Final answer:
As a US citizen in the 1930s, I would be influenced by the dominant isolationist sentiment and the Neutrality Acts that governed US policy, but the aggressive actions of fascist regimes would make maintaining this stance increasingly complex, culminating in the United States joining World War II after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Step-by-step explanation:
If I were a US citizen in the 1930s, my stance on whether to support isolationism or intervention in the face of overseas aggression would be shaped by the prevailing attitudes and recent legislation of the time. The United States, still reeling from the Great Depression and the losses of World War I, largely adopted an isolationist policy characterized by a series of Neutrality Acts. The Neutrality Act of 1935, for instance, banned the sale of weapons to nations at war, a clear effort to maintain US neutrality and avoid the entanglements that led to involvement in the previous war. Furthermore, President Franklin Roosevelt's public stance of strict neutrality despite his private communications reflected the complex dynamics of US politics, balancing a desire to aid allies like Britain and France against the strong isolationist sentiments at home.
However, the unchecked aggression of fascist powers in Europe and the spread of conflict to Africa, with Italy's invasion of Ethiopia, began to test this neutrality. While the US and other Western powers faced internal dilemmas and widespread desire to avoid another war, the rising threat of fascist and totalitarian regimes could not be ignored indefinitely. Ultimately, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 forced America's hand, resulting in its full engagement in World War II.