1

Truman’s Role in the Cold War and the Containment Policy

Name

Institution

Course

Date
 2

Truman’s Role in the Cold War and the Containment Policy

The Cold War era refers to a period of heightened tension between the US and the Soviet

Union, which divided the world into two spheres of influence as each of the two countries sought

to defend its allies and protect its global interests. America had abstained from the war for a long

time, citing the desire for internal development and a lack of interest in the international political

arena (Levering, 2016). Notably, these isolationist sentiments played a critical role in the

country’s internal political, economic, and social landscapes, specifically the elections in 1944.

This led to the election of President Harry Truman, whose ideology favored America’s

participation in global politics. The bombing of Pearl Harbor, the spread of fascism, and Hitler’s

declaration of war on the US forced it to take part in the war. It changed public opinion and

propelled Truman to the presidency. Truman’s presidency changed the tide of the second world

war and, subsequently, the cold war, despite the tension between the US and the Soviet Union.

Literature Review

Current research about America during the Cold War era advocates that President

Truman played a critical role in the Cold War and the Containment Policy, especially in

changing the war’s tide in its allies’ favor and crafting America’s position in global politics and

economics. The book “The First Cold Warrior: Harry Truman, Containment, and the Remaking

of Liberal Internationalism” by Elizabeth Edwards Spalding presents Truman as an active

participant in the Cold War. According to Spalding’s (2006) expository approach to Truman’s

role in the Cold War, Truman came to power at a time when the country’s foreign interaction and

foreign policy were primarily theoretical concepts that had not been successfully implemented,

especially during wartime. However, Truman used his position and experience in both world

wars to formulate policies that helped protect America’s global interests. Spalding asserts that
 3

the limited experience of the president’s advisers on internationalism prompted Truman to rely

on his ideological background and America’s push to spread democracy as critical pillars for his

foreign policy approach. This explains his decision to use aggressive measures to contain the

spread of communism, as he considered it a threat to democracy, which thrived through the

exploitation of economic, social, and political crises in countries neighboring the Soviet Union.

Truman’s role in the Cold War is also evident in the formulation of policies to curtail the

spread of communism. According to Weissman, A. D. (2013) played an active role in the

formulation and implementation of the Marshall Plan, which was proposed by his Secretary of

State, George Marshall. Based on the intended operations of the Marshall Plan, Weissman (2013)

demonstrates that Truman believed that the communist threat could only be eradicated through

international cooperation across Europe. Similar research by Anistratenko (2021) affirms this

observation by revealing how Truman’s actions and decisions in the first year of his presidency

prepared the country for Truman’s doctrine. Anistratenko's (2021) article discloses that

Truman’s foreign policy prompted him to pledge America’s military and financial muscle in the

fight against the spread of communism in Greece, Turkey, and throughout Western and Eastern

Europe and Asia.

Current literature also recognizes actions such as the President’s failure to control

General MacArthur in his military plans in Japan and Korea. According to Mueller (2015),

although MacArthur adopted a somewhat rogue approach, Truman interpreted his success as

crucial support for the containment policy and a blow to the Soviets. Interestingly, the President

also directed the deployment of US military forces in South Korea during this period without the

approval of Congress, an aspect that Truman and MacArthur believed would give them an added

advantage over the Soviet-backed North Korean forces.

 4

Truman's role in the Cold War also encompasses the influence that domestic politics had

on his ability to function as president. According to Roark (1998) in “The American Promise: A

History of the United States from 1865, Vol. II,” Truman faced hostile domestic politics,

especially during the anti-communism hysteria and the return of the Red Scare politics. This

issue integrated extremist tendencies into the anti-communist policies during Truman’s

administration. Therefore, although Truman was not an extremist, measures such as the

militarization of the FBI and misuse of labor organizations to root out communists within the

US, as discussed by Schmidt (2004), were implemented under his watch.

An excerpt from the book “Religion and the Cold War” examines how Truman leveraged

religion during the Cold War to actualize the containment policy. In this book, the author

discusses the alignment between the Church’s and Truman’s views against Soviet aggression

(Kirby, 2003). Truman gained the support of the church by supporting democracy in Italy,

especially after he made it clear that a communist Italy would not benefit from the Marshall Plan

or any other economic aid from America and its allies. In return, Truman restored US-Italy

relations and used the pope to frame the anti-communist ideology as a fight between darkness

and light, giving it a religious connotation and much-needed public support (Kirby, 2003).

Therefore, Truman used a combination of objective and subjective strategies to win the Cold

War and contain communism, an approach that framed America's approach to foreign policy,

where the country used a situation-specific method instead of a one-size-fits-all approach.

The current literature also examines Truman’s role in Cold War-era legislation. Although

certain legislation was sponsored by the opposition in a bid to undermine his power, researchers

assert that he also took an active role in pushing for legislation that would support his ideologies.

For instance, trumanlibrary.gov. (n.d.) asserts that Truman had a hidden hand in the passage of
 5

the Defense Production Act in 1950, the National Security Act of 1947, and the Atomic Energy

Act of 1946. These laws gave Truman the power to implement the Marshall Plan, the Truman

Doctrine, and the entire containment policy. Interestingly, they also justified Truman’s anti-

communism policies by intensifying the Cold War (Kalinovsky & Daigle, 2014). For instance,

the Atomic Energy Act played a critical role in advancing the ideology of America’s

monopolization of nuclear technology, an aspect that Stalin responded to by pushing for the

manufacture and testing of nuclear weapons in his country.

Analysis and Discussion

Truman played a somewhat controversial role in the Cold War and containment policy,

given that despite his resolve to prevent the expansion of Soviet influence, his policies varied

between extremist approaches and diplomacy. Nevertheless, his role cannot be downplayed,

especially in steering the country through a period of political, economic, and social tension both

locally and internationally. Some of the key factors that influenced Truman′s approach to the

Soviet Union Cold War include, but are not limited to, domestic politics, the second world war

experience, and ideological differences with the Soviets.

Domestic Politics

In hindsight, President Truman came to power at one of the most challenging moments in

US history. Undoubtedly, he drove the anti-isolationist wave to get the presidency, meaning that

irrespective of his perception of the war, domestic politics were bound to influence his approach

to the Soviet Union’s Cold War. One of the major aspects of domestic politics that impacted

Truman’s policies was the fear of the spread of communism in America and globally. According

to Roark (1998), these politics emanated from the end of the nuclear monopoly, given that the

Soviet Union had responded to Japan's opinions by letting out their open secret that they were
 6

developing and testing nuclear weapons. This also followed the wide-scale military expansion of

the Soviet Union under Stalin’s expansionary ideologies.

The Soviet Union had successfully managed to unite its allies under the communist

banner, an issue that destabilized America’s internal politics. Politicians and citizens felt

threatened by the growing influence, leading to the re-emergence of the red scare, and politicians

became more vocal about their anti-communist stands, prompting Truman to take a

confrontational stand against the Soviet Union (Schmidt, 2004). Internally, Truman’s

administration formulated a loyalty program to prompt patriotism among federal employees in a

bid to eliminate the infiltration of communist agents into government agencies.

Interestingly, Congress viewed this as an opportunity to strengthen the Federal Bureau of

Investigation (FBI) to use the loyalty program and the Sedition Act of 1918 to combat the spread

of communism in the country (Schmidt, 2004). Pressure from Republicans and conservative

Democrats also forced President Truman to issue Executive Order 9835, which allowed

mandatory investigations of federal employees, further fueling the anti-communist hysteria.

Domestic politics further influenced Truman’s approach, pushing him towards extremism in this

fight by rationalizing the direct confrontation between America and the Soviet Communist Party.

According to Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (1957), this led to the prosecution of

communist party leaders arrested within the US under the Smith Act of 1940, worsening

Soviet/USA relations.

The domestic political sphere also encompassed sentiments made by respected politicians

and government officials, which also influenced Truman’s approach. For instance, the “Iron

Curtain Speech” by Winston Churchill in 1945 and the subsequent communication with Truman

through the “Iron Curtain Telegrams,” as cited by Truman’s memoirs, helped shape the
 7

president’s view of Stalin and the Soviet Union (Ryan, 1979). Truman also received a telegram

from George Kennan, which gave him insights into Soviet society and politics from a diplomat’s

perspective. According to Kennan (1946), the Soviet Union was fixated on expansion and would

pose a threat to America and other European nations if left unchecked. Collectively, insights

from these leaders reinforced Truman’s pre-existing belief in the need to contain Stalin, the

spread of communism, and the union at large.

Leading the country’s multiple warfronts left Truman exposed to his competitors in

domestic politics. Filling President Roosevelt's shoes proved an uphill task, especially with the

communist expansion of the Soviet Union and China. Additionally, Roark (1998) cites that

Truman’s inner circle was composed of loyalists who had limited experience in leadership and

post-war reconstruction. Thus, they contributed little to quelling the opposition by improving his

Cold War strategies. Extremist anti-communism accused Truman of being weak and unable to

use the presidency to protect America. Notably, Senator Joseph McCarthy fueled the

McCarthyism wave, which weaponized Congress and led to the passage of undiplomatic anti-

communism legislation (Levering, 2016). The movement gained popularity in education

institutions, labor organizations, and blue-collar avenues, forcing Truman to compromise his

conservative approach to the Soviet Cold War because he was bound to follow the legislation as

the country’s president. Therefore, his confrontation with the Soviet Union and economic

development in the post-war era were the only weapons he had to regain control of domestic

politics, causing this desire to shape his approach.

The Second World War Experience

Truman had made various decisions that changed the country’s and the world’s view of

war, international politics, and America as a country within the first few years in power,
 8

primarily due to his experience of the war and desire to save lines. For instance, he reversed his

predecessors’ ideology of non-involvement in the Second World War, thrusting America deep

into the war. One of the major controversial decisions Truman made during this time was the

decision to drop an atomic bomb in Japan (National Security Archive, 2020). The atomic bomb

dealt a huge blow to Japan, given the massive causalities and the bomb's catastrophic

implications for survivors and human life for decades. Truman viewed these as a strategic move

given that Japan’s forces had shown resilience and determination to continue the war, as

evidenced by the resistance they mounted during the Battle of Okinawa.

According to the National Security Archive. (2020), Truman’s decisions to use the

atomic bombs were anchored on the desire to end the war instantly. Thus, he believed that by

making Japan suffer massive casualties, the Japanese forces would retreat and concentrate on

national building instead of the world. His actions, though brutal, saved thousands of American

lives who would have become casualties of war had Japan and other Pacific Front forces made a

ground invasion into the US. This points out that one of the key factors that influenced his

approach to the Cold War was the desire to protect American lives, informed by his experience

in the Second World War.

The bombing gave him an opportunity to demonstrate his role as president. This aspect

can be better understood by examining post-war America, especially the impact the decision had

on public opinion, especially with the country healing from the losses of the Pearl Harbor

bombings. Notably, the conscription campaigns had dulled a once enthusiastic public, given their

high social costs. Therefore, despite there being alternatives to force the unconditional and

peaceful surrender of Japan, the bombing restored Americans’s hope in their president, given

that, despite the high human cost, Japan was primarily considered an enemy state at the time.
 9

Truman’s war experience had made him identify the Soviets as formidable adversaries

incapable of responding to diplomacy unless it was preceded by the use of force. According to

Nasrkhani (2022), in addition to saving American lives, the bombings in Japan also aimed at

forcing the Soviet Union to consider diplomacy. This explains why, even after the end of the

Second World War and the beginning of the Cold War, Truman adopted a non-compromising

approach when dealing with the Soviet Union. For instance, he rejected Stalin’s offer on the

territorial subdivision of all former German territories, an action that further worsened the Cold

War and the science competition to make bombs and other sophisticated weapons.

Ideological Differences

America and the Soviet Union adopted different economic, social, and political ideals, a

factor that dictated their relationship throughout the Cold War era. To the Soviets, communism

was the best policy, as it favored its foreign policy and the expansionary ideals pioneered by

Stalin. Comparably, America under President Truman favored democracy, and due to the age-old

concept of Manifest Destiny, Truman and the American public viewed communism as a threat to

democracy (trumanlibrary.gov, n.d.). The ideological differences between Stalin and Truman

fueled the containment policy as the US sought to reduce the impact and spread of communism,

specifically in Korea. Korea was split between the Soviet Union in the North and America in the

South, a factor that led to the start of the Korea War in 1950–1953 (Levering, 2016).

America also supported the Korean Democratic Party in the South, while the Soviet

Union supported the Korean Communist Party, demonstrating the ideological divide that

informed Truman’s decisions. According to a 1950 brochure, “The Korean War: The Outbreak,

“written by William J. Webb and authorized by the US government, the Korean War, which

broke out after the artificial split of Korea failed to stand, represents the first time the US military
 10

had a direct confrontation with the communist forces. It was also an outright application of the

containment policy to prevent the spread of communism in South Korea (Mueller, 2015).

Military Considerations

Truman’s administration initially underfunded the military, citing that it was one of the

largest government expenditures but gave little value for money. However, the atomic bomb

standoff and the longevity of the Cold War prompted Truman to change this position to improve

the country’s military capabilities. General MacArthur’s military success in Japan and Korea

further reinforced Truman’s belief in the military's values (Mueller, 2015). In hindsight, the

increased military spending and MacArthur’s success played a critical role in justifying the

decision to dishonor parts of the Yalta conference. It also influenced his formulation and

implementation of Truman’s doctrine, especially in quelling the Korea War in 1950–1953, and in

offering military support in Greece against the rebels supported by communist forces. Lastly, the

military strength gained after the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

also influenced the policies adopted against the Soviets and the extent to which Truman was

willing to rely on the United Nations to protect it from Soviet aggression.

The Contribution of Truman’s Decision and Actions to the Development and

Implementation of Truman’s Doctrine

Truman’s doctrine was one of the policies used by the US to contain the spread of

communism. This policy is intended to offer economic, military, and political support to any

party to this agreement who faces threats from external forces, specifically the Soviet Union.

Truman’s doctrine was preceded by the Yalta Conference, in which the three top powers of the

Second World War met to discuss the dismemberment of Germany and her former territories.

According to Graebner (1958), Truman was the vice president during this conference, and after
 11

taking over the presidency a few months later, he was tasked with implementing the agreement

signed by his predecessor. On the positive side, Truman supported and actively participated in

the creation of the United Nations (UN), which played a critical role in the implementation of his

proposal in Truman’s doctrine. For Truman, the UN represented everything he sought to achieve

using Truman’s doctrine.

However, Truman failed to honor certain parts about reparations and the boundaries of

the parts given to the Soviet Union, such as Poland. These actions broke the Big Three’s

relationship, turning the US and Soviets into enemies. Truman adopted new and aggressive

approaches to foreign policies, specifically with the Soviets, despite having supported President

Roosevelt’s relatively conservative approaches when he was vice president. A major outcome of

this change was the bombing of Japan in Truman’s attempt to weaken the Soviet Union owing to

his belief in the US’s nuclear monopoly (Spalding, 2006). This worsened US-Soviet relations,

necessitating the formulation of a policy that united its allies against the common threat posed by

communism.

Truman’s decision to bomb Japan was also followed by a decision to continue

manufacturing and testing nuclear weapons, resulting in atomic diplomacy. However, the Soviet

Union took this as a challenge and began making nuclear weapons, resulting in the nuclear arms

race further accelerating the Cold War. Thus, despite saving lives, the bombings failed to

intimidate Stalin into seeking a peaceful option. Nevertheless, the situation forced Truman to

formulate better ways of dealing with communism and have nuclear bombs as the last resort,

leading to the formulation of Truman’s doctrine. Therefore, irrespective of the outcome of

Truman’s decision to use nuclear bombs in Japan, it pushed him towards the formulation of
 12

Truman’s doctrine and Anglo-American unity as popularized by the “Iron Curtain Speech”

(Ryan, 1979).

In his presentation to Congress, President Truman affirmed that countries such as Turkey

and Greece faced an imminent threat of falling to the Soviet Union’s communism and

expansionary wars (Anistratenko, 2021). Truman’s proposal suggested that it was the US’s duty

to protect such nations and push for the adoption of democracy across Western and Eastern

Europe. Truman’s decisions to propose the protection of the two countries contributed

significantly to the adoption and implementation of Truman’s doctrine, as they resolved the

Americans’ concerns about the increasing spread of communism in Europe, Asia, and Africa.

The two countries are strategically located at the entry of these three regions, meaning that a

successful implementation of the doctrine would contain the Soviet Union (Anistratenko, 2021).

Therefore, Truman suggested that protecting them and instilling democratic values would be an

effective strategy. He effectively defended his ideology in Congress, prompting the US to adopt

a direct military intervention as part of its foreign policy under the Truman Doctrine.

Truman justified his decision and proposal through the domino theory and managed to

convince Congress about the reality of the communism issues, citing that if one country fell to

Stalin’s pressures, then its neighbors would not resist communism for long. Thus, he advocated

that the only way to contain Stalin was through international cooperation, both in peacetime and

wartime. According to Anistratenko (2021), he requested that Congress allocate $400 million

towards the initiative to help Greece and Turkey politically and through military action. These

actions were later reciprocated in other jurisdictions once Congress accepted the doctrine,

quickening the spread of democracy and political stability in Europe.

 13

Truman’s desire for the success of the doctrine prompted him to support the

implementation of the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan was an economic recovery plan

intended to counter the spread of communism and boost Western European economies. Through

this approach, Truman led the country to embrace multilateralism and international cooperation,

as the plan had a promise to safeguard the interests of American allies against communism and

the Soviet Union (Weissman, 2013). This promise emanated from the notion that countries that

were economically connected would find it irrational to wage war against each other. Secretary

George Marshall’s proposal considered factors that led to the failure of the Treaty of Versatile,

resulting in an all-inclusive proposal that, despite being rejected by the Soviets, helped unite

Western European countries (Weissman, 2013). This cemented Truman’s role in international

politics and also restored economic balance within the country by quelling opposition politics,

which leveraged the country’s post-war economic status. For instance, the Marshall Plan's

advocacy played a critical role in his reelection in 1949, demonstrating how he was influenced

and also influenced domestic politics to navigate the Cold War stalemate.

The decision to heed advice from George Kennan about the relentless nature of the

Soviets and the need to contain their expansion led to the integration of the containment policy

into Truman’s doctrine. The policy strengthened the doctrine’s implementation process by

allowing the US to enter into alliances such as NATO (Anistratenko, 2021). This helped unite its

allies for economic, political, and diplomatic partnerships and also boosted containment efforts

by availing the manpower for military action readiness. Therefore, Truman's actions committed

America’s military and financial resources to the global preservation of peace, democratic ideals,

and control over communism. This explains America’s swift action in the Korean War of 1950 to
 14

tame the spread of communism in the Soviet-backed North Korea, demonstrating the doctrine’s

principles in action.

President Truman’s decision before, during, and after the formulation of Truman’s

doctrine gave him an active role in implementing the proposed strategies by expanding his

presidential powers. For instance, owing to the Congress and public support he enjoyed,

especially after Japan’s bombing and the passage of Truman’s doctrine, Truman oversaw the

passage of the National Security Act of 1947 (Kalinovsky & Daigle, 2014). The Act created the

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA), and the National

Security Council. These institutions gave the president unprecedented authority over national

security issues, meaning he could use the CIA to combat communism if it grew to the extent of

threatening national security. Such actions were crucial in implementing Truman’s doctrine,

especially with the rise of McCarthyism and anti-communism hysteria.

The president also showed his expanded powers by spearheading the placement of troops

in Korea following the looming attack on South Korea by North Korea (Kalinovsky & Daigle,

2014). He followed the advice of General MacArthur, demonstrating his ability to declare war

without the approval of Congress and his commitment to observing the doctrine’s provisions in

helping allies against external aggression from the Soviet Union. Similarly, Truman’s support for

the Marshall Plan further aided Truman’s doctrine implementation by eliminating doubts about

the president’s power to pledge the country's resources for international aid without

congressional approval.

The president also began using executive orders to support the doctrine's efforts to fight

Soviet influence. For instance, he issued an order authorizing an investigation of federal

employees to root out communist sympathizers (Nasrkhani, 2022). He also pushed for the
 15

passage of the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, which transferred the control of nuclear bomb

manufacturing from the US Army to the civilian-managed Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)

(Spalding, 2006). This led to intensive secrecy about the country’s nuclear program, an aspect

that strengthened the public’s perception of America's military prowess. This also gave Truman

more power than his predecessors, given that, unlike them, he headed national security and was

privy to information about the nuclear arsenal, further reinforcing his ability to implement

Truman’s doctrine.

Conclusion

Truman’s decision to end American isolationism was welcomed by the American public

as the right way to go in an economy where the world war had caused international politics to

interfere with American affairs. However, embracing international cooperation proved to be an

uphill task, prompting President Truman to employ various strategies to craft the country’s

position in the Cold War era. The threat kept shifting between the aggressive spread of

communism, extremist domestic politics, and the nuclear arms race. Truman framed these threats

as one, as they were basically caused by the Soviet Union, and hence he devoted himself to

ending the union’s global influence. Truman popularized the analogy that communism spread

due to the economic and political weakness of countries on the path of the Soviet Union’s

expansionary path. Therefore, to contain the aggression, Truman devised the Truman Doctrine,

which was crucial in offering military and political support to its allies and countries at risk of

falling prey to Stalin’s ideologies. He also supported the Marshall Plan, which leveraged

monetary aid as a strategy to interconnect economies in Europe to prevent the re-occurrence of

the war and the spread of communism. He also pushed for favorable legislation that helped him

expand the presidential powers to implement the containment policy and anchor America’s
 16

position in the postwar international political arena. Collectively, Truman played a critical role in

the Cold War by containing the spread of communism, weakening the Soviet Union’s allies,

offering economic and military friends to vulnerable countries, and sparking domestic economic,

social, and political development.

 17

Reference

Anistratenko, T. (2021). Truman’s Doctrine of 1947 And Its Impact On International Relations.

European Philosophical and Historical Discourse. https://orcid.org /0000-0003-0930-

8872

Graebner, N. (1958). The Truman Administration and the Cold War. Current History, 35(206),

223–228. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45313611

Kalinovsky, A. M., & Daigle, C. (Eds.). (2014). The Routledge Handbook of the Cold War.

Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315882284

Kennan, George. (1946). “Moscow Embassy Telegram #511, ‘The Long Telegram’ February

22. 1946.” In Containment: Documents on American Policy and Strategy, 1945-1950.

Edited by Thomas H. Etzold and John Lewis Gaddis. New York, NY: Columbia

University Press,

Kirby, Dianne. (2003). Harry Truman’s Religious Legacy: The Holy Alliance, Containment and

the Cold War. 10.1057/9781403919571_6.

Levering, R. B. (2016). The cold war: a post-cold war history. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-

118-84840-1 (paper)

Mueller, L. G. (2015). Defying the United States: General Douglas MacArthur.

https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/history_honproj/52

Nasrkhani, N. (2022). The Atomic Bombing and Soviet Union’s Expansion in the Far East.

Armstrong Undergraduate Journal of History, 12(1), 113-130.

National Security Archive. (2020, May 17). The atomic bomb and the end of World War II.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2020-08-04/atomic-bomb-end-

world-war-ii
 18

Roark, J. L. (1998). The American Promise: A History of the United States from 1865, Vol. II.

https://yale.imodules.com/s/1667/images/gid6/editor_documents/conollysmith/

fifties_readings/1950s_wk._2.pdf?sessionid=9aa4d568-3150-40b0-869b-

9b50f00e6cc2&cc=1

Ryan, H. B. (1979). A New Look at Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” Speech. The Historical Journal,

22(4), 895–920. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2638692

Schmidt, R. (2004). Red Scare: FBI and the Origins of Anticommunism in the United States (p.

394). Museum Tusculanum Press.

Spalding, E. E. (2006). The First Cold Warrior: Harry Truman, Containment, and the Remaking

of Liberal Internationalism. University Press of Kentucky.

https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt2jcmrx

trumanlibrary.gov. (n.d.). Ideological foundations of the Cold War. Ideological Foundations of

the Cold War | Harry S. Truman. https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/online-

collections/ideological-foundations-of-cold-war

Webb, W. J. (1950). The Korean War: The outbreak.

https://history.army.mil/html/books/019/19-6/CMH_Pub_19-6.pdf

Weissman, A. D. (2013). Pivotal Politics—The Marshall Plan: A Turning Point in Foreign Aid

and the Struggle for Democracy. The History Teacher, 47(1), 111–129.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/43264189

Yates v. United States. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved May 1, 2024, from

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1956/6