Socratic Seminar Question 2 (Period 4)

Question 2: Should the United States join the League of Nations?

Read the documents below to help you develop your opinion on this essential question regarding the future of our world and the precarious peace President Wilson has worked to establish in Versailles.

Submit your comments below.  For each question, every student should:

• Write a comment using evidence to back up your opinion (either by referencing the document or referencing specific facts discussed in class or in your readings)
• Ask a question
• Respond to someone else's comment or question

Document 1: President Wilson presents the Treaty of Versailles to the Senate

A league of free nations had become a practical necessity. ...

That there should be a league of nations to steady the counsels and maintain the peaceful understandings of the world ... [is] the basis of peace with the central powers. The statesmen of all the belligerent countries were agreed that such a league must be created to sustain the settlements that were to be effected.  ... The League of Nations was the practical statesman’s hope of success in many of the most difficult things he was attempting.

Document 2: Henry Cabot Lodge's Reservations

The United States assumes no obligation to preserve the territorial integrity or political independence of any other country or to interfere in controversies between nations -- whether members of the League or not -- under the provisions of Article 10, or to employ the military or naval forces of the United States under any article of the treaty for any purpose, unless in any particular case the Congress, which, under the Constitution, has the sole power to declare war or authorize the employment of the military or naval forces of the United States, shall by act or joint resolution so provide. ...

If the United States shall at any time adopt any plan for the limitation of armaments proposed by the Council of the League of Nations under the provisions of Article 8, it reserves the right to increase such armaments without the consent of the Council whenever the United States is threatened with invasion or engaged in war.

Document 3: Excerpt from a speech by Senator Robinson (Democrat from Arkansas)

No senator can doubt that the repudiation by the United States of the undertaking in Article 10 to respect and preserve the territorial integrity and political independence of the other members of the League weakens, if it does not destroy, one of the principal agencies or means provided by the League for the prevention of international war.

Socratic Seminar Question 4 (Period 9)

Question 4: Should the U.S. concern itself with "keeping the world safe for democracy"?

Read the documents below to help you develop your opinion on this essential question regarding the future of our world and the role of the United States in that world.

Submit your comments below.  For each question, every student should:

• Write a comment using evidence to back up your opinion (either by referencing the document or referencing specific facts discussed in class or in your readings)
• Ask a question
• Respond to someone else's comment or question

Document 1: Woodrow Wilson, "War Message", 1914

The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be planted upon the tested foundations of political liberty. We have no selfish ends to serve. We desire no conquest, no dominion. We seek no indemnities for ourselves, no material compensation for the sacrifices we shall freely make. We are but one of the champions of the rights of mankind. We shall be satisfied when those rights have been made as secure as the faith and the freedom of nations can make them.

Document 2: Woodrow Wilson, Message on the Treaty of Versailles, 1919

It was almost exactly twenty-one years ago that the results of the war with Spain put us unexpectedly in possession of rich islands on the other side of the world and brought us into association with other governments in the control of the West Indies. ... Weak peoples everywhere stand ready to give us any authority among them that will assure them a like friendly oversight and direction. They know that there is no ground for fear in receiving us as their mentors and guides. Our isolation was ended twenty years ago ... There can be no question of our ceasing to be a world power. The only question is whether we can refuse the moral leadership that is offered us, whether we shall accept or reject the confidence of the world.

The war and the Conference of Peace now sitting in Paris seem to me to have answered that question. ... It is thus that a new role and a new responsibility have come to this great nation that we honour and which we would all wish to lift to yet higher levels of service and achievement.

The stage is set, the destiny disclosed. It has come about by no plan of our conceiving, but by the hand of God who led us into this way. We cannot turn back. We can only go forward, with lifted eyes and freshened spirit, to follow the vision. It was of this that we dreamed at our birth. America shall in truth show the way. The light streams upon the path ahead, and nowhere else.

Document 3: Charles Lindbergh, September 1941

We are on the verge of war, but it is not yet too late to stay out. It is not too late to show that no amount of money, or propaganda, or patronage can force a free and independent people into war against its will. It is not yet too late to retrieve and to maintain the independent American destiny that our forefathers established in this new world. . . .

Document 4: Donald J. Trump, inaugural address

Under a Trump administration, no American citizen will ever again feel that their needs come second to the citizens of foreign countries.  My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people and American security first.

Socratic Seminar Question 3 (Period 9)

Question 3: Should freedom of speech be restricted in wartime? 

Read the documents below to help you develop your opinion on this essential question regarding the success of the United States in conducting foreign wars.

Submit your comments below.  For each question, every student should:

• Write a comment using evidence to back up your opinion (either by referencing the document or referencing specific facts discussed in class or in your readings)
• Ask a question
• Respond to someone else's comment or question

Background:

Under the Espionage and Sedition Acts, hundreds of labor union leaders and socialists were put in jail for opposing the war.  The Supreme Court ruled that this was a fair restriction of the freedom of speech because of the "clear and present danger" this created for the U.S. war effort and for the U.S. military in particular.  

Document 1: Sedition Act, 1918

Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies ...or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct ...the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States ...or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully ...urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production ...or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated ... shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both....

Document 2: Oliver Wendell Holmes, writing for the majority, Schenk v. United States, 1919

Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment may become subject to prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances a to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.

A conspiracy to circulate among men called and accepted for military service under the Selective Service Act of May 18, 1917, a circular tending to influence them to obstruct the draft, with the intent to effect that result, and followed by the sending of such circulars, is within the power of Congress to punish, and is punishable under the Espionage Act

Socratic Seminar Question 2 (Period 9):

Question 2: Should the United States join the League of Nations?

Read the documents below to help you develop your opinion on this essential question regarding the future of our world and the precarious peace President Wilson has worked to establish in Versailles.

Submit your comments below.  For each question, every student should:

• Write a comment using evidence to back up your opinion (either by referencing the document or referencing specific facts discussed in class or in your readings)
• Ask a question
• Respond to someone else's comment or question

Document 1: President Wilson presents the Treaty of Versailles to the Senate

A league of free nations had become a practical necessity. ...

That there should be a league of nations to steady the counsels and maintain the peaceful understandings of the world ... [is] the basis of peace with the central powers. The statesmen of all the belligerent countries were agreed that such a league must be created to sustain the settlements that were to be effected.  ... The League of Nations was the practical statesman’s hope of success in many of the most difficult things he was attempting.

Document 2: Henry Cabot Lodge's Reservations

The United States assumes no obligation to preserve the territorial integrity or political independence of any other country or to interfere in controversies between nations -- whether members of the League or not -- under the provisions of Article 10, or to employ the military or naval forces of the United States under any article of the treaty for any purpose, unless in any particular case the Congress, which, under the Constitution, has the sole power to declare war or authorize the employment of the military or naval forces of the United States, shall by act or joint resolution so provide. ...

If the United States shall at any time adopt any plan for the limitation of armaments proposed by the Council of the League of Nations under the provisions of Article 8, it reserves the right to increase such armaments without the consent of the Council whenever the United States is threatened with invasion or engaged in war.

Document 3: Excerpt from a speech by Senator Robinson (Democrat from Arkansas)

No senator can doubt that the repudiation by the United States of the undertaking in Article 10 to respect and preserve the territorial integrity and political independence of the other members of the League weakens, if it does not destroy, one of the principal agencies or means provided by the League for the prevention of international war.

Socratic Seminar Question 1 (Period 9)

Question 1: Which of the Fourteen Points is most significant for lasting peace?

Using the text of the Fourteen Points below (and your analysis from yesterday's assignment) to help you, develop your opinion on this essential question regarding the future of our world and the precarious peace President Wilson has worked to establish in Versailles.

Submit your comments below.  For each question, every student should:

• Write a comment using evidence to back up your opinion (either by referencing the document or referencing specific facts discussed in class or in your readings)
• Ask a question
• Respond to someone else's comment or question

Document 1: The Fourteen Points

I. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at ...

II. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war ...

III. The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.

IV. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.

V. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.

VI. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy ...

VII. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. ...

VIII. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.

IX. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.

X. The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity to autonomous development.

XI. Rumania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored ...

XII. The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty ...

XIII. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations ...

XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

Socratic Seminar Question 4 (Period 6)

Question 4: Should the U.S. concern itself with "keeping the world safe for democracy"?

Read the documents below to help you develop your opinion on this essential question regarding the future of our world and the role of the United States in that world.

Submit your comments below.  For each question, every student should:

• Write a comment using evidence to back up your opinion (either by referencing the document or referencing specific facts discussed in class or in your readings)
• Ask a question
• Respond to someone else's comment or question

Document 1: Woodrow Wilson, "War Message", 1914

The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be planted upon the tested foundations of political liberty. We have no selfish ends to serve. We desire no conquest, no dominion. We seek no indemnities for ourselves, no material compensation for the sacrifices we shall freely make. We are but one of the champions of the rights of mankind. We shall be satisfied when those rights have been made as secure as the faith and the freedom of nations can make them.

Document 2: Woodrow Wilson, Message on the Treaty of Versailles, 1919

It was almost exactly twenty-one years ago that the results of the war with Spain put us unexpectedly in possession of rich islands on the other side of the world and brought us into association with other governments in the control of the West Indies. ... Weak peoples everywhere stand ready to give us any authority among them that will assure them a like friendly oversight and direction. They know that there is no ground for fear in receiving us as their mentors and guides. Our isolation was ended twenty years ago ... There can be no question of our ceasing to be a world power. The only question is whether we can refuse the moral leadership that is offered us, whether we shall accept or reject the confidence of the world.

The war and the Conference of Peace now sitting in Paris seem to me to have answered that question. ... It is thus that a new role and a new responsibility have come to this great nation that we honour and which we would all wish to lift to yet higher levels of service and achievement.

The stage is set, the destiny disclosed. It has come about by no plan of our conceiving, but by the hand of God who led us into this way. We cannot turn back. We can only go forward, with lifted eyes and freshened spirit, to follow the vision. It was of this that we dreamed at our birth. America shall in truth show the way. The light streams upon the path ahead, and nowhere else.

Document 3: Charles Lindbergh, September 1941

We are on the verge of war, but it is not yet too late to stay out. It is not too late to show that no amount of money, or propaganda, or patronage can force a free and independent people into war against its will. It is not yet too late to retrieve and to maintain the independent American destiny that our forefathers established in this new world. . . .

Document 4: Donald J. Trump, inaugural address

Under a Trump administration, no American citizen will ever again feel that their needs come second to the citizens of foreign countries.  My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people and American security first.

Socratic Seminar Question 3 (Period 6)

Question 3: Should freedom of speech be restricted in wartime? 

Read the documents below to help you develop your opinion on this essential question regarding the success of the United States in conducting foreign wars.

Submit your comments below.  For each question, every student should:

• Write a comment using evidence to back up your opinion (either by referencing the document or referencing specific facts discussed in class or in your readings)
• Ask a question
• Respond to someone else's comment or question

Background:

Under the Espionage and Sedition Acts, hundreds of labor union leaders and socialists were put in jail for opposing the war.  The Supreme Court ruled that this was a fair restriction of the freedom of speech because of the "clear and present danger" this created for the U.S. war effort and for the U.S. military in particular.  

Document 1: Sedition Act, 1918

Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies ...or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct ...the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States ...or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully ...urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production ...or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated ... shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both....

Document 2: Oliver Wendell Holmes, writing for the majority, Schenk v. United States, 1919

Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment may become subject to prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances a to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.

A conspiracy to circulate among men called and accepted for military service under the Selective Service Act of May 18, 1917, a circular tending to influence them to obstruct the draft, with the intent to effect that result, and followed by the sending of such circulars, is within the power of Congress to punish, and is punishable under the Espionage Act