Children, War and Propaganda, Revised Edition

Definitions, Scope and Approach

This study uses traditional historical research methods in an examination of the militarization of American childhood during both world wars. By historical methods we mean a considered interpretation of events in the past based mainly on primary sources from the past, along with secondary research, and construction of a narrative based on that interpretation. By militarization we mean how authorities tried to create a wartime culture for American children using propaganda: what they wanted children to think, what they hoped children would learn, what they intended children to do, what they expected children to accomplish, and what they believed children should not know.

We define a child by age using the standard definition adopted by the United Nations: any human being under age eighteen.⁶ We recognize that while persons in this age group generally are defined as children, it is an arbitrary number not accepted by all cultures. We also note that worldwide many military authorities, including the United States, have set the age in which a person can be accepted for service at seventeen.

We also recognize, of course, that young children will respond differently than near-adults, and that authorities will often use different approaches and have different expectations for different age groups. But no child was left behind from service during the world wars. Even toddlers under five, during World War I organized into the “Khaki Babes.”⁷

We will learn mostly about Caucasian children; authorities examined here almost never considered special appeals to African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, or other minorities. One would expect this during World War I; the emphasis was on “Americanization,” not separation by race, class or “hyphen.” World War II authorities spoke little of Americanization, but their sensitivity toward children of races other than that of the dominant culture did not seem to change much from that of 1918, at least as reflected in these sources. We recognize that American youth groups and popular culture were typically racist, particularly in World War II.⁸ We recognize that African American children and other minorities did shoulder a considerable amount of service during both world wars, but that racism and stereotypical depictions in ←3 | 4→youth groups and children’s publications generally did not recognize their equality with white children.⁹ We also recognize that authorities generally treated girls as an afterthought. Certainly, however, girls contributed in a variety of ways during both wars, often doing the same things as the boys and showing strong interest in supposedly “male” areas such as aviation, military drills and tales of combat in comic books and juvenile literature.

World wars means the wars during the time the United States was participating, from about 1917–1918, and about 1941–1945. The definition of propaganda is controversial; here propaganda has been accepted in its neutral sense as persuasion neither good nor bad, although to be noted is the troubling notion that children most of the time were manipulated through this material.

The grooming process to militarize American children was undertaken primarily by four groups. These are the groups we mean when we generally refer to “the authorities”: government, educators, private children’s organizations and industries, and juvenile media. The last three took cues from the first, as of course in both wars it was the U.S. Government which declared and directed war policies. But despite the almost universal underlying belief in the correctness of the government’s choice to go to war, groups and individuals displayed a variation in concept and philosophy of how children should be brought into wartime culture. Differences existed in the approaches taken during World War I and World War II. But in common was agreement over positive values and skills children could gain from living through a total war. War was a disaster in principle. But in practice it could be a good opportunity to build a child’s character on the home front.

We rely on written documents designed for consumption by children themselves, or by their adult charges such as teachers and scout leaders, that is, those whose main interest was to serve as guides for the journey through childhood. This focus suggests some primary sources on the pop culture periphery are excluded from study. In fact, it is acknowledged that media children consumed during the world wars extended beyond the literary children’s publications. Movies were popular during both wars; in 1918 they already attracted 10 million viewers a day.¹⁰ By World War II, radio had grown to the point where three-fourths of Americans used it as their major source for war information.¹¹ Obviously children made up a share of this audience, and some programs appealed directly to them. It is also obvious that children consumed adult-aimed media. A World War II study showed children as young as ten already had a reasonably good knowledge of the war, presumably based in part on their consumption of adult-aimed radio and publications.¹² By World War II, as well, comic books had become popular; more than 90 percent of younger children read them regularly.¹³ This revised edition adds an extended examination of the comic book genre. Other publications examined ←4 | 5→presumed a more literary and instructional tone, perhaps slightly preachy. Clearly editors of children’s publications such as Boys’ Life and American Girl were interested in values-based education, and so deserve a place in a study of authorities, their propaganda, and militarization of American childhood. It is presumed that broadcast sources cared mostly about “low-brow” entertainment, although the author will quickly agree that this was not always true, and that it does not mean these should not be the focus of a future study.