Chapter 13: La Follette Speaks against the War - 1917

Chapter Summary:

     The neutrality of the United States during the "Old World's quarrels" was upheld by President Wilson for as long as possible, until German submarines resumed their "unrestricted submarine warfare" upon innocent Americans. The German government did draw a zone "within which any neutral ship might be attacked by surprise," yet the United States was still shocked to anger by the sinking of American merchant ships in the free-fire zone. This combined with the Zimmerman note outraged the American public, turning them from peaceful, war-opposed people into "hysterical supporters of an all-out war." La Follette, already infamous for having blocked the passing of the Armed Ship Bill with a filibuster, was planning to speak out in opposition to the war, along with a handful of others at the Senate meeting on April 4th, 1917. Many arguments were made, most supporting the war, such as President Wilson's, reminding them about "Germany's history of unprovoked and murderous attacks on peaceful United States ships and passengers exercising their right to travel on the high seas," as well as a more general "preservation and extension of freedom from autocracy and militarism around the globe." Other arguments pressed the importance of "[securing] the world's peace," as well as upholding democracy and the will of a free people. 
     The rare antiwar speakers spoke of a "cruel sacrifice of lives for no worthwhile purpose" while the people who would actually benefit were "comfortably ensconced in a bomb proof position." The war would only benefit the rich bankers who made loans to Allied nations, who would be guaranteed repayment by a victory, while the poor people on the battle lines were the real ones who suffered. People supporting the war became more and more restless until the pariah, La Follette, took the stage. He raised many questions towards the President's authority, the majority vs. the minority's opinions, the necessity of the imposition of democracy, and even how much America really had to do with the war. Although La Follette's speech caused him to be politically ostracized, the narrator speaks of the devastating effects of the war that could have theoretically been avoided had the Senate and the general public listened to La Follette's pleas for "the poor...the ones called upon to rot in the trenches," who "have no organized power, have to press to voice their will upon [the] question of peace or war."

Chapter Reflection:

     The impact of these debates really hit me - as the narrator explains, the members of the Senate were "dictating tragedy for generations yet unborn, our own and those of our children and our children's children included." If only the war-crazed men could look past their anger and blinding nationalism to see the real consequences that this action could-and would-bring. The voices of the poor and oppressed could not be heard, it did not matter whether they wanted peace or not, the only people whose opinions mattered were the only ones who could possible benefit from such an undertaking. Pride, honor, and "national interest" were so important in these people's minds that they forgot about "who suffers most in war," and "who pays" in the end.