[083] post-WWII digest
Within The Idea of National Independence, General de Gaulle introduces a new notion of nationalism, a nationalism which is defined not by a struggle towards supremacy, but instead a struggle towards independence and individuality. He also introduces a concept of foreign diplomacy in which other nations are not merely nations against whom to compete or nations with whom to ally oneself with in war, but nations with whom one can reach “relations of working understanding.”
Furthermore, his statement that “independence leads us to adopt a policy…that no exercise of hegemony by any power, no foreign intervention in the internal affairs of a state…can ever be justified,” sounds remarkably like Mill.
The Bad Godesberg Program similarly identifies a Socialism that is now much different from its pervious incarnations. However, although it continues to advocate the freedom of the lower classes, it ceases to identify this freedom with the oppression of others. The difference between these documents may also arise from their different types; de Gaulle is making a speech, and the Bad Godesberg Program is a statement of a party’s platform. Nevertheless there continues to be somewhat of a hostile/aggressive tone, which comes in part from its continuing to call for German unification.
The title of Jean Monnet’s Red-Letter Day for European Unity is indicative of its purpose, Jean Monnet’s continuing work for European unity, a unity which he believes is necessary not only for the peace of Europe, but for the peace of the entire world.
All three documents, mention both explicitly and implicitly the effects of the war. These policies are aggressive in their struggle for peace, or the demonstration that it is desirable. Although it is evident that some degree of nationalism remains, in the desire of countries to remain autonomous and individual, this nationalism is not one that ardently calls for war.
Furthermore, his statement that “independence leads us to adopt a policy…that no exercise of hegemony by any power, no foreign intervention in the internal affairs of a state…can ever be justified,” sounds remarkably like Mill.
The Bad Godesberg Program similarly identifies a Socialism that is now much different from its pervious incarnations. However, although it continues to advocate the freedom of the lower classes, it ceases to identify this freedom with the oppression of others. The difference between these documents may also arise from their different types; de Gaulle is making a speech, and the Bad Godesberg Program is a statement of a party’s platform. Nevertheless there continues to be somewhat of a hostile/aggressive tone, which comes in part from its continuing to call for German unification.
The title of Jean Monnet’s Red-Letter Day for European Unity is indicative of its purpose, Jean Monnet’s continuing work for European unity, a unity which he believes is necessary not only for the peace of Europe, but for the peace of the entire world.
All three documents, mention both explicitly and implicitly the effects of the war. These policies are aggressive in their struggle for peace, or the demonstration that it is desirable. Although it is evident that some degree of nationalism remains, in the desire of countries to remain autonomous and individual, this nationalism is not one that ardently calls for war.