In the 1906 Bud Dajo and 1913 Bud Bagsak massacres, hundreds of Muslim minority Moros (men, women, and children) were killed by Philippine Scouts (some of them Moros too) because the US military feared they were “plotting the slaughter of Americans.” Army officials decried the Scouts’ excesses at Bud Bagsak, while patronizingly upholding Filipinos’ qualifications for military service — Filipinos had to run their own nation, they self-servingly claimed. The Naturalization Act of 1918 allowed “Filipino veterans with three years of service” to become US citizens, and the Immigration Acts of 1917 and 1924 exempted Filipinos from bans on Asian immigration. These new laws, and the demand for cheaper labor in the United States, placed Filipinos in a purgatory between citizen and alien. Occupying this middle ground allowed them to labor in Alaska fisheries, California farm fields and restaurants, and Washington State restaurants for “as long as you like,” recalled one migrant. “A Virtual Nullification of Philippine Independence”

For the task of molding public opinion, Wilson turned to an investigative journalist, George Creel, who staffed the Committee on Public Information with psychologists, fellow journalists, artists, and advertising designers. The committee developed many of the techniques now associated with modern advertising. The magazine illustrator Howard Chandler Christy drew Liberty as an attractive young woman dressed in a see-through gown cheering on the troops. The man now regarded as the “father of public relations,” Edward Bernays, also worked for Creel, pioneering the techniques of manipulating and managing public opinion based on the theories of mass psychology. The committee appealed to innate motives: the competitive (which city would buy the most bonds), the familial (“My daddy bought a bond. Did yours?”), guilt (“If you can’t enlist, invest”), fear (“Keep German bombs out of your home”), revenge (“Swat the Brutes with Liberty Bonds”), social image (“Where is your Liberty Bond button?”), gregariousness (“Now! All together”), the impulse to follow the leader (President Wilson and Secretary McAdoo), herd instincts, maternal instincts, and – yes – sex. Bernays’s uncle was Sigmund Freud. The Spectator wrote at the time: “It is the people of Great Britain who must provide the cash with which to finance the war, and there is little reason to doubt that they can do it if only they will. A large part of the nation, instead of being impoverished by the war, has been enriched.”Funding a war is no easy feat and often requires tons of money. Oftentimes, governments may call on investors in a bid to secure money for war efforts by issuing war bonds. This article seeks to examine what war bonds are, how they came about, and the advantages and disadvantages associated with them. War Bonds: Meaning But the question remained: how would the shift in output be arranged? How should the war be paid for? There were three possibilities: taxation, borrowing, and printing money. The Nazi regime never attempted to convince the general populace to buy long-term war bonds as had been done during the First World War. [35] The Reich government did not want to present any perceived form of public referendum on the war, which would be the indirect result if a bond drive did poorly. [36] Rather, the regime financed its war efforts by borrowing directly from financial institutions, using short-term war bonds as collateral. [35] German bankers, with no demonstration of resistance, agreed to taking state bonds into their portfolios. [35] Financial institutions transferred their money to the Finance Department in exchange for promissory notes. Through this strategy, 40 million bank and investment accounts were quietly converted into war bonds, providing the Reich government with a continuous supply of money. [37] Likewise, German bank commissioners compelled occupied Czechoslovakia to buy up German war bonds. By the end of the war, German war bonds accounted for 70% of investments held by Czechoslovakian banks. [37] United Kingdom [ edit ] As debates raged in the United States between anti-imperialists and war hawks over the necessity of empire, the war carried on until 1913. Over seventy thousand army troops were deployed to the Philippines by November 1899 with instructions to use “overwhelming force.” US officials, new to overseas conquest but very familiar with suppressing domestic insurgencies, analogized the conflict to the Native wars in the American West.

Ahead of the election, one challenge is political as there is a long tail of individual holders of the War Loan that would be affected by any decision to redeem it. It may also be administratively complex and expensive,” he said.In 1917 and 1918, the United States government issued Liberty Bonds to raise money for its involvement in World War 1. An aggressive campaign was created by Secretary of the Treasury William Gibbs McAdoo to popularize the bonds, grounded largely as patriotic appeals. [24] The Treasury Department worked closely with the Committee on Public Information in developing Liberty Bond campaigns. [25] The resulting propaganda messages often borrowed heavily from military colloquial speech. [25] Thomson weaves a compelling thread of the bonds representing a democratization of a war effort, in contrast to past wars being funded by financial elites."— Emerging Civil War For Filipinos in the United States, the war on terror solidified longstanding connections between “American patriotism and military service” that made them “evocative symbols both of Filipino Americans’ loyalties and the American government’s broken promises.” In the Philippines, however, those symbols currently echo in the dictatorship of Rodrigo Duterte, a former member of the People Power revolution whose anti-American statements resonate with Filipinos, but who refuses to cancel military agreements that keep US troops in his country.