Closing Thought–02Jul19

The Quincy Institute

AS an antiwar activists, campaigner, etc I have often said there are not enough think tanks pursuing the peace this world desperately needs.

I am happy to report that there is a new think tank dedicated to the pursuit of peaceful solutions.

Stephen Kinzer comments on the creation of a new think tank, The Quincy Institute, committed to promoting a foreign policy of restraint and non-interventionism:

Since peaceful foreign policy was a founding principle of the United States, it’s appropriate that the name of this think tank harken back to history. It will be called the Quincy Institute, an homage to John Quincy Adams, who in a seminal speech on Independence Day in 1821 declared that the United States “goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.” The Quincy Institute will promote a foreign policy based on that live-and-let-live principle.

The creation of a think tank dedicated to “an approach to the world based on diplomacy and restraint rather than threats, sanctions, and bombing” is very welcome news. Other than the Cato Institute, there has been nothing like this in Washington, and this tank’s focus will be entirely on foreign policy. The lack of institutional support has put advocates of peace and restraint at a disadvantage for a very long time, so it is encouraging to see that there is an effort underway to change that. The Quincy Institute represents another example of how antiwar progressives and conservatives can and should work together to change U.S. foreign policy for the better. The coalition opposed to the war on Yemen showed what Americans opposed to illegal and unnecessary war can do when they work towards a shared goal of peace and non-intervention, and this institute promises to be an important part of such efforts in the future. Considering how long the US has been waging war without end, there couldn’t be a better time for this.

Quincy Institute: A Think Tank Dedicated to Peace and Restraint

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/realism-resurgent-rise-quincy-institute-65116

I am pleased to see someone else joining against the fight for peace……embracing realism for a change.

Advertisements

100 Years Ago

A Hundred years ago the 28 June was the official end of World War One, the Treaty of Versailles 28Jun1919….

World War I officially ended with the signing of the Treaty of Versailles on June 28, 1919. Negotiated among the Allied powers with little participation by Germany, its 15 parts and 440 articles reassigned German boundaries and assigned liability for reparations. After strict enforcement for five years, the French assented to the modification of important provisions. Germany agreed to pay reparations under the Dawes Plan and the Young Plan, but those plans were cancelled in 1932, and Hitler’s rise to power and subsequent actions rendered moot the remaining terms of the treaty.

The treaty, negotiated between January and June 1919 in Paris, was written by the Allies with almost no participation by the Germans. 

The negotiations revealed a split between the French, who wanted to dismember Germany to make it impossible for it to renew war with France, and the British and Americans, who did not want to create pretexts for a new war. The eventual treaty included 15 parts and 440 articles. Part I created the Covenant of the New League of Nations, which Germany was not allowed to join until 1926. Part II specified Germany’s new boundaries, giving Eupen-Malmedy to Belgium, Alsace-Lorraine back to France, substantial eastern districts to Poland, Memel to Lithuania, and large portions of Schleswig to Denmark. Part III stipulated a demilitarized zone and separated the Saar from Germany for 15 years.

https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-i/treaty-of-versailles-1

Were lessons learned by the failure of the Treaty of Versailles?

he peace treaty following the “war to end all wars” was initially thought to be ushering in a never-ending era of peace and international brotherhood, but not all observers thought so: the German Crown Prince Wilhelm, who had fought against Marshal Petain at Verdun and was now exiled in Holland, blasted the victors’ exclusion of the surrendered governments during the Paris discussions begun that January: the very morning of the signing, he flatly predicted in an interview that a new European war was a certainty ten years hence. Meanwhile, John Maynard Keynes, the great British economist who attended the conference as a representative of the British Treasury, was disgusted with the harsh terms meted out by the western allies and resigned his post in late May. Returning to Britain, he wrote The Economic Consequences of the Peace that summer, flatly predicting another war with Germany in twenty years

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2019/06/28/the_right_lessons_from_versailles_100_years_later_114542.html

The Treaty itself was a precursor to the rise of the Nazis….and ultimately the 2nd World War…..so it failed it is main conquest…to prevent war.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Let The End Begin

I wrote before the first Dem debate last week that depending on performance and how much the MSM like them would decide who stayed and who dropped out of the race.

Now that the first round of debates is over the field of 25+ candidates should begin to get smaller and more manageable…..some will find their donors drying up…….

Expect Democratic presidential candidates to start throwing in the towel within weeks, perhaps with the release of second-quarter fundraising results on July 15. That’s the prediction of Politico, which reports that—seven months before Democratic caucuses and primaries begin—it’s “getting very late” for candidates to make an impression. To take part in a third debate in September, to follow another in late July, candidates will need donations from at least 130,000 individuals and support of 2% or higher in four polls. “At the moment, fewer than 10 candidates would likely qualify,” reports Politico. With “the demands of raising money, and the embarrassment factor of proud and accomplished people waging what are going to look like increasingly futile efforts, history suggests there will be multiple dropouts before the close of summer.”

Denver’s Maggie Banks looks forward to that development. “Some people will be weeded out as we go along, and I want that to happen so I can look at everybody’s ideals and experience,” the 32-year-old mother tells Fortune, which suggests the crowded field of candidates is overwhelming voters. Prior to Wednesday’s debate, Fortune named the front-runners as Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Pete Buttigieg. But Politico reports only Warren and Buttigieg “can convincingly claim to have improved their relative position in polls, coverage, and activist energy” over months of campaigning. A recent poll showed 11 of 24 candidates (Joe Sestak has since jumped in, making it 25) were unknown by 50% of 400 respondents, while 40% actively hoped New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio would drop out of the race, reports the Washington Post

My candidate (for now) at this point is Tulsi Gabbard and I think she will stay in for her antiwar, anti-interventionist plays well to the population….not so much in the Media….she has an uphill fight….then there are others that cannot find the mountain to climb…….

As the the donor base start to dry up some of the lesser known candidates will start looking for the exit…..

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

VOTE!

Poverty, Climate And Defense Spending

The first Dem debate is in the tank…..I heard very little about poverty, lost of lip service but no new ideas, climate was on the agenda for the MSM and little about out of control defense spending.

But fortunately there was an outlet for the candidates to go on the record without having to depend on the MSM to bring up the issues like they do with the debate.

The Institute on Policy Studies met with most of the candidates and got their views the day before the debate……

Where do the 2020 presidential candidates stand on poverty, climate change, taxes, and military spending?

Over 140 million Americans — or 43 percent of us — are poor or low-income, according to research by the Institute for Policy Studies and the Poor People’s Campaign. That poverty is compounded by the interlocking injustices of racism, militarism, and ecological devastation. It was caused not by poor personal decision making, but by massive public investments in policies that benefit a tiny few at the expense of the rest.

The good news? We have abundant resources to fix it, our Poor People’s Moral Budget report shows. All we have to do is get them out of the military, Wall Street, and the mass incarceration industry and into programs that actually work for the public.

When we launched our Moral Budget with the Poor People’s Campaign, we asked nine 2020 presidential candidates if they had the political will to put those resources to work for the public.

https://ips-dc.org/2020-candidates-poverty-climate-change-military-spending-racism-militarism-ecological-devastation-presidential-debates/

If you are considering voting in 2020 then maybe this post and accompanying article will be helpful….I try to be as much FYI as I possibly can…..hoefully it will be informative.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

The VOTE!