Across all of American history, the accumulation of state power during times of war and national emergency has been the most destructive threat to human liberty. World War I was no exception. Thousands of books have been written about the first World War. Despite this, much less has been written about a mostly-forgotten anti-war perspective put forth by those in the classical liberal or libertarian tradition. This includes many who are now considered the “Old Right,” including Albert Jay Nock, who examined the relationship of social power (liberty) and state power. This methodology was adapted and described by Murray Rothbard as “the great conflict which is eternally waged between Liberty and Power…."[1] According to Rothbard: “In those areas of history when liberty—social power—has managed to race ahead of state power and control, the country and even mankind have flourished. In those eras when state power has managed to catch up or surpass social power, mankind suffers and declines.”[2] The central concern of the American story is: “Who will control the state, and what power will the state exercise over the citizenry?”[3] More recently, historians such as Robert Higgs have demonstrated how governments used crises to increase their power.[4]

The focus of this dissertation will be the major political, legal, and economic events of the First World War in the United States within the context of this Rothbardian methodology. While some classical liberal and libertarian scholars such as Rothbard, Higgs, and Ralph Raico have written essays or chapters about the first World War, none of them did so in a full-length treatise from this classical liberal conflict methodology. Moreover, libertarian scholars have tended to focus on economic history. Among more recent works among more orthodox scholars, books such as William G. Ross's World War I and the American Constitution addresses many important legal issues.[5] Nonetheless, it is tied to court cases that are important to, but not sufficient, to express to full measure of social power eclipsed by the war. My thesis envisions that social power (or human liberty) can be diminished even if there is court decision on the matter, and even when there might be no legal cause of action to justify a complaint.

As a result, there is a gap in the scholarly work in this area. My dissertation seeks to fill that gap by examining the first World War in the context of its impact on American society through the lens of the classical liberal conflict theory. My focus will be on specific instances or situations (political, social, economic, and legal) where social power was converted into state power. A few examples that stand out are the takeover of the railroads, activities of the American Protective League and the Council of National Defense (and its state and local associates), and how these organizations contributed to surveillance and prosecution for draft evasion, espionage, and other crimes—and how the courts were complicit in this conversion. Moreover, many victims of these activities suffered because of state-enforced nativism and discrimination. Here again, much has been written about these activities in a substantive manner. The intent is not to duplicate work that has already been done but to show how these activities were part of an overall scheme to centralize government at the expense of liberty.

            What is the classical liberal conflict theory? This question is designed to answer and understand the methodology that my research will be based upon. Class conflict theory is widely attributed to Karl Marx and is a staple of Marxist historical analysis. But research (mostly in the 20thcentury) has demonstrated that this class conflict analysis was seen as early as the 16th century and predated his work, a fact that he acknowledged. The existence of this history is due to the research of libertarian scholars Ralph Raico, Leonard Liggio, David M. Hart, Walter E. Grinder, and others.  These historians showed the development of this classical liberal or libertarian class analysis as distinct from Marx. Rather than capitalist vs. working class based upon the payment of wages, these historians showed that the classical liberal analysis was (and is) based upon wielding the power of government to achieve one’s means. Rothbard synthesized the ideas of classical liberals and the Old Right, Austrian economic theory, and contributions from the New Left.

How did the war transform the relationship between the American people and their government as seen through the lens of the Rothardian synthesis? This dissertation is not about the causes of the war, information about battles or strategy or tactics, nor does it focus on diplomacy or the peace settlement after the war. All of these subjects are important to the overall framework, but they are not intended to be covered in any comprehensive way. Instead, the central argument is the relationship between the American people and their government that emerged during and immediately after the war—as seen through the lens of Rothbard's conflict theory. The approach of this dissertation is, first: to explain the convergence of historical factors that served as justifications or rationalizations for the centralization power; second, to describe the methods by which implementation took place; and third, demonstrate how this power was consolidated.

What is the legacy of World War I, as seen through this perspective? For many Americans, the First World War is a forgotten war. While millions of Europeans died in over for years of trench warfare, the United States was at war for only 19 months and involved in only a few months of direct combat operations in the summer and fall of 1918. Yet the legacy of the war--especially it unfolded on the home front. The war had immediate effects in areas such as free speech, immigration, and even rent control. Later, much of the administrative structure of the New Deal was directly inspired by the American war effort. Perhaps the legacy of the war impacts us even today.

[1] Murray N. Rothbard, Conceived in Liberty, vol. 1 (Auburn, AL: Mises Institute, 2011), xv-xvi.

[2] Ibid., xvi.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Robert Higgs, Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government (Oakland: Independent Institute, 2013).

[5] William G. Ross, World War I and the American Constitution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017).