Henry Lodge 商界與政客

商界與政客

https://faculty.tnstate.edu/tcorse/h2020/henry_cabot_lodge.htm
亨利·卡伯特·洛奇 (1895)

如果民主黨有一個超越其他所有原則的基本原則，那就是推動美國的邊界向前發展。在本屆政府的領導下，由於受到自由貿易的影響，民主黨在近一個世紀的存在中這一偉大原則已被徹底拋棄。托馬斯·傑斐遜承認他在購買路易斯安那時違反了憲法，但克利夫蘭先生卻努力推翻美國利益和美國在夏威夷的控製。安德魯·傑克遜為佛羅裏達而戰，但克利夫蘭先生急於放棄薩摩亞。……這是這一學說的悲哀結果，即對於人類或國家來說，沒有比買賣、交易折刀和使一切變得便宜更高的目標或目的了。沒有人會低估關稅的重要性，也沒有人會低估健全貨幣的更重要意義。但近年來，我們過於專注於這些經濟問題，以至於忽視了其他問題。我們受曼徹斯特學派信徒的影響太大了，他們認為印??花布的價格比國家的榮譽更重要，生鐵的關稅比種族的進步更重要。

現在是時候回憶一下我們一直傾向於忘記的事情了：我們過去和現在都有一項對國家福祉至關重要的外交政策。這項政策的基礎是華盛頓的中立主義。我們應該感謝他和漢密爾頓，他和漢密爾頓提出了這樣一個原則：美國無權幹涉歐洲事務。當這項政策宣布時，當時的美國人感到震驚，因為我們在思維習慣上仍然是殖民者，沒有意識到歐洲的鬥爭與我們無關。然而，中立政策的確立是華盛頓和漢密爾頓為美國民族事業做出的最偉大的貢獻之一。華盛頓政策的必然結果是門羅主義，這是約翰·昆西·亞當斯的傑作，他比以他的名字命名的總統要偉大得多。華盛頓宣稱，美國無權幹涉歐洲事務，約翰·昆西·亞當斯則補充說，歐洲不得幹涉西半球。正如我最近看到有人鄭重聲明的那樣，吞並夏威夷將違反門羅主義，因此，說門羅主義與美國的擴張無關，隻是認為任何歐洲國家都不得在美洲建立自己的勢力或幹涉美國政府，也許並不為過。

中立政策和門羅主義是美國外交關係方麵有遠見的政治家從一開始就確立的兩大原則。但是，如果以為我們的外交政策就此止步，或者這些基本主張以任何方式束縛了美國人民的前進，那就大錯特錯了。華盛頓讓我們退出歐洲事務，但同時他指出，我們真正的前進路線是向西。他從未想過我們會停滯不前，停止前進。他以先知般的眼光，看到了美國人民的真正道路，這是他那個時代沒有其他人能做到的。他自己無法進入應許之地，但他向他的人民展示了從藍嶺到太平洋的應許之地。我們遵循了華盛頓的教誨。我們占領了密西西比河大峽穀，並越過內華達山脈。我們擁有征服、殖民和領土擴張的記錄，是十九世紀任何民族都無法比擬的。我們現在不應受曼徹斯特學派的教義束縛，這些教義在英國從未出現過，作為一種外來思想，它們在這裏比在本國更不合時宜。美國的政策不是像英國那樣，在世界各地普遍獲得遠方土地。我們的政府不適應這樣的政策，我們也不需要它，因為我們國內有廣闊的土地；但同時必須記住，雖然我們在美國自己擁有我們作為一個國家的權力和偉大的堡壘，但有一些外圍工事對於保衛這個堡壘是必不可少的，這些外圍工事既不能忽視也不能放棄。

如果美國政治家想證明自己是華盛頓和亞當斯原則的合格繼承者，他們在這方麵有一個非常明確的政策要奉行。我們不希望向南擴張，因為無論是中美洲還是南美洲的人口和土地都不會是美國的理想補充。但從格蘭德河到北冰洋，應該隻有一麵旗幟和一支

國家。種族和氣候都不妨礙這種擴張，國家發展和國家福利的每一個考慮都要求這樣做。為了我們的商業利益和我們最充分的發展，我們應該修建尼加拉瓜運河，為了保護這條運河，為了我們在太平洋的商業霸權，我們應該控製夏威夷群島，並保持我們在薩摩亞的影響力。英國在西印度群島布滿了堅固的地方，對我們的大西洋海岸構成了長期威脅。我們應該在這些島嶼中至少有一個強大的海軍站，當尼加拉瓜運河建成時，古巴島仍然人煙稀少，幾乎擁有無限的肥沃，對我們來說將成為必需品。商業跟著國旗走，我們應該建立一支強大的海軍，足以保護全球各地的美國人，並且足夠強大，使我們的海岸遠離成功攻擊的可能性。

現代的趨勢是走向整合。這在資本和勞動力中都很明顯，在國家中也是如此。小國已成過去，沒有未來。現代運動全都朝著將人民和領土集中到大國和大領地的方向發展。大國正迅速吞並地球上所有的荒地，以用於未來的擴張和目前的防禦。這是一場促進文明和種族進步的運動。作為世界大國之一，美國絕不能落伍。

三十多年來，我們一直專注於嚴重的國內問題，以至於我們忽視了這些就在我們邊界之外的巨大利益。它們不應該再被忽視了。它們不僅具有物質重要性，而且關係到我們作為一個國家的偉大和我們作為一個偉大民族的未來。它們關乎我們的國家榮譽和尊嚴，關乎國家和種族的自豪感。如果本屆政府屈辱的外交政策能夠引起人們對這些問題的關注，並提醒我們這些問題至少與關稅或貨幣一樣重要，那麽它也許會被證明是因禍得福。當我們麵臨外交關係問題時，永遠不應忘記，我們麵臨的是超越黨派政治的東西，它激發並呼籲我們永遠不嫌多的愛國主義和美國主義，而過去兩年來，我們的政府卻表現得太少了。

The Business World vs. the Politicians 

https://faculty.tnstate.edu/tcorse/h2020/henry_cabot_lodge.htm
Henry Cabot Lodge (1895)

If the Democratic party has had one cardinal principle beyond all others, it has been that of pushing forward the boundaries of the United States. Under this Administration, governed as it is by free-trade influences, this great principle of the Democratic party during nearly a century of existence has been utterly abandoned. Thomas Jefferson, admitting that he violated the Constitution while he did it, effected the Louisiana purchase, but Mr. Cleveland has labored to overthrow American interests and American control in Hawaii. Andrew Jackson fought for Florida, but Mr. Cleveland is eager to abandon Samoa. . . . It is the melancholy outcome of the doctrine that there is no higher aim or purpose for men or for nations than to buy and sell, to trade jack-knives and make everything cheap. No one underrates the importance of the tariffs or the still greater importance of a sound currency. But of late years we have been so absorbed in these economic questions that we have grown unmindful of others. We have had something too much of these disciples of the Manchester school, who think the price of calico more important than a nation's honor, the duties on pig iron of more moment than the advance of a race.

It is time to recall what we have been tending to forget: that we have always had and that we have now a foreign policy which is of great importance to our national well-being. The foundation of that policy was Washington's doctrine of neutrality. To him and to Hamilton we owe the principle that it was not the business of the United States to meddle in the affairs of Europe. When this policy was declared, it fell with a shock upon the Americans of that day, for we were still colonists in habits of thought and could not realize that the struggles of Europe did not concern us. Yet the establishment of the neutrality policy was one of the greatest services which Washington and Hamilton rendered to the cause of American nationality. The corollary of Washington's policy was the Monroe doctrine, the work of John Quincy Adams, a much greater man than the President whose name it bears. Washington declared that it was not the business of the United States to meddle in the affairs of Europe, and John Quincy Adams added that Europe must not meddle in the Western hemisphere. As I have seen it solemnly stated recently that the annexation of Hawaii would be a violation of the Monroe doctrine, it is perhaps not out of place to say that the Monroe doctrine has no bearing on the extension of the United States, but simply holds that no European power shall establish itself in the Americas or interfere with American governments.

The neutrality policy and the Monroe doctrine are the two great principles established at the outset by far-seeing statesmen in regard to the foreign relations of the United States. But it would be a fatal mistake to suppose that our foreign policy stopped there, or that these fundamental propositions in any way fettered the march of the American people. Washington withdrew us from the affairs of Europe, but at the same time he pointed out that our true line of advance was to the West. He never for an instant thought that we were to remain stationary and cease to move forward. He saw, with prophetic vision, as did no other man of his time, the true course for the American people. He could not himself enter into the promised land, but he showed it to his people, stretching from the Blue Ridge to the Pacific Ocean. We have followed the teachings of Washington. We have taken the great valley of the Mississippi and pressed on beyond the Sierras. We have a record of conquest, colonization, and territorial expansion unequalled by any people in the nineteenth century. We are not to be curbed now by the doctrines of the Manchester school which have never been observed in England, and which as an importation are even more absurdly out of place here than in their native land. It is not the policy of the United States to enter, as England has done, upon the general acquisition of distant possession in all parts of the world. Our government is not adapted to such a policy, and we have no need of it, for we have an ample field at home; but at the same time it must be remembered that while in the United States themselves we hold the citadel of our power and greatness as a nation, there are outworks essential to the defence of that citadel which must neither be neglected nor abandoned.

There is a very definite policy for American statesmen to pursue in this respect if they would prove themselves worthy inheritors of the principles of Washington and Adams. We desire no extension to the south, for neither the population nor the lands of Central or South America would be desirable additions to the United States. But from the Rio Grande to the Arctic Ocean there should be but one flag and one country. Neither race nor climate forbids this extension, and every consideration of national growth and national welfare demands it. In the interests of our commerce and of our fullest development we should build the Nicaragua canal, and for the protection of that canal and for the sake of our commercial supremacy in the Pacific we should control the Hawaiian Islands and maintain our influence in Samoa. England has studded the West Indies with strong places which are a standing menace to our Atlantic seaboard. We should have among those islands at least one strong naval station, and when the Nicaragua canal is built, the island of Cuba, still sparsely settled and of almost unbounded fertility, will become to us a necessity. Commerce follows the flag, and we should build up a navy strong enough to give protection to Americans in every quarter of the globe and sufficiently powerful to put our coasts beyond the possibility of successful attack.

The tendency of modern times is toward consolidation. It is apparent in capital and labor alike, and it is also true of nations. Small States are of the past and have no future. The modern movement is all toward the concentration of people and territory into great nations and large dominions. The great nations are rapidly absorbing for their future expansion and their present defence all the waste places of the earth. It is a movement which makes for civilization and the advancement of the race. As one of the great nations of the world, the United States must not fall out of the line of march.

For more than thirty years we have been so much absorbed with grave domestic questions that we have lost sight of these vast interests which lie just outside our borders. They ought to be neglected no longer. They are not only of material importance, but they are matters which concern our greatness as a nation and our future as a great people. They appeal to our national honor and dignity and to the pride of country and of race. If the humiliating foreign policy of the present Administration has served to call attention to these questions and to remind us that they are quite as important at least as tariffs or currency, it will perhaps prove to have been a blessing in disguise. When we face a question of foreign relations it should never be forgotten that we meet something above and beyond party politics, something that rouses and appeals to the patriotism and the Americanism of which we never can have too much, and of which during the last two years our Government has shown altogether too little.