Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

George Washington on Foreign Entanglements/Interventionism
George Washington's Farewell Address | 1796 | George Washington

Posted on 03/02/2003 5:37:33 PM PST by Possenti

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages, which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! Is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions, by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluged citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influences (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens), the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

Europe has a primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such as attitude as will cause the neutrality, we may at any time resolve upon, to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances dictate; constantly keeping in view, that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors; and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: georgewashington; history

1 posted on 03/02/2003 5:37:33 PM PST by Possenti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Possenti
Now if only the world had stayed the same as it was over 200 years ago... but it did not and is not.
2 posted on 03/02/2003 6:02:24 PM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Possenti
Evil prospers when good men do nothing!

We are a nation of good men. Let the French be a nation of pathetic little worms.

3 posted on 03/02/2003 6:04:48 PM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Possenti
GW bump. Whatta guy.

Other George Washington addresses.

4 posted on 03/02/2003 6:16:24 PM PST by pttttt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Possenti
I think GW (not the current GW) would have been supportive of our current action. We where attacked and we have to fight back by all means neccesay. He did see the evils of the UN (which is going to falter anyway).
5 posted on 03/02/2003 6:22:36 PM PST by KevinDavis (Ad Astra!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
The advice of a wise man is appicable in all ages and circumstances. This is golden advice, more golden today -- in the sense that we have ignored the depth and unavoidability of its wisdom, making it a more valuable coin if it were to be applied and heeded anew.
6 posted on 03/02/2003 6:25:33 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bvw
Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

"defensive posture" - We were attacked.

"extraordinary emergencies" - 911... Hello?!

7 posted on 03/02/2003 6:59:44 PM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
We were attacked because we have become slackers -- no defesive posture, just a "HEY KICK ME" sign. No gates, no gatekeepers, we expent our policing energies to the diversity police, the war-on-drugs (gulafesin now included) -- the near-malignant growth of the federal police state, turned away from policing genuine dangers, instead mutated to chasing the mock-crime of the day -- destroying more healthy parts of the body politic than any bad ones as might happen to be included.

We'd ignore the advice of the Sage of Mount Vernon -- no "respectable defensive posture" -- not respectable, and hardly defensive in any ascpect. "Hey China -- come and take this Panama Canal that our dear Fathers took mighty effort and expense to construct! Being as we are idle foolish indulgents, we need it not" was a real blow to our defenses! But it was one among hundreds of similar scale and tens of thousands of lesser scale.

The extra-ordinary emergency? Again -- great advice from that white haired Sage of Mount Vernon -- keep them short and ad-hoc.

8 posted on 03/02/2003 7:18:42 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bvw
So should we have gotten involved in the "foreign entanglement" of WWII? A straight answer please.
9 posted on 03/02/2003 7:21:08 PM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
Yes, and three years sooner, at the least. By that time Hitler's game was obvious, and and obvious danger to us -- even bounded by the oceans as we are.
10 posted on 03/02/2003 7:26:31 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bvw
But then you're not following the advise of the wise sage from Mount Vernon.
11 posted on 03/02/2003 7:39:13 PM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
Yes, I am -- and a great Sage he was and still is -- heeded to his Spirit.

Washington was no moral equivocator -- things are right and things are wrong -- nations evil for a time and despots running them are both known to him. The Sage never preaches isolation -- rather he preaches the great benefot of "Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest." Pay heed to that term central "humanity" -- what does the Sage mean -- his words each and all have meaning, and each is weighed before dispatch into this advice of his.

Washington would be not slack in letting a Hitler -- or a Stalin -- have run of the world, ot even a major part of it. Harmony he meant in its tempooral and SPIRITUAL conote. That is -- as in the Hebrew "Shalom". Solid comfort, serenity, one's proper place in the worlds temporal and spiritual -- as blessed hy grace upon the establishment of Jutice and Benevolence. A Harmony not to be had by standing by with evil afoot and at the run. A Harmony that does require attention to the cries of Humanity, not only Commerce or a vacationer's Interest in clean Hotels and safe accomodations.

12 posted on 03/02/2003 8:04:59 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Possenti
I'm a great admirer of George Washington but one must realize that he lived in a much different world than the one we live in today. In the late 18th Century, America was isolated from the rest of the civilized world in a manner that most people today cannot imagine. Europe was separated by several weeks of rough ocean voyage. Once we established our independence from Britain, we did not have to worry too much about threats from abroad. In fact, we didn't even bother maintaining much of an army or navy.

However, it did not take long for us to realize that we could not afford to grow and prosper without "entangling" ourselves abroad. Case in point was the Barbary pirates of the Mediterranean who would board our ships and ransack them if we did not pay them tribute. So we ended up building a few Navy ships and went over there and kicked their ass. And the rest is history.

13 posted on 03/02/2003 8:13:05 PM PST by SamAdams76 (California wine tastes better - boycott French wine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
Washington's advice here still applies. Read it carefully -- Washington advises avoiding permanent or long term alliances, favoritisms, disfavors. He advises and reccommends short-term or temporary ad-hoc alliances. In broader advice he is anti-isolationist, he reccommends trade, interchange and commerce on equal, harmonious, basis with nations in pursuit of policy, the moral and brotherly companionship of all humanity, and the for the pursuit of the interests of individuals among the general populace.
14 posted on 03/02/2003 8:29:39 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Possenti
Ok, this speech is by a dude who just signed a treaty with France.
15 posted on 03/02/2003 8:31:40 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson