Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Few aspects of World War II have evoked as much controversy as how the United States responded to the genocidal policies of Nazi Germany. At the time, Nazi atrocities sparked widespread debate between isolationists and interventionists, centering on the extent to which the United States was responsible for the safety of citizens of other countries. Beginning in the 1960s, a number of historians argued that the U.S. government, especially the State Department and the armed forces, had failed to take actions that could have rescued a significant number of Jews from Hitler's regime. Other scholars have concluded the United States did all it could to rescue European Jewry. They maintain that the only way to thwart Nazi genocide was to secure the military defeat of Nazi Germany.

Prewar Responses

The anti-Semitism of the Nazis became quickly apparent when the regime came to power in January 1933. In March 1933, the American Embassy in Berlin and U.S. consuls reported numerous mob attacks on Jews as well as the systematic removal of Jews from positions in government, education, and the legal profession. The U.S. press gave significant coverage to the anti-Semitic writings and actions of the Nazi regime.

Although political and ethnic divisions existed within American Jewry, these reports generated widespread alarm. Several organizations, such as the Joint Distribution Committee and the American Jewish Committee, began initiatives to aid the embattled German Jewish community. American Jews were joined by other religious and nonsectarian organizations, most notably the Quaker American Friends Service Committee. Moreover, the Jewish War Veterans together with other Jewish organizations, as well as a number of churches, civic organizations, and intellectuals joined in publicizing Nazi policies and organizing boycotts of German goods. Not all Americans believed the United States should actively intervene in another country's internal affairs, however, and a number of American corporations continued to operate their subsidiaries in Germany. In addition, although a significant number of American athletes supported the idea of a boycott, the American Olympic Association voted by a narrow margin to participate in the 1936 Olympics held in Berlin.

The U.S. government's response to German Jews fleeing Germany was similarly mixed. The Roosevelt administration supported efforts by the League of Nations to coordinate the resettlement of German refugees and played a key role in organizing an international conference at Evian, France, in 1938 to consider solutions to the problem. At the same time, the U.S. State Department, which was roundly criticized by Jewish groups and others, was rigidly enforcing immigration laws that denied entry to Jews seeking to flee Germany, Austria (after 1938), and Czechoslovakia (after 1939). Although much of the public was considerably dismayed by the plight of refugees fleeing Europe, Congress in the 1930s consistently refused to relax strict immigration quotas, even for refugee children. Anti-Semitic sentiments certainly played some part, but the Great Depression and high unemployment also inhibited support for admitting more refugees.

Jews fleeing Germany faced enormous obstacles, especially the restrictions the Nazis placed on taking assets out of the country and the need to find countries that would accept refugees. In 1939, newspapers widely covered the plight of the Jewish refugees aboard the passenger ship St. Louis—denied entrance into Cuba, they searched in vain for safe harbor before turning back to Germany. Despite the reluctance of the United States and other Western countries to lift immigration barriers, William D. Rubenstein in The Myth of Rescue (1997) has calculated that nearly 72 percent of German Jews were able to leave Germany from 1933 to 1939 (although some fled to countries later conquered by the Nazis). Unfortunately, some German Jews, especially the elderly, were reluctant to leave Germany; although the Nazis remained consistently anti-Semitic, policy implementation displayed significant ebbs and flow in harshness.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading