Jeannette Rankin (Republican-Montana) was the first female member of the US House of Representatives in the years 1917-1919 and 1941-1943. However in her latter term she voted present on the declaration of war against the Axis powers. Was this action moral or correct in your opinion. I think it is not as had we not gone to war as she wished Japanese and German tyranny would have continued unabated.
I respect her for holding to her own principle of pacificsm in spite of overwhelming political pressure. I do not agree with her decisions.
I’ve added punctuation to your text to see if I could make the OP any clearer. Is there a reason her status as first female Rep 30 years before is relevant? Wikipedia notes that she voted “no” on the war, but abstained from the specific vote against war with Germany and Italy. So I gather you’re asking about that.
As far as the moral dimension, you can always make a moral argument against war. She made one herself. Was it correct (the best decision)? Probably not, though it wasn’t incorrect, either; she didn’t have the power to stop America from entering the war. Do you really think, though, that the German system would have continued unabated? It doesn’t seem all that stable. It could certainly have ruined / destroyed millions more lives as well as all of Central Europe, but I doubt if it could have lasted very long. Japan I know little about.
Seconded. If ever two countries needed to be stopped, it was Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany. If ever a war needed to be fought, it was World War II.
We just went to the new U.S. Capitol Visitors Center. Among the many interesting exhibits on the history of Congress was a photo of Rankin, who had locked herself in a House members’ phone booth to keep an angry crowd at bay until Capitol police came to escort her back to her office. She was gutsy, but she wasn’t stupid.
As for Ms. Rankin, I learned of her in a ‘side bar’ in an American History textbook.
I’d say her votes were principled. I don’t agree with the WWII vote but I don’t see it as being immoral.
That sort of was Congresswoman Rankin’s “thing” though, right? That no war ever needed to be fought.
Of course. And I think she was wrong. The rape of Manchuria and the Holocaust were not ended by negotiations.
It would have collapse eventually but at how many more lives dead? Would a million, two million, several million more have died in the concentration camps and at the hands of Einstzgruppen?