• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jeannette Rankin: the sole vote against the United States entry into world war 2

Unitedwestand13

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,738
Reaction score
6,290
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
When I first became interested in learning about history, world war 2 was the topic that sparked my interest. One of the assumptions that I had for the longest time was that in the aftermath of the Japanese surprise attack on the United States navy’s pacific fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor, Any opposition to the United States declaring war on japan would have evaporated.

Sure there have been times when the United States entered a conflict on controversial grounds and that provided reasons for people to oppose the war, notable examples include the Vietnam war and the second Iraq war. Opposing the United States entry into world war 2? I didn’t believe that any one would do such a thing....

That was before I learned about Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin, and she has recently become one of the most fascinating people to learn about.

Jeannette Rankin is historically significant in multiple ways: she was a prominent women’s rights advocate and she is the first woman to ever hold federal office in the United States. She was elected to the United States House of Representatives on two occasions, serving as a Republican representing the state of Montana, first being elected in 1916, then winning a second term in 1940. She is also at the present moment the only female congressional representative elected to represent Montana.

Jeannette Rankin - Wikipedia

While I could continue to list Rankin’s accomplishments, I want to focus on one of her most prominent moments: being the sole Congressional Representative to vote against the u.s declaration of war against Japan. Her decision was controversial from the moment she cast her vote: several of her congressional colleagues tried to convince her to change her vote or at least abstain from the vote, but Rankin refused. This vote effectively any chance of continuing her political career and chose not to run for re-election in 1942.

So why did Jeannette Rankin vote against u.s entry into world war 2? Because she refused to go against her principles. Jeannette Rankin was a devout Pacifist: she voted against u.s. entry into both world wars, decisions that were controversial at the time but she stood by her decisions.

Jeannette Rankin is a inspirational figure to me because she chose to stick to her pacifist principles by voting against the declaration of war against Japan, even though the act not only destroyed her political career but also made her a pariah to many people at the time.

So what do you think of Jeannette’s vote against the United States’s entry into world war 2? Do you find her dedication to her principles admirable? Or do you disagree with her choice?

Discuss
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
When I first became interested in learning about history, world war 2 was the topic that sparked my interest. One of the assumptions that I had for the longest time was that in the aftermath of the Japanese surprise attack on the United States navy’s pacific fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor, Any opposition to the United States declaring war on japan would have evaporated.

Sure there have been times when the United States entered a conflict on controversial grounds and that provided reasons for people to oppose the war, notable examples include the Vietnam war and the second Iraq war. Opposing the United States entry into world war 2? I didn’t believe that any one would do such a thing....

That was before I learned about Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin, and she has recently become one of the most fascinating people to learn about.

Jeannette Rankin is historically significant in multiple ways: she was a prominent women’s rights advocate and she is the first woman to ever hold federal office in the United States. She was elected to the United States House of Representatives on two occasions, serving as a Republican representing the state of Montana, first being elected in 1916, then winning a second term in 1940. She is also at the present moment the only female congressional representative elected to represent Montana.

Jeannette Rankin - Wikipedia

While I could continue to list Rankin’s accomplishments, I want to focus on one of her most prominent moments: being the sole Congressional Representative to vote against the u.s declaration of war against Japan. Her decision was controversial from the moment she cast her vote: several of her congressional colleagues tried to convince her to change her vote or at least abstain from the vote, but Rankin refused. This vote effectively any chance of continuing her political career and chose not to run for re-election in 1942.

So why did Jeannette Rankin vote against u.s entry into world war 2? Because she refused to go against her principles. Jeannette Rankin was a devout Pacifist: she voted against u.s. entry into both world wars, decisions that were controversial at the time but she stood by her decisions.

Jeannette Rankin is a inspirational figure to me because she chose to stick to her pacifist principles by voting against the declaration of war against Japan, even though the act not only destroyed her political career but also made her a pariah to many people at the time.

So what do you think of Jeannette’s vote against the United States’s entry into world war 2? Do you find her dedication to her principles admirable? Or do you disagree with her choice?

Discuss
Click to expand...

I would like to see history “gamed out” into the future assuming a loss of Europe to Germany, and a win over Japan, and how uninterrupted progress in Germany of the atom bomb would gave changed the equation. (Sold bombs to pre defeat Japan?).

Then there is the wild card of Russia...
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
So what do you think of Jeannette’s vote against the United States’s entry into world war 2? Do you find her dedication to her principles admirable? Or do you disagree with her choice?

Discuss
Click to expand...

I don't know much about her, however, if her views is to be an absolute pacifist to the point of NEVER supporting any war for any reason than she should have resigned since she couldn't perform one of the duties that congress can perform.

If she was just against these two wars and not an absolute pacifist (no war for any reason) and felt she was representing her constituents than maybe some would praise her but I wouldn't. Japan's attack on an actual American territory needed a response of war IMO.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
When I first became interested in learning about history, world war 2 was the topic that sparked my interest. One of the assumptions that I had for the longest time was that in the aftermath of the Japanese surprise attack on the United States navy’s pacific fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor, Any opposition to the United States declaring war on japan would have evaporated.

Sure there have been times when the United States entered a conflict on controversial grounds and that provided reasons for people to oppose the war, notable examples include the Vietnam war and the second Iraq war. Opposing the United States entry into world war 2? I didn’t believe that any one would do such a thing....

That was before I learned about Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin, and she has recently become one of the most fascinating people to learn about.

Jeannette Rankin is historically significant in multiple ways: she was a prominent women’s rights advocate and she is the first woman to ever hold federal office in the United States. She was elected to the United States House of Representatives on two occasions, serving as a Republican representing the state of Montana, first being elected in 1916, then winning a second term in 1940. She is also at the present moment the only female congressional representative elected to represent Montana.

Jeannette Rankin - Wikipedia

While I could continue to list Rankin’s accomplishments, I want to focus on one of her most prominent moments: being the sole Congressional Representative to vote against the u.s declaration of war against Japan. Her decision was controversial from the moment she cast her vote: several of her congressional colleagues tried to convince her to change her vote or at least abstain from the vote, but Rankin refused. This vote effectively any chance of continuing her political career and chose not to run for re-election in 1942.

So why did Jeannette Rankin vote against u.s entry into world war 2? Because she refused to go against her principles. Jeannette Rankin was a devout Pacifist: she voted against u.s. entry into both world wars, decisions that were controversial at the time but she stood by her decisions.

Jeannette Rankin is a inspirational figure to me because she chose to stick to her pacifist principles by voting against the declaration of war against Japan, even though the act not only destroyed her political career but also made her a pariah to many people at the time.

So what do you think of Jeannette’s vote against the United States’s entry into world war 2? Do you find her dedication to her principles admirable? Or do you disagree with her choice?

Discuss
Click to expand...

Sticking by moronic principles doesn’t make you admirable just a moron.
 
Praxas said:
I don't know much about her, however, if her views is to be an absolute pacifist to the point of NEVER supporting any war for any reason than she should have resigned since she couldn't perform one of the duties that congress can perform.

If she was just against these two wars and not an absolute pacifist (no war for any reason) and felt she was representing her constituents than maybe some would praise her but I wouldn't. Japan's attack on an actual American territory needed a response of war IMO.
Click to expand...

She was against all wars. She believed war was morally wrong.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
When I first became interested in learning about history, world war 2 was the topic that sparked my interest. One of the assumptions that I had for the longest time was that in the aftermath of the Japanese surprise attack on the United States navy’s pacific fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor, Any opposition to the United States declaring war on japan would have evaporated.

Sure there have been times when the United States entered a conflict on controversial grounds and that provided reasons for people to oppose the war, notable examples include the Vietnam war and the second Iraq war. Opposing the United States entry into world war 2? I didn’t believe that any one would do such a thing....

That was before I learned about Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin, and she has recently become one of the most fascinating people to learn about.

Jeannette Rankin is historically significant in multiple ways: she was a prominent women’s rights advocate and she is the first woman to ever hold federal office in the United States. She was elected to the United States House of Representatives on two occasions, serving as a Republican representing the state of Montana, first being elected in 1916, then winning a second term in 1940. She is also at the present moment the only female congressional representative elected to represent Montana.

Jeannette Rankin - Wikipedia

While I could continue to list Rankin’s accomplishments, I want to focus on one of her most prominent moments: being the sole Congressional Representative to vote against the u.s declaration of war against Japan. Her decision was controversial from the moment she cast her vote: several of her congressional colleagues tried to convince her to change her vote or at least abstain from the vote, but Rankin refused. This vote effectively any chance of continuing her political career and chose not to run for re-election in 1942.

So why did Jeannette Rankin vote against u.s entry into world war 2? Because she refused to go against her principles. Jeannette Rankin was a devout Pacifist: she voted against u.s. entry into both world wars, decisions that were controversial at the time but she stood by her decisions.

Jeannette Rankin is a inspirational figure to me because she chose to stick to her pacifist principles by voting against the declaration of war against Japan, even though the act not only destroyed her political career but also made her a pariah to many people at the time.

So what do you think of Jeannette’s vote against the United States’s entry into world war 2? Do you find her dedication to her principles admirable? Or do you disagree with her choice?

Discuss
Click to expand...
I definitely think the vote is 'admirable' and I would have happily returned her to Congress, but mostly because there was only one of them. The legislature is the absolute best place to put people who do not conform to political or social norms, who think outside the box. We can best use the gadflies, the Don Quixotes of politics by putting them in a body that dilutes their power but magnifies their message. That particular Congress did not need unanimity in that vote, but it did need near unanimity in that vote so that the world was left with a resounding statement of American resolve. Because Rankin was in Congress, that body and the public were ensured that one lone voice of pacifism was still available and heard. Whether she was a communist, a fascist, a devout conspiracist, or just an eccentric, she was bravely standing up against political conformity and saying something nobody else was. We need a lot more of them in Congress today.
 
Last edited:
Crovax said:
Sticking by moronic principles doesn’t make you admirable just a moron.
Click to expand...

Principles define the character of a individual. There are times when people can choose to bend their principles to suit particular needs, interests, and situations.

But there is a limit to one’s ability to bend their principles without breaking.
 
It was pretty stupid thing for her to too, but at least she has her principles, for whatever that's worth in this case.
 
chuckiechan said:
I would like to see history “gamed out” into the future assuming a loss of Europe to Germany,
Click to expand...

It collapses a few years down the line. The Nazis were bad at economics.
 
Praxas said:
I don't know much about her, however, if her views is to be an absolute pacifist to the point of NEVER supporting any war for any reason than she should have resigned since she couldn't perform one of the duties that congress can perform.

If she was just against these two wars and not an absolute pacifist (no war for any reason) and felt she was representing her constituents than maybe some would praise her but I wouldn't. Japan's attack on an actual American territory needed a response of war IMO.
Click to expand...

If I were in her district, I would not have voted for her again if I had voted for her to begin with after she cast her no vote. However, being a pacifist does not disqualify her from Congress, nor does it require her to resign, not does being a pacifist prevent one from doing their Congressional duties. I find it ironic that she was a Republican.
 
a
Unitedwestand13 said:
So what do you think of Jeannette’s vote against the United States’s entry into world war 2? Do you find her dedication to her principles admirable? Or do you disagree with her choice?
Click to expand...





Being a lifetime coward myself, I greatly admire people like Ms. Rankin that are willing to stand up for their principles -- regardless of the social or even physical consequences.

For example, the Dems are trying all kinds of desperate things to deny President Trump reelection: possible impeachment, keeping him off certain states' ballots, encouraging women to accuse him of misconduct, etc.

a. If any Dem official had the moral courage to tell his colleagues to knock it off, s/he would deserve the same respect for integrity and just plain decency that Ms. Rankin deserves.

Most people, of course, understandably follow the rule of "To get along, one must go along."

Once in a while, however, someone like Ms. Rankin appears.

When the Senate was voting on whether or not to convict President Andrew Johnson (the House had impeached him), a few Senators sacrificed their political careers by voting "No."
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
When I first became interested in learning about history, world war 2 was the topic that sparked my interest. One of the assumptions that I had for the longest time was that in the aftermath of the Japanese surprise attack on the United States navy’s pacific fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor, Any opposition to the United States declaring war on japan would have evaporated.

Sure there have been times when the United States entered a conflict on controversial grounds and that provided reasons for people to oppose the war, notable examples include the Vietnam war and the second Iraq war. Opposing the United States entry into world war 2? I didn’t believe that any one would do such a thing....

That was before I learned about Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin, and she has recently become one of the most fascinating people to learn about.

Jeannette Rankin is historically significant in multiple ways: she was a prominent women’s rights advocate and she is the first woman to ever hold federal office in the United States. She was elected to the United States House of Representatives on two occasions, serving as a Republican representing the state of Montana, first being elected in 1916, then winning a second term in 1940. She is also at the present moment the only female congressional representative elected to represent Montana.

Jeannette Rankin - Wikipedia

While I could continue to list Rankin’s accomplishments, I want to focus on one of her most prominent moments: being the sole Congressional Representative to vote against the u.s declaration of war against Japan. Her decision was controversial from the moment she cast her vote: several of her congressional colleagues tried to convince her to change her vote or at least abstain from the vote, but Rankin refused. This vote effectively any chance of continuing her political career and chose not to run for re-election in 1942.

So why did Jeannette Rankin vote against u.s entry into world war 2? Because she refused to go against her principles. Jeannette Rankin was a devout Pacifist: she voted against u.s. entry into both world wars, decisions that were controversial at the time but she stood by her decisions.

Jeannette Rankin is a inspirational figure to me because she chose to stick to her pacifist principles by voting against the declaration of war against Japan, even though the act not only destroyed her political career but also made her a pariah to many people at the time.

So what do you think of Jeannette’s vote against the United States’s entry into world war 2? Do you find her dedication to her principles admirable? Or do you disagree with her choice?

Discuss
Click to expand...

She's a true pioneer woman: tough as nails. People who have family from that era, who knew those women well, will get every bit of those memories themselves. Pioneer woman is a lost art and we need it back.
 
jet57 said:
She's a true pioneer woman: tough as nails. People who have family from that era, who knew those women well, will get every bit of those memories themselves. Pioneer woman is a lost art and we need it back.
Click to expand...

If she were a true pioneer woman than she'd likely have been an indentured servant, a slave, a Native American, a Mexican half breed (white and Native American), a prostitute or madam or both, low life criminals on the run from John Law, impoverished religious fanatics, or chattel obligated to their husband's decisions, or all of the preceding. The pioneer American women were rarely pioneers by their own choices. Many died from illness, childbirth, violence, and those who survived often adopted veneers of hypocritical respectability. The common principles among pioneer women were wealth accumulation and escaping worse horrors than they found in the New World.

Yup, we all could do with more of that.
 
Manc Skipper said:
They voted for her.
Click to expand...

So elections are little more than selling voters a pig in a poke.

Essentially, we get all the government that future generations will be held responsible for paying for. We're heading towards a more or less two class society, made up of the "haves" and the "have what government will give them." Inequality will exist only in the "have" class, more or less a benevolent dictatorship.
 
Individual said:
So elections are little more than selling voters a pig in a poke.

Essentially, we get all the government that future generations will be held responsible for paying for. We're heading towards a more or less two class society, made up of the "haves" and the "have what government will give them." Inequality will exist only in the "have" class, more or less a benevolent dictatorship.
Click to expand...

That's your supposition. Her pacifism was a large part of her appeal, so they knew what they were getting. And voted for her.
 
Manc Skipper said:
That's your supposition. Her pacifism was a large part of her appeal, so they knew what they were getting. And voted for her.
Click to expand...

And she was re-elected by a landslide?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom