The domestic propaganda efforts of the American government were highly effective, even if they did not exactly meet expectations. By neatly packaging the specific reasons why the country should go to war while providing clear, actionable solutions, the government successfully overcame the majority of the public's isolationist stance. At the same time, due to this success, there were fears regarding propaganda, similar to those after World War 1; critics were afraid that the American public would be "hoodwinked" into a futile conflict and that it would be the misuse of propaganda that would ultimately threaten the "democratic way of life."29
At the core of these anxieties was the fear that Americans were losing their ability to think critically for themselves. This concern was echoed by people such as Clyde R. Miller, who started the Institute for Propaganda Analysis (IPA) and started a monthly bulletin that issued articles such as "How to Detect Propaganda" and analyses of "German Fascism" propaganda techniques.30 Interestingly enough, researchers started referring to their area of study as "persuasion" rather than "propaganda," which has become a highly developed subject of communication and social psychology today.31
In terms of social effects, the full extent of the Nais’ systemic anti-Semitism and the truth of the Holocaust was revealed at the end of World War 2, hurting the far-right movement in America. Although some extremists like Dilling became even more anti-Semitic and ended up charging desegregation as a "Jewish plot," many moved back towards the center-right of the political spectrum.32 Meanwhile, the increasing number of women and Blacks in the workforce and military gave credence to the idea that qualities such as strength and courage were no longer exclusively white male traits, helping set the stage for future civil rights movements.