Browning chief. [volume] (Browning, Mont.) 1941-1953, 1943-08-27

presented themselves to Chairman
Spangler of the Republican national
committee.
Results of Session
1t was some time before the re-
suits of this meeting between Wat
son and his colleagues and Chair
man Spangler of the Republican ma
tlonal committee leaked out. Those
with an anti-Republican slant, wove
the words dropped into a threat
ened split in the Republican party, a
drive to nominate Wendell Willkie
for president.
To the person who tried to be OBJ
| jective, it was neither.
MIR. Spangler has one job-to keep
the party together, to eschew any
favoritism for any policy or any per-
son. Naturally, these persistent per-
sons who called upon him were pre-
senting problem. believe it was
that fact rather than what his critics
said that indicated there was a lean
ing toward the "status quo" atti-
tude, the desire to remain a pur-
veyor of platitudes and follow the
tide rather than to face it.
This issue-full participation in
world affairs versus a return to ma
tionalism or isolationism, if you will
is, according to our most earnest
non-partisans, the most important
issue which has faced the public and
should not be political football.
Briefly, what the men with their
sleeves rolled up at Mackinac in
September have to face is this:
shall we, good Republicans, come
out frankly for world-co-operation or
dodge the issue?
! What the Watson association de-
! mands is more than that and some
thing the Republican national COM
mittee must face: will the party Off
cially get behind a nationwide cam
paign to educate" the people on
the international issue?
Unfortunately, personalities do get
mixed up in these things and Wen
dell Willkie has become the symbol
OF the international view.
That is why it is essential, if the
party is to take the issue out of
partisan politics and disassociate it
from any of the individuals aspiring
for the Republican candidacy, that
; they must go on record.
The Monroe Doctrine
Walter Lippmann has written a
book called American Foreign Pol
| ICY and the point he makes is this:
until 1900, politics did stop at the
waters edge. We had a foreign
policy Cor thought we did) which
was the Monroe Doctrine. Accord
ing to Lippmann, we were living
under delusion. Namely, that we
had under the Monroe Doctrine de-
clared our whole policy-America
for Americans (period) which inn
piled, of course, that the rest of the
world could do what it pleased so
long as it kept off our grass.
We believed that we could enforce
that policy ourselves. That was not
| correct. We were really depending
on the British fleet to enforce it. It
happened to be to British advantage
to agree, SO there was no trouble.
Then we mixed in world affairs,
found we had to fight our own bat
ties, and did it-took over Hawaii,
the Philippines. But we didn't pro-
vide the means to hold them. And
SO, disagreeing on the various steps
| necessary to carry out our foreign
| policy, we failed to provide the
means to do so-Britain was busy
elsewhere, and one morning we lost
the Philippines and came within an
eyelash of losing Hawaii.
And so we now face the necessity
of framing new foreign policy
which must include the willingness
to provide security for our own
shores and those other contiguous
shores ,(South America and Canada)
which might be used by an enemy
against US. Or we have to take
part in prophylactic measures-to
stop the danger to our security in
advance.
That issue once clarified by the
two political parties will leave us
free for a good, old-fashioned free
for-all political campaign, and if the
best man wins, or the worst man
wins, his policies can't affect the
international welfare of the nation.
Failure of both parties to clearly
set forth their views on foreign poll
cy may well create a third party
movement which could wreck the
two-party system, the rock on which