The 1930s saw an increased amount of political activism across the nation's campuses. The hardship of the depression jolted students out of the apathy typical of the previous decade. The central concern of many of the student activists in the 1930s was war, or rather the maintenance of peace. Within the global economic problems lay the potential for violence. Students realized that if war were to break out then they would be the individuals called upon to fight. Fearful of another global disaster like the First World War, which still permeated students' memories, groups formed to discuss economic problems and methods to curtail warfare.
The University of Virginia student body also took part in the national political awakening of students. Yet University students never had the widespread radical activist bent of their peers at Columbia, for example. The nation's first student movement at U.Va. remained largely intellectual for the predominantly conservative student body. The majority of Virginia men were unwilling to defy the status quo and "stick their neck out"; rather the maintenance of a gentlemanly reserve was stressed. However, the students' minds seemed open to new ideas. A small group of students were able to exploit this opportunity and spoke out against war. Their efforts resulted in a flurry of debate and mild protest, but ultimately only contributed to the growing seriousness of purpose and political consciousness amongst the students .
Because the University actively maintained its ties to a Jeffersonian tradition stressing free speech, the administration permitted greater openness in student speech than other schools. One reason the student movement of the thirties did not take hold at Virginia as elsewhere was that Virginia students already had some of the rights denied other students. The student paper College Topics, financially independent of the University, was the first student political voice on campus in the early 1930s. Its editors chose to speak out against administrative sanctions of student speech at other schools and promoted a more diverse exchange of ideas at the University of Virginia.
In the midst of an international depression in which the Soviet Union appeared to be surviving fairly well student interest in communism peaked. In November of 1932 Palmer Weber formed a student group to discuss this political and social theory. Weber was atypical for a Virginia student. He was poor, political, and willing to "stick his neck out". The group meet weekly in Madison Hall, the facilities for the University Y.M.C.A. which sponsored many student activities. After a small controversy about the affiliation of Madison Hall with a communist group (itself an inaccuracy for the group was about communism not necessarily of communists) and in an effort to broaden the appeal of the group to more students it became the Liberal Discussion Group. College Topics paid great attention to this group's activities despite its small size.
Nationally, students in the National Student League were focusing their energies on the anti-war effort. These efforts were keyed around a strike planned for Armistice Day 1933. The leadership of College Topics was hesitant to publicize the N.S.L. supported strike and none occurred at the University of Virginia. However, as the year progressed the paper began publishing anti-war material received from the N.S.L. Again in April of 1934 the N.S.L. planned an anti-war strike and, despite the Liberal Discussion Group's efforts, U.Va. students could not be mobilized to participate. In a poll of 500 U.Va. students 250 said they would fight if the United States were invaded, 179 would fight any American war, and 73 would not fight under any circumstance. Still most students believed that disarmament was the only way to prevent future wars while many others favored a strong national defense. While the majority of students clearly were not sympathetic to the objectives of the N.S.L. or the Liberal Discussion Group there was a sizable minority with pacifistic leanings. During the 1934-35 school year the Liberal Discussion Group became the U.Va. chapter of the N.S.L.
As part of the National Student League the Liberal Discussion Group ratified the N.S.L.'s six point agenda, only one of which condemned war and military training. However the group's main efforts focused on the upcoming anti-war strike. It created the United Front Groups to be a coalition of student groups mobilized against war. The N.S.L. was attempting to shed its communist image to appeal to a greater number of students. Indeed, the Y.M.C.A at U.Va. supported the strike, but other groups like the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society remained hesitant to support the activities of any communist affiliated group. However, preventing war was on many students minds as evident by the "considerable interest" from the crowds of "well attended" lectures like "Nationalism v. Internationalism" by Stringfellow Barr in Madison Hall in November 1934. Most student opinions on war echoed the comments of Spanish professor Bardin's comment in lecture on war in Madison Hall who said, "I am opposed to war just as I am opposed to cancer." It was this sentiment that the N.S.L. at U.Va. tapped into to find support for the planned anti-war strike. In November 1934 at an N.S.L. anti-war meeting in Madison Hall seventy-five students took the Oxford pledge, an oath of pacifism. However, in the same meeting a resolution in favor of abolishing R.O.T.C. nationwide was defeated.
R.O.T.C. had been disbanded at the University in the early 1920s due to lack of interest from the student body, but in December of 1934 University President Newcomb and Dean Ivey Lewis, interested in reestablishing R.O.T.C., surveyed student opinion on this controversial issue. When 350 of the 2435 enrolled students responded favorably Newcomb and Lewis put the issue of establishing a 100 student program, the minimum allowed, before the Board of Visitors. The response of student activists was heavily steeped in Jeffersonian language. College Topics editor Murat Williams argued that, "military training is out of harmony with the purposes for which Jefferson founded the University". Palmer Weber agreed declaring R.O.T.C., "a force opposed to (the) University's most sacred traditions: namely those of free thought, individual action, and the general liberal outlook". While the appeal to the student's sense of tradition lent weight to their argument, not all students were persuaded. Being against war like cancer and being against a program many viewed as vital to the national defense proved two different subjects.
A strong conservative reaction ensued which also evoked the school's Jeffersonian heritage. Most argued in letters to College Topics that free government requires an ability to defend itself and protecting free government was as Jeffersonian as it gets. One student even claimed to have found a letter from Jefferson to James Monroe in which he supports military training for men in college. However, most who evoked Jefferson did not cite any of his writings but used his memory as a pragmatic tactic to garner the favor of students. The debate was not about establishing an accurate historical record of Jefferson's opinions, but about what was acceptable for his University over a hundred years later. The Board of Visitors (BOV) proved unwilling to "stick its neck out" on such a controversial subject and deferred its decision on the issue claiming its chief concern was "whether or not 100 University of Virginia students would be interested in undertaking the military training".
With the R.O.T.C. debate in check the anti-war rally planning proceeded. After two years of not finding enough interest to hold an anti-war strike at Virginia the N.S.L. leaders predicted 1000 students would attend the demonstration planned for 12 April 1935. Elsewhere in America and Europe students would also be protesting R.O.T.C. and other war-related issues, but at U.Va. warfare was the sole focus which allowed for the mass appeal. President Newcomb, unlike most other University administrators, cooperated fully with the N.S.L. anti-war demonstration. Classes were cancelled and predictions of 1000 demonstrators were met for the rally at which University professors, including Dean Lewis, spoke. It was far from a radical affair. Newcomb sanctioned the event only after demanding that the rally not have a communist agenda. Consequently, the rally had mass appeal, but was not the radical student strike for which some students had hoped. Newcomb felt prohibiting the strike would have been an unjust restriction of the students' freedom of speech, but he had no qualms about curtailing that class of speech labelled communist. The Daily Progress and Richmond-Times Dispatch as well as many alumni and community members applauded the rally.
The N.S.L. at U.Va. faded rather quickly in the aftermath of the anti-war rally while the University got caught up in the controversy ensuing from the application of Alice Jackson, the first African American to apply for admission to the University. No common denominator could be found on this issue as had been found for war. Most every person does not like war, but Jackson's challenge to the University went much deeper. The N.S.L. was unable and unwilling to respond with vigor on this issue. But war would not be absent from students' minds as the growth of fascism abroad made war a growing threat rather than an abstract idea.