Evening star., 1942-06-16
Discusses IsOlationists
And Terms Of Desirable Peace.

TAAAu Il CA AAAS Va OCoh 0UlC CdCC.
To the Editor OF The Star
1solationists may be defined as those
who believe that their country should
remain detached, self-contained, its
government conducted for its sole in
terest. Some are enlightened men Of
good will; many are uncultivated harsh,
rude; all are dangerous because they are
highly individualistic pacinsts, congenital
appeasers. Their characters are def
nitely formed
Nevertheless, many of our isolationists
are highly patriotic. When war en-
cages us they become ardently wishful
that we and our Allies shall be victorious.
They fear the consequences of defeat.
But none Of them can be depended
upon for the team work indispensable
for permanent world peace. They were
the backbone of the class that sabotaged
the constructive policies of President
Wilson after the First World War. This
they accomplished through political &C
ton, although the party had pledged
itself, as 1t now again after a quarter
century has been committed, to support
of an international attitude.
Individually, the isolationist must be
granted the right to his opinion.
Whether or not he should be permitted
to enter or to continue In public service
should depend upon an estimate of all
his qualities. If the balance favors his
usefulness, he should be employed. But
great risk will be taken If his service
is legislative
The Congress is the main field of high
partisan struggle and the urge is very
great toward coalescence of politicians
OF similar thought on controversial SUBJ
jects with little regard for small differ
ences. Besides. many who have no rea-
soned opinions will join them for fancied
advantage or the development of pres
tige
A principal argument Of isolationists
is against alliances because that has
been a traditional policy since the days
of Washington and Jefferson" That is
partly so. But what has a mere hoary
tradition to do with a modern United
States or with world so changed since
then? We were an agricultural country;
we are industrialized to the extreme.
The world has largely changed likewise.
Our localities and the worlds then and
much later were separated by days and
weeks. and months. Now communica-
ton is practically instantaneous and
routes of travel are almost negligible in
time. Populations were small and scat
tered; they are large and congested.
Another well-worn argument is that
the League of Nations failed through its
selfish dominance by Britain and France.
That, too, is partly true. But 1t might
not have failed had we not refused ad-
herence or had it been provided with an
instrument to enforce its decisions.
A second animation is that Britain
has dominated markets to our cost. But
how about our own tariffs on imports as
late as the Hoover administration at
the cost Of other nations?
Another allegation is that opponents
of the Axis have habitually done too
little and too late" True; but when
have we, equally threatened, done much
and early?
If our present Allies have been "ket-
tles," we have certainly been "pots."
Still, all are for victory. But that
cannot be the sole object Of the war.
There must be a continuing peace after
victory. 1t must be an imposed peace
impossible to be broken by the il-dis-
posed. These have always appeared-in
later centuries they have been nation
aliSt6