Frank Capra's take on "Why We Fight": American Propaganda in WWII

For this assignment, I watched the first episode of Frank Capra’s “Why We Fight” series: Prelude to War. A series of seven films, “Why We Fight” was commissioned by the US Government during WWII. Capra was tapped by the US Office of War Information and General George Marshall to direct the films due to his reputation as a master storyteller and acclaimed filmmaker.

Frank Capra was born in Sicily and immigrated to the United States in 1903. Six-year old Capra came to the US with parents and two siblings to join an uncle already settled in California. Capra attended an arts high school in Los Angeles and went on to attend what is now the California Institute of Technology. Capra became a US citizen in 1920, two years after being honorably discharged from the US Army during WWI. Capra became a major Hollywood player with 1934’s It Happened One Night, for which he won his first Oscar for Best Director. Capra went on to enjoy critical and box office success with his films throughout the 1930s.

The basic premise behind the creation of this film series was that US troops would rally under the war’s cause if it were explained “properly” to them. The resulting “Why We Fight” series (mandatory viewing before soldiers were deployed) is classic WWII propaganda. Officially sanctioned by the War Department, the seven films were eventually shown in theaters across the US home front as well as to troops. The “Why We Fight” series was made between 1942 and 1948. The series consists of Prelude to War (1942), The Nazis Strike (1942), The Battle of Britain (1943), Divide and Conquer (1943), Know Your Enemy: Japan (1945), Tunisian Victory (1945), and Two Down and One to Go (1945).

Prelude to War opens with a quote by Secretary of War Henry Stimson: “The purpose of these films is to give factual information as to the causes, the events leading up to our entry into the war and the principles for which we are fighting.” Of course, the film doesn’t present any factually incorrect information (that I caught) but it does present the story of how WWII came to be in a very biased interpretation. Among other gems, the film tells us that the US didn’t join the war effort after the Japanese invasion of Nanking because we couldn’t convince an Iowa farm boy to enlist to save a burning mud hut across the ocean (A similar quote about another burning mud hut and Midwestern farm boy is used to explain why Mussolini’s invasion of Ethiopia didn’t kick the US in the pants, either).

I think this film could be used in many ways. I would not show the entire film, but use it for a lesson on propaganda for a 90 minute block period. There are extended scenes that show Nazi and Italian rallies could be fast forwarded through—eight minutes of marching would probably lose their interest. I would use this film after having looked at the causes of WWII—I would want students to have background knowledge and context for the war in Europe and why the US eventually joins in. Students could watch portions of this film as well as look at examples of propaganda from the Axis Powers to try to find similarities and differences in how each “side’ of the war twisted its message to suit their audience. “Why We Fight” could help students see that EVERYONE uses propaganda, not just the “bad guys.” “Why We Fight” clearly vilifies the Axis Powers. It refers to them as “a slave world” and shows an image of an earth swathed in light (us) and one in shadow (them). It also uses music very interestingly in the film. I would ask students to think about the music they hear when different counties are being discussed (angelic vs. foreboding), as well as the word choices used. “Why We Fight” draws heavily on the US as an enlightened, Christian nation whose founding fathers insisted we were special and a model for the world. Capra wants the audience to understand that the US worked hard through our depression instead of turning to fascism or Nazism. Students could use a simple T chart to compare how the Axis Powers are presented vs. the United States. The same approach could be used when looking at German propaganda. The message of both is the same: we are somehow better than our enemy. Helping students come to this realization via a culminating class discussion could be powerful to show that “good guys” and ‘bad guys” aren’t so one-sided. “Us” and “them” designations are useful in times of war because you want people to rally around your cause. Often times, the cause is much more appealing when you have a dark, evil “slave world” to compare yourself to. For homework, students could write a response discussing if they think the US’ use of propaganda was justified? Germany’s? Why or why not?