Americans did not cheerfully accept rationing, despite postwar claims they did

Americans were eventually informed of their ancestors' World War II-era enthusiastic acceptance of sacrifice. In reality, many of the sacrifices required of those at home were bitterly opposed and frequently refused. As the war dragged on, discontent grew, especially as systemic violations became more and more obvious. Rationing pains could be avoided, and systemic abuses were frequently overlooked. Many times, Americans ate better than they did in the ten years prior to the war.

Domestically, Americans who had been for a long time unable to buy particular commodities due to the Depression and a lack of money now found themselves employed, with money to spend, but frequently without the goods to do so. The production of farms increased concurrently. Americans questioned the need for rationing after observing the plenty, especially when it came to food and clothing. Since there was little evidence of a fuel shortage, restrictions on travel were an additional annoyance. To travel by bus, ferry, plane, or rail, citizens need government-approved travel priorities. Due to petroleum rationing and a 35 mph nationwide speed limit, driving was restricted.

Ration booklets for food were only meant to be used by the recipients and their close families. Within a few weeks of the system's deployment, Americans started exchanging one kind of ration stamp for another, defeating the purpose of the system. The idea that Americans gladly and freely accepted rationing throughout the post-war era is a fallacy. The efforts made by the federal government and law enforcement organizations to stop abuses of the rationing system are proof that the Americans at home during the war despised and opposed it.