Perspectives from Paris, 1919 by CONNOR LEIGH DARLING https://padlet.com/cldarling/pmldzfedrtnsod4t en-us 2021-04-25 04:21:37 UTC 2021-04-27 09:08:47 UTC hello@padlet.com Self-Determination cldarling https://padlet.com/cldarling/pmldzfedrtnsod4t/wish/1458759972 Self-determination was ever-present in the minds of many at the Paris Peace conference of 1919. It was based upon a right of nations to determine their own future and governance. In the past Prime Minister Lloyd George had paid lip service to the principle of ‘national self-determination', but it was President Wilson who brought the principle to the peace conference. Wilson had stated that the war ‘had its roots in the disregard of the rights of nations… to determine their own allegiances [and] political life’, declaring self-determination as ‘an imperative principle of action’. Hundreds of petitions were sent to Wilson’s delegation at the conference and many parties came to Paris to directly ask for the President’s support in their nations case. When Wilson spoke of self-determination, he had for the most part been thinking of nations in Europe; the President had not intended to raise the hopes of nationalists around the world. President Wilson’s call for self-determination would later be used by nationalists in the colonies in their fight for independence. President Wilson first alluded to the idea of self-determination in his Fourteen Points speech which stated his objectives during the peace talks. In that same speech, Wilson outlined his desire for a League of Nations to be established that he hoped would prevent another war. ]]> 2021-04-26 10:21:45 UTC https://padlet.com/cldarling/pmldzfedrtnsod4t/wish/1458759972 Racial Equality cldarling https://padlet.com/cldarling/pmldzfedrtnsod4t/wish/1458760844 The principle of racial equality was also very much present in discussions at the Paris Peace Conference. Racial equality meant that individuals should be free from discrimination on basis of race. The Bolsheviks were one group who spoke of racial equality; however, it was the Japanese delegation was the primary driving force behind the push for racial equality at the conference. Their support came out of a desire to be seen as an equal to the western powers which was still a struggle despite the Japanese efforts towards westernisation. The Japanese put for a motion to enshrine racial equality as a principle within the proposed League of Nations. This was met with majority support of delegates present at the conference, however, was overruled by the Chair, President Wilson. The Prime Minister of Australia Billy Hughes and President Woodrow Wilson were notable figures against the adoption of the Japanese delegation’s proposal. Hughes’ opposition to racial equality came from a desire to preserve the white Australia policy, a popular policy amongst the Australian electorate. President Wilson was personally opposed to racial equality but also relied upon the votes of fellow Democrats in Congress from Southern and Western states who too opposed racial equality. 

]]> 2021-04-26 10:22:07 UTC https://padlet.com/cldarling/pmldzfedrtnsod4t/wish/1458760844 Debating Racial Equality cldarling https://padlet.com/cldarling/pmldzfedrtnsod4t/wish/1458762327 The debate surrounding racial equality at the conference involved diverse perspectives both for and against the principal. To the Japanese it was an issue of national pride, a desire to be taken seriously; to the Australians it was primarily political expediency; and to the Americans it was bound up in both the personal and the political. 

Japan had played a minor, yet advantageous role in the pacific front during the war. Their navies had patrolled the pacific and protected Australian vessels. When it came to making peace at the conference Japan was designated a great power alongside France, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and were thus accorded two delegates. Japan had seemingly achieved equality amongst the western powers. They had made great effort to westernise the nation, its leaders would adopt the clothing and many customs of Europeans in order to be seen as civilised. Despite these facts Japan was still perceived as inferior to the western powers due to the race of the nation. The editor of the newspaper ‘Asahi’ and many others argued the Japanese delegation to the peace conference should call for an end to racial discrimination. The delegation would put forth a proposal that would enshrine racial equality as core to the League of Nations. 

The Australian Prime Minister Billy Hughes’ opposition to racial equality principally stemmed from his fear that its adoption at the League of Nation would threaten the status of the White Australia Policy, an Act of Parliament which he saw as vital to the nation. Hughes was an advocate for trade unions who feared a relaxation in Australia’s immigration policy would lead to Asian workers migrating to Australia and undercutting local worker’s pay. Australia had been established as a ‘worker’s paradise’ with well paid jobs, any threat to this would be electorally unpopular so Prime Minister Hughes privately opposed the Japanese delegation’s motion in talks with other leaders at the conference. 

President Woodrow Wilson as an individual was much opposed to social relations between black and white races, far more so than many in his time. During his presidency he supported segregation imposing it on several Federal agencies and during his time as president of Princeton, Wilson barred black students from the school. He was also reliant on the votes of Democrats from the southern and western states who were against racial equality to pass legislation through the Congress.



]]> 2021-04-26 10:22:44 UTC https://padlet.com/cldarling/pmldzfedrtnsod4t/wish/1458762327