Most influential year or 12-month period in US history?

[SingingAnalyst]

Not worst. Not best. Just most influential.

In the spirit of David Frum's book, "How We Got Here: The 70's: The Decade that Brought You Modern Life (For Better or Worse)" which I have not read, I vote for the 1973-74 school year.

Early in 1973 most white Americans saw little reason for anything but optimism. America had just landed 12 men on the moon, had just re-elected a President in a landslide, and in retrospect we were living in the time of the least income/wealth inequality of any time in American history--before or since. The percentage of Americans who favored converting to the metric system was probably as high as it would ever be.

Beginning in September, a number of things happened that shook America to the core: Billie Jean King won the "Battle of the Sexes" tennis match, overturning men's confidence in their physical superiority (Riggs was depressed for days following the match); the Yom Kippur War exposed some American anti-Semitic opposition to the Nixon Administration's support for Israel; the murder of Dr. Marcus Foster and the kidnapping of Patty Hearst shook Americans' sense of security to the core; the oil embargo had far-reaching effects, including more fuel-efficient vehicles and a sharp drop in auto fatalities after the speed limit was lowered to 55; and, of course, Nixon's resignation and the economic collapse ('stagflation") that followed.

The effects of this era were felt in social and demographic trends and popular culture: in the early 1970s most male major-sport athletes were white; by the end of the decade, most were Black. In 1972 the Black homicide and suicide rates reached an all-time high, especially for younger Black males; by 1977 both statistics had significantly improved for Blacks and gotten significantly worse for Whites. From 1970 to 1977, the number of Black man-White woman marriages rose from 41,000 to 95,000, while the number of White man-Black woman marriages barely budged.

Am I missing anything? Was there another year that has had such a far-reaching effect on American life today? (In case you're interested, I thought the 1980s were rather boring).

[GeorgiaModerate]

Surely 1776, 1789, or 1861?

[Skill and Chance]

Not counting the decision to revolt against the British or establish the Constitution itself:

1. May 1860- April 1861 (Lincoln elected, South secedes, Civil War begins)
2. July 1932-June 1933 (FDR's New Deal probably averted a 2nd Civil War)
3. Oct 1876-Sept 1877 (disputed 1876 election, end of Reconstruction, beginning of long period of unrestrained racist violence and suppression of black votes in the South)
4. Nov 1796-Oct 1797 (Washington leaves office voluntarily, peaceful transition of power to Adams)
5. July 1936-June 1937 (FDR landslide, Supreme Court begins to consistently uphold New Deal reforms, court-packing plan defeated, but norms around economic regulation permanently changed)

Would include 1865 as well, but I think a Union victory and eventual abolition of slavery became inevitable when the Civil War first broke out.  The only question was how long it would take.  Also wanted to include the 14th and 15th Amendments, but they were not ratified within a year of each other.

[progressive85]

It's got to be one of the years in World War II.  America beating the Nazis and saving the world has got to be one of the finest moments for any nation in history.

[Don Vito Corleone]

1968.

[Sumner 1868]

Surely 1776, 1789, or 1861?

This. 1929 and 1945 are also very important.

[America Needs R'hllor]

It's got to be one of the years in World War II.  America beating the Nazis and saving the world has got to be one of the finest moments for any nation in history.

LOL. American exceptionalism at its best.

[dead0man]

1778,1861,1942....probably the first was the most important, but if you don't want to count it because we were not a country yet, then 1942.

[Angel of Death]

It's got to be one of the years in World War II.  America beating the Nazis and saving the world has got to be one of the finest moments for any nation in history.

[dead0man]

this just in, dying isn't how you win


Without material support from the West the Soviets would have collapsed.  Clearly we didn't do it alone, many nations sacrificed greatly, the Russian people the most.  But they would have sacrificed a lot more if they didn't have $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386 of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans); 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras) and 1.75 million tons of food from the US and 4 million tonnes of war material including food and medical supplies from the UK. The UK munitions totaled £308m (not including naval munitions supplied), the food and raw materials totaled £120m in 1946 index. In accordance with the Anglo-Soviet Military Supplies Agreement of 27 June 1942, military aid sent from Britain to the Soviet Union during the war was entirely free of charge.

[America Needs R'hllor]

this just in, dying isn't how you win


Without material support from the West the Soviets would have collapsed.  Clearly we didn't do it alone, many nations sacrificed greatly, the Russian people the most.  But they would have sacrificed a lot more if they didn't have $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386 of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans); 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras) and 1.75 million tons of food from the US and 4 million tonnes of war material including food and medical supplies from the UK. The UK munitions totaled £308m (not including naval munitions supplied), the food and raw materials totaled £120m in 1946 index. In accordance with the Anglo-Soviet Military Supplies Agreement of 27 June 1942, military aid sent from Britain to the Soviet Union during the war was entirely free of charge.

That's all true, but saying that Americans "beat the Nazis and saved the world" is extremely arrogant and disrespectful of all the other nations that sacrificed so much, including Britain and the Soviet Union.

[Strudelcutie4427]

this just in, dying isn't how you win


Without material support from the West the Soviets would have collapsed.  Clearly we didn't do it alone, many nations sacrificed greatly, the Russian people the most.  But they would have sacrificed a lot more if they didn't have $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386 of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans); 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras) and 1.75 million tons of food from the US and 4 million tonnes of war material including food and medical supplies from the UK. The UK munitions totaled £308m (not including naval munitions supplied), the food and raw materials totaled £120m in 1946 index. In accordance with the Anglo-Soviet Military Supplies Agreement of 27 June 1942, military aid sent from Britain to the Soviet Union during the war was entirely free of charge.

That's all true, but saying that Americans "beat the Nazis and saved the world" is extremely arrogant and disrespectful of all the other nations that sacrificed so much, including Britain and the Soviet Union.

Idk I think if America didn't get involved the Germans would've steamrolled Russia and Britain would've tried negotiating a cession of hostilities and independence for France, Netherlands, Belgium etc. America invaded North Africa around the time of Stalingrad so if the Germans weren't distracted there and on the Atlantic coast they could've turned all the guns on Russia. I mean they blitzed through Ukraine and Belarus when they were focused only on the ussr. Mussolini also screwed the Germans when he couldn't beat Yugoslavia and Greece

[America Needs R'hllor]

this just in, dying isn't how you win


Without material support from the West the Soviets would have collapsed.  Clearly we didn't do it alone, many nations sacrificed greatly, the Russian people the most.  But they would have sacrificed a lot more if they didn't have $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386 of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans); 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras) and 1.75 million tons of food from the US and 4 million tonnes of war material including food and medical supplies from the UK. The UK munitions totaled £308m (not including naval munitions supplied), the food and raw materials totaled £120m in 1946 index. In accordance with the Anglo-Soviet Military Supplies Agreement of 27 June 1942, military aid sent from Britain to the Soviet Union during the war was entirely free of charge.

That's all true, but saying that Americans "beat the Nazis and saved the world" is extremely arrogant and disrespectful of all the other nations that sacrificed so much, including Britain and the Soviet Union.

Idk I think if America didn't get involved the Germans would've steamrolled Russia and Britain would've tried negotiating a cession of hostilities and independence for France, Netherlands, Belgium etc. America invaded North Africa around the time of Stalingrad so if the Germans weren't distracted there and on the Atlantic coast they could've turned all the guns on Russia. I mean they blitzed through Ukraine and Belarus when they were focused only on the ussr. Mussolini also screwed the Germans when he couldn't beat Yugoslavia and Greece

Perhaps, perhaps not. And without the Red Army in the war, or without Britain holding on so admirably, the allies would've lost too. The language of Great Society's post- "America beating the Nazis and saving the world has got to be one of the finest moments for any nation in history"- implies that the U.S. is THE nation responsible for the allied victory in WW2.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Surely 1776, 1789, or 1861?

This. 1929 and 1945 are also very important.

All these plus also july 1942 - july 1943. DDay was peak America

[GeorgiaModerate]

Surely 1776, 1789, or 1861?

This. 1929 and 1945 are also very important.

All these plus also july 1942 - july 1943. DDay was peak America

D-Day wasn't in that twelve-month period.  It was June 6, 1944.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Surely 1776, 1789, or 1861?

This. 1929 and 1945 are also very important.

All these plus also july 1942 - july 1943. DDay was peak America

D-Day wasn't in that twelve-month period.  It was June 6, 1944.

Oops.

[Orser67]

Five stand out to me:

1)Pretty much any one-year period between the Battles of Lexington and Concord (April 1775) to the Battle of Saratoga (October 1777). The U.S. could have collapsed during this period. Alternatively, the French not intervening could have led to the U.S. winning less territory in the eventual peace treaty

2)The period between the Constitutional Convention (convened in May 1787, lasted until September 1787) to New York's ratification of the document (July 1788). The U.S. could have failed to implement a much-needed improvement on the Articles of Confederation and could have eventually collapsed.

3)Washington's first full year in office (late April 1789 to April 1790). Establishing the new gov't, including Hamilton's economic policies. We could easily have a more de-centralized gov't if not for the influence of Washington and Hamilton. The actions of this period also led to the creation of the Democratic-Republican Party

4)1864: The Civil War wasn't won until the following year, but it was pretty much decided in 1864. The election was also important; I'm not sure how different President McClellan would have been from President Johnson, but a more Democratic Congress probably wouldn't have ratified the 13th Amendment and certainly would have handled Reconstruction differently.

5)Late 1932-1933: Roosevelt's election (rather than say, Al Smith) and his first few months set us on a new, statist course and possibly averted worse forms of government and/or isolationism

[The Mikado]

1942 is a strong candidate for reasons that have already been mentioned, and it features Americans fully mobilizing in ways that transformed American life forever and showed the power of what had happened to the US economically: the mass production of military hardware alone changed warfare forever. Any Japanese hopes that destroying American naval forces at Pearl Harbor would cripple Americans in any material way were washed away with the mass production of American war machines.

1865 featured the end of the Civil War, the annexation of the CSA, the assassination of Lincoln, the failure of Presidential Reconstruction, and the passage of the XIIIth Amendment. It has to be a major candidate as well.

[pbrower2a]

The 12 months ending in April 1865. That includes most of the Georgia campaign, General Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia getting trapped in Appomattox and surrendering, the assassination of Abraham Lincoln (quite possibly the most critical event in American history), and the cornering and death of John Wilkes Booth.   Just imagine Lincoln as a peacetime President.

[Unapologetic Chinaperson]

this just in, dying isn't how you win


Without material support from the West the Soviets would have collapsed.  Clearly we didn't do it alone, many nations sacrificed greatly, the Russian people the most.  But they would have sacrificed a lot more if they didn't have $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386 of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans); 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras) and 1.75 million tons of food from the US and 4 million tonnes of war material including food and medical supplies from the UK. The UK munitions totaled £308m (not including naval munitions supplied), the food and raw materials totaled £120m in 1946 index. In accordance with the Anglo-Soviet Military Supplies Agreement of 27 June 1942, military aid sent from Britain to the Soviet Union during the war was entirely free of charge.

That's all true, but saying that Americans "beat the Nazis and saved the world" is extremely arrogant and disrespectful of all the other nations that sacrificed so much, including Britain and the Soviet Union.

Don't forget China.

On topic: I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the year starting on 9/11 as a candidate. Not only was there lots of violence on that day and during the subsequent War in Afghanistan, but it fundamentally changed America's relation with the world and how people inside and outside the country perceived it. (Though I guess you can say the same way with Vietnam.)

[Dr. MB]

2001 in the last couple decades.

[swf541]

It's got to be one of the years in World War II.  America beating the Nazis and saving the world has got to be one of the finest moments for any nation in history.

And the soviets were utterly incompetent and not really in the allies.....  plus they would have lost without lend lease

[Brittain33]

4)1864: The Civil War wasn't won until the following year, but it was pretty much decided in 1864. The election was also important; I'm not sure how different President McClellan would have been from President Johnson, but a more Democratic Congress probably wouldn't have ratified the 13th Amendment and certainly would have handled Reconstruction differently.

I was going to nominate this one. 1861 and secession could be said to be driven by long-term events, but 1864 is when history reached a fork and the Union could have given up on the war effort.

[Santander]

1964: The year the racists became Republicans.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

1980  The beginning of the Reagan 80s  (aside from the 12 months after 9/11)