outbreak of hostilities. British propaganda played up the German invasion of Belgium. The Germans harshly administered occupied Belgium, but British propaganda painted a vicious pictures of the Germans--an image they wereto live up to in World War II. The British painted the War has a conflict betwen the Allied democracies (Britain, France, and Italy) and the authoritarian Central Powers (Germany, Austria, and Turkey). This played well in America. The only problem was that Russia, the most autocratic country in Europe was a key member of the Allied coalition. It was Russia in August 1914 that prevented the Germans from bringing the full weight of their Army to bear against the French and winning the War at the onset in August-September 1914. The Russians through 1915 and 1916 kept large German armies tied up in the Eastern Front. Almost certainly the Allies would have been unable to hold in the West had it not have been for the Russians. The Russian presence in the Allied coalition, however, was an embarassment. This was not just a matter of British propaganda in America. It also affected domestic public opinion. The British hesitated to accept the Tsar and his family in 1917 when it was still possible to save them.

France


Italy

Italy had signed a treaty with Germany and Austria Hungary, decided not to honor it and later entered the War.

Russia


Sources

Mai, Gunther. “Verteidigungskrieg“ und “Volksgemeinschaft“ Staatliche Selbstbehauptung, nationale Solidarität du soziale Befreiung in Deutschland in der Zeit des Ersten Weltkriegs (1900 – 1925)" in Michalka ed. Weltkrieg (1994)..

Nübel, Christoph. "Bedingt kriegsbereit. Kriegserwartungen in Europa vor 1914," in: Apuz. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 63/12 (2013)

Rohkrämer, Thomas."August 1914: Kriegsmentalität und ihre Voraussetzungen," in Wolfgang Michalka, ed. : Der Erste Weltkrieg: Wirkung, Wahrnehmung, Analyse (1994).





CIH -- WW I







Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to Main World War I conduct page]
[Return to Main military style page]
[About Us]
[Aftermath] [Alliances] [Animals] [Armistace] [Biographies] [Causes] [Campaigns] [Casualties] [Children] [Countries] [Declaration of war] [Deciding factors] -------[Diplomacy] [Economics] -------[Geo-political crisis] [Home front] [Intelligence]
[Military forces] [Neutrality] [Pacifism] [People] [Peace treaties] [Propaganda] [POWs] [Russian Revolution] [Terrorism] [Trench warfare] ------[Technology] [Weaponry]
[Bibliographies] [Contributions] [FAQs] [Images] [Links] [Registration] [Tools]
[Return to Main World War I page]
[Return to Main war essay page]
[Return to CIH Home page]




Created: September 29, 2002
Last updated: 4:03 PM 3/6/2018