Was the anti-soviet Truman Doctrine considered liberal?
It was the liberal response to communism. There were those to Truman’s left, such as Wallace, that would have preferred friendship with the Soviet Union, of course. Nevertheless, if you were to break up Truman’s presidency into a dichotomy, of sorts, Republicans and conservatives would still have been more anti-intervention than Truman. Hoover’s stance on the Marshall Plan and the Cold War is a good example of what a post-1945 conservative foreign policy might have looked like, perhaps pioneered by Bricker or Taft. Dewey, Eisenhower, and Lodhe were all in 1952 considered as relatively Liberal internationalists among Republicans. By the sixties, this was hanging; Kennedy and Johnson both felt pressure from the right to fight communism across the globe, and it helps to communicate the extent to which conservative isolationism was no longer tenable.
In contrast with Truman, Republican anti-communism in the years 1945-1952 would have looked more like the McCarthy hearings (though hopefully less embarrassing) combined with the idea of building our strength at home. They likely would have still signed onto the covert actions pioneered by Dulles, et al. I assume they would likewise have invested in nuclear technology. The likelihood of a Marshall Plan and associated giveaways to countries such as Greece and Turkey is reduced. The exception to all this is perhaps MacArthur, who received the votes of isolationist Mid-Westerners in Republican primary contests, but whose own opinions I know very little about, and who oversaw the rather liberal postwar reconstruction of Japan.
I’m at work, so I’m not at liberty to go further in-depth.
