When the peace conference convened in France in 1919, President Woodrow Wilson attended and took an active role in negotiations in the hope of preserving his proposed idealistic blueprint for peacemaking, the Fourteen Points. The resulting Treaty of Versailles contained little of the original Fourteen Points except the League of Nations, which Wilson believed would correct the mistakes of the peace treaty. The heart of the new League of Nations was Article 10, which urged league members “to respect and preserve” the territory of members from external aggression. When Democrat Wilson submitted the treaty to the U.S. Senate for ratification, it came under the close scrutiny of Republican Henry Cabot Lodge, chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. Born in Massachusetts and Harvard educated (the first Ph.D. in political science), Lodge was known for his clear and forceful arguments in the 37 years he served in Congress. In a speech on the Senate floor (which you can read excerpts from by clicking here) Lodge offered his reasons for opposing the Treaty of Versailles (and the League of Nations). The Senate would defeat the treaty ratification in two separate votes, mainly along partisan lines.After reading excerpts from Lodge’s speech, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: For what reasons does Henry Cabot Lodge oppose the treaty? What changes would he make to the treaty? How does he propose to maintain world peace? Is that possible? Is Lodge an isolationist? What is the significance of his opposition to the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles? Your thoughts…
10 comments:
He doesnt want to be drawn into european affairs or be controlled by a committee. He thinks each nation individually should uphold the standards that the league had on anti-agression. He says its just an alliance of nations. He doesnt think the league will help keep the peace. He wants to keep US independent and isolated from other countries. He says he doesnt want US to meddle in other peoples affairs. He brings up that the US already fought in the Great War, which he doesnt think concerned them. Lodge is an isolationist, because he wants the US to stay apart from other countries.
I would have to agree with him, because we really dont need to be drawn into other peoples problems. The funny thing is that we join the later United Nations, and now we're stooping in other peoples problems today.
He is pretty much saying that the President has no authority to try and force this idea on to the country unless the citizens want it. The Congress does not want that, it apparently means that the people do not want the League of Nations. He also states that he does not want the country to get involved with the internal affairs of other nations. He also says that the League of Nations will be corrupt and only promote the interests of their own countries. It definitely appears that Lodge is not necessarily an isolationist, but he does not want the USA to jump into every conflict that its allies get into.
Henry Cabot Lodge opposes the League of Nations because he feels it impedes on the Untied States's sovreignty. He believesthat domestci affairs should be handled first; he believes that the League represents a military alliance in which all the members would have to take action against an invading force of any nation rather than a peace alliance. Lodge states that in order for congress to back the League, it will have to become an alliance of peace, not war: "Those of us, Mr. President, who are either wholly opposed to the league,
or who are trying to preserve the independence and the safety of the United
States by changing the terms of the league, and who are endeavoring to make
the league, if we are to be a member of it, less certain to promote war instead
of peace have been reproached with selfishness in our outlook and with a
desire to keep our country in a state of isolation." Lodge is concerned with the independence of the U.S., as entering the Leauge would mean uncoditional support in protecting member territory. the refusal of congress to ratify the U.S. membership in the League of Nations greatly hampered the orginizations's effectiveness. This is seen in the Japanese invasion of Manchuria; the Japanese left the League. Yet, the League took no action. One could argue that this was because the United States, the major world power, was not part of the League.
Was Jiang Jieshi the warlord who made Puyi leave the Forbidden City?
In the reading it does not address the transition from Juarez to Diaz. Could you make this a little more clear?
as far as i know jiang jieshi (better known as chiang kai-shek was in shanghai during the overthrow, working with the revolution down there...
as far as diaz... umm... not exactly democratically elected... there was one president between him and juarez, lerdo de tejada (juarez's vp that took over when juarez died in office)... diaz led a series of revolts against him, and finally managed to overthrow him in 1876, and he was "elected" president in 1877... hope that clarifies things a bit
More or less, he just wants freedom of Euro events. It also seems as if he wants to be his own government. He wants a very hands off type deal. I understand his ways.
that clears things up.
I found that Feng Yuxiung was the warlord who threw Pu Yi out.
Lodge is not an isolationist:
"So far as the question of
isolation goes, it is impossible to isolate the United States. . . . But there is a
wide difference between taking a suitable part and bearing a due responsibility
in world affairs and plunging the United States into every controversy
and conflict on the face of the globe."
He doesnt want America to get dragged back in to the political affairs of Europe unless its absolutly nessecsary. He also sees the league as a alliance and not a league of peace, and that by joining the league it will create problems for America. He isnt an isolationist really, because he sees a need for U.S involvement when nessecsary, but doesnt want the U.S to get involved in problems that arent theirs.
Lodge doesn't want to isolate the US he just doesn't want the US to be dragged into foriegn conflicts and be sent to foriegn lands by obligations to uphold peace but would rather do so on it's own accord. You definetly tell the animosity felt towards Wilson by the conservative congress.
He does have a point. He doesn't want the US to be forced to intercede in any internal event in Europe or anywhere else in the world. He says that the US congress should be able to make a decision if they want to get involved or not. The only thing is that today the US is drawn into every single conflict that happens anywhere in the world by the choice of our congress. I guess that what happens when you are a superpower and sometimes referred to as the world police.
Post a Comment