logo
When sedition came to Montana …

When sedition came to Montana …

Yahoo01-04-2025

A montage created by the Montana Historical Society of people arrested and convicted of seditious speech during the World War I era. This photo is by no means exhaustive. Seventy-two Montanans were charged, tried and convicted for running afoul of the Montana Sedition Act.
Early on the morning of April 13, 1918, a group of Billings residents surrounded the house of Herman Bausch, which happens to be right across the street from where I live now. Bausch was a German immigrant who had moved to Billings a few years earlier and started farming just outside of town. He was highly respected in Billings for being a bit of an innovator, one of the first locals to plant an orchard.
But that morning, he was confronted by a mob because he had been included on a list of Billings residents that had not purchased Liberty bonds to help support America's entry into World War I. Bausch had stated: 'I am opposed to war…all war that is aggressive and oppressive. But if Wall Street plutocrats insist on further bloodshed, let them finance it. Voluntarily, I will not contribute financially to this world calamity.'
The mob pressed Bausch to change his mind and buy some Liberty bonds, and when he refused, they threatened to string him up in one of the apple trees in his yard. But instead they dragged him off to the local Elks Club, where a group of more than 50 people had gathered. This crowd spent several hours grilling Bausch, trying again to convince him to buy bonds, but he would not budge. So he was charged under the Montana Sedition Act, and sentenced to four years in prison.
Teddy Roosevelt once said that patriotism means standing with one's country, not standing with the president. But America has a checkered past when it comes to using patriotism as a cudgel to keep people from expressing themselves, and one of the most egregious examples of that started right here in Montana.
When war broke out in Europe in 1914, Americans were almost universally opposed to becoming involved in the conflict. The overall sentiment was that the conflict was none of our business, but there was also a general feeling that it wouldn't last long. But as the war dragged on, the allies—which included Great Britain, France, Russia, and China—pressed President Woodrow Wilson to change his mind. The longer it lasted, the more concerned they were about having the resources necessary to fight off the Axis, which consisted of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy.
Two major events played a huge role in swaying public sentiment. First, German U-boats sank the Lusitania, a British ocean liner, in 1915. The incident killed 1198 people, and 128 of them were American.
The second event was the revelation in January 1917 that German Foreign Minister Arthur Zimmerman had carried out a secret diplomatic correspondence with the German Ambassador to Mexico, proposing that if Mexico joined forces with the Germans, Germany would help them regain control of Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.
Although Wilson won reelection in 1916 on a platform of keeping Americans out of the war, it was just a few months after his inauguration that he declared war on Germany, and it was as if a switch had been flipped. A country that had been so firmly neutral suddenly developed a rabid form of nationalism.
Wilson established the Committee on Public Information, which distributed books and pamphlets, sent out speakers, and even made films, spreading strong opinions about German immigrants, and calling on everyone to buy Liberty bonds to support the war effort. In Montana, Gov. Sam Stewart got so caught up in this nationalist fervor that he called a special session of the Legislature just a few weeks after Wilson declared war, and convinced them to pass The Montana Sedition Act, which was an expansion of a previous bill called the Espionage Act. The Espionage Act was designed to pressure anyone who published works that undermined the war effort, but the Sedition Act took that sentiment one step further, encouraging local law enforcement to seek out people who simply spoke out against the war, or failed to show their support. During the next two years, 78 Montanans were convicted under the Sedition Act, most of whom were sentenced to 20 years. These people were not activists or troublemakers. They were farmers and salesman, and even housewives.
One man, rancher Faye Rumsey, was sentenced to 20 years after a mob confronted him for not buying Liberty bonds, insisting that he kiss the American flag to show his loyalty. Another was convicted after saying that he wished the Kaiser would come over and straighten things out in his own county.
Once the war ended, people came to their senses, and the Montana Sedition Act was repealed in 1921. The people serving sentences were released. But not before Herman Bausch lost his 2-year-old son and wasn't allowed to travel from Deer Lodge to Billings for the funeral. And not before Faye Rumsey's wife lost their ranch and had to give up all 12 of their children to the state. Many of these siblings never saw each other again.
In 2006, Gov. Brian Schweitzer issued a pardon to everyone who had been convicted under the Sedition Act, and it was at that ceremony that several of Faye Rumsey's grandchildren met for the first time.
Herman Bausch was able to return to the house across the street from where I live and continue to farm, having more children. But extreme nationalism left its mark on his life, as it did on many innocent Montanans. As Bausch said when he was arrested, 'If what I did was a crime, then there are thousands of other people in this country who are just as guilty as I am.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Apollo eyes $100 billion Germany investment as private capital swerves U.S. turmoil for Europe
Apollo eyes $100 billion Germany investment as private capital swerves U.S. turmoil for Europe

CNBC

time8 hours ago

  • CNBC

Apollo eyes $100 billion Germany investment as private capital swerves U.S. turmoil for Europe

MEGA, or "Make Europe Great Again," was a hot topic at this year's biggest private markets event last week. The about-turn in sentiment toward the continent was illustrated no better than when the boss of industry juggernaut Apollo said he saw the opportunity to put $100 billion "in the ground" in Germany over the next decade. "I think many investors in Europe see the opportunity, and many investors in U.S. see the opportunity right now in Europe. They see it across the private equity ecosystem. They also see it across the credit ecosystem," Apollo Global Management President Jim Zelter said during a keynote interview. As well as direct lending, Zelter said he saw big opportunity in investment-grade commercial and residential real estate, highlighting domestic housing shortages in Spain and the U.K. On Germany, Zelter said the $100 billion investment figure would be hard to match anywhere in the world outside of the U.S., and that the country had "woken up Europe to focus on financing industry, military and a variety of other critical industries." His comments will be welcomed by Germany's new government, which has called for private capital to help meet its infrastructure needs alongside public funding. Sentiment began to significantly shift around the sluggish German economy in March, when lawmakers approved alterations to longstanding debt restrictions to allow the establishment of a $500 billion fund for defense, infrastructure and climate-related projects. At the start of May, center-right, pro-business politician Friedrich Merz — who has served on the boards of BlackRock Germany, EY Germany and the Deutsche Börse — was confirmed as Germany's new chancellor, ending months of political uncertainty. Merz met with U.S. President Donald Trump last week , achieving some diplomatic wins in his attempt to strengthen ties between the countries and urge further support for Ukraine. Europe bulls, U.S. nerves Joana Rocha Scaff, head of European private equity at Neuberger Berman, told CNBC that many investors had started the year overweight the U.S. and intending to extend their allocations, expecting deregulation and a boost to economic growth, only to be abruptly stymied by Trump's tariff policies. "In the midst of this turbulence and noise in the U.S., we have seen capital be redirected towards Europe," she said, with her own investment firm "actively investing in the market" alongside its core general partners, or GPs. Neuberger Berman's active market investments deploy around $4 billion of capital on a direct basis a year, she said. So far this year, Europe has accounted for around 65% of direct investment activity, up from around 20-30% of global market activity on a typical year, she noted. Those investments have been broad, she continued but generally oriented around developed parts of Europe, energy security and transition, defense, digitalization and industrial assets. Private equity's enthusiasm toward Europe has also been reflected in public markets. Germany's blue chip DAX index is up around 22% this year, versus around 1% for the Dow Jones Industrial Average . Europe's Aerospace and Defense Index is up nearly 50%, while a tracker index of the long-buzzy Magnificent 7 U.S. tech giants is down 2%. For retail investors seeking opportunities in the space, JPMorgan recently named its top European stock picks for the next year — and they include defense names Rheinmetall and Babcock International , IT firms SAP and Dassault Systems , and infrastructure picks Alstom , Heidelberg Materials and Saint-Gobain . There are also new ways for retail investors to track private credit returns through exchange-traded funds — though experts warn private markets are complex and come with significant risks . Earlier this year, State Street and Apollo Global Management launched the SPDR SSGA Apollo IG Public & Private Credit ETF (PRIV) exchange-traded fund (ETF), which aims to have at least 80% of its assets in investment-grade private and public debt securities.

Why the damage Elon Musk faces from his Trump feud is just getting started
Why the damage Elon Musk faces from his Trump feud is just getting started

Yahoo

time9 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Why the damage Elon Musk faces from his Trump feud is just getting started

The spectacular breakup of Donald Trump and Elon Musk could soon get far worse for the Tesla CEO—while doing little good for the U.S. president. Some political pundits have portrayed last week's blowup as merely yet another exit by a disgruntled Trump ally. But the president's anger toward Musk seems worse than his temper tantrums following the departures of other hand-picked loyalists, such as Vice President Mike Pence, Attorneys General Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr, Secretaries of State Rex Tillerson and Mike Pompeo, or Secretaries of Defense James Mattis and Mark Esper. And it's not a faux morality play about business leaders facing punishment for straying outside their lane. Musk, given his stature, is different than other CEOs who have taken pro-Trump or anti-Trump stances, whether from Papa John's, Goya Foods, MyPillow, Coca-Cola, Delta, or Amazon. And this is not about Musk taking a principled stand on the soaring national debt or any other political issue. Instead, the blowup reflects two unrestrained top-down leaders fighting it out in a struggle for supremacy. Musk's biggest mistake was about the nature of his role—as an advisor to Trump, not the primary character he believed himself to be. Even now, he continues to overestimate his own importance and indispensability. Trump, who relies on a hub-and-spokes model of leadership—where all power is centralized in himself while he divides and conquers his warring subordinates—has always been deeply resentful of consiglieres who try to outmaneuver or constrain him. Trump will never tolerate business leaders who believe they are bigger than the big boss. Musk apparently believed that his money and largesse insulated him and entitled him to a greater role as 'first buddy.' But that was misguided if not delusional. Consider advisors with grandiosity who threatened to undermine sovereign bosses, including the Russian mystic Grigori Rasputin, who engineered creeping control over Czar Nicholas II; Mark Hanna, portrayed in his time as the grand puppeteer controlling President William McKinley; and President Woodrow Wilson's close advisor Colonel Edward House, who undermined Wilson's Versailles negotiations after World War I. All these audacious advisors found their presumption punctured by icing out or even execution. A look at recent Russian history is illustrative here. Consider Yukos boss Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin after they dared challenge the power of Vladimir Putin, a strongman Trump has expressed admiration for. We hosted Mikhail Khodorkovsky at our Yale CEO summits during the height of his power at Yukos in the early 2000s, when he controlled virtually all of Russia's oil and gas reserves. He didn't hesitate to criticize Putin at our events, openly presenting a different path for Russia's future. When he started bringing his show on the road within Russia—thinking that Putin needed his money and support too much to whack him—he learned his money didn't buy him the protection he thought it did. Putin quickly moved to nationalize Khodorkovsky's assets, forming an alliance with his business rivals to divvy up his once-great wealth. More recently, Wagner boss Prigozhin believed his mercenary group had become so indispensable—thanks to its battlefield triumphs, raw military might, and global wealth—that he could challenge the authority of Putin's top lieutenants, blasting them in videos posted on Telegram for mishandling the Urkaine invasion. When Prigozhin failed to sway them with this bullying, he thought he could get away with marching on Moscow with his forces and starting an insurrection within Russia against Putin's rule. The full delusion of this folly was revealed when little of the domestic support Prigozhin expected materialized. Not long after he died when his plane plunged out of the skies, the victim of sabotage—one wonders by who. Prigozhin was among at least 60 prominent Russians who have met suspicious deaths since the start of Putin's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. USA Today documented around 40 such cases prior to then as well, and the actual number is likely to be even higher. Musk and his defenders, emboldened by his status as the world's wealthiest person, apparently have either forgotten such lessons or don't think they apply to Musk. Last week, Musk taunted on X, 'Trump has 3.5 years left as president, but I will be around for 40+ years.' He also called for Trump's impeachment and accused him of being illicitly connected to the late pedophile and accused rapist Jeffrey Epstein. Musk did all this despite his companies depending on government support in one way or another. That includes Tesla via EV tax credits, SpaceX via contracts, and Neuralink and the Boring Company via regulatory clearances. Given that Trump held up regulatory clearances of the AT&T-TimeWarner deal—which involved less personal animus than his feud with Musk—one wonders how long he could gum up the works for Musk now. Musk might be well served to remember the lessons embodied by Khodorkovsky and Prigozhin, however different the contexts. Meanwhile, with Trump insinuating Musk's government interest is motivated by commercial self-gain and Musk accusing Trump of entanglement with Epstein—and having the resources to fund an anti-Trump counterrevolution—the news media might be a better investment than AI or cryptocurrency. Jeffrey Sonnenfeld is the Lester Crown Professor in Management Practice and president and founder of the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute. Steven Tian is the director of research at the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute. The opinions expressed in commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune. This story was originally featured on Sign in to access your portfolio

German minister visits Poland to smooth out differences on migration
German minister visits Poland to smooth out differences on migration

Yahoo

time9 hours ago

  • Yahoo

German minister visits Poland to smooth out differences on migration

German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt attempted to smooth out differences with Poland over migration policy on Monday as he visited Warsaw. Germany's new government has signalled its intention to crack down on irregular migration since taking office last month, reinforcing border checks and denying migrants entry even if they apply for asylum. The move has led to criticism from the country's neighbours, including Poland, with Prime Minister Donald Tusk notably displeased with the policy during German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's visit to Warsaw in May. After meeting with Dobrindt on Monday, Polish Interior Minister Tomasz Siemoniak said protecting the European Union's external borders and the fight against illegal migration are "common priorities" for Germany and Poland. "Only together can we defy the challenges of the modern world," he added. The two ministers discussed how to minimize the effects of the checks for travellers on the border. "We have discussed how we can make the situation as harmonious as possible for all road users at the borders," said Siemoniak. Dobrindt meanwhile praised Poland's efforts to limit migration from Belarus. "Poland is doing an extraordinary amount at its external border in the fight against irregular migration and for the security of Europe," said the German minister. "I am very grateful for this commitment." The two sides agreed that "migrants are currently being used in a hybrid war triggered by Russia and Belarus," according to the ministry's statement.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store