
"America First? America Last? America at Last?," Lowell Lecture, Harvard University (20 April 1992)
1990s
Japan, The Ambiguous, and Myself (1994)
Context: After the end of the Second World War it was a categorical imperative for us to declare that we renounced war forever in a central article of the new Constitution. The Japanese chose the principle of eternal peace as the basis of morality for our rebirth after the War.
I trust that the principle can best be understood in the West with its long tradition of tolerance for conscientious rejection of military service. In Japan itself there have all along been attempts by some to obliterate the article about renunciation of war from the Constitution and for this purpose they have taken every opportunity to make use of pressures from abroad. But to obliterate from the Constitution the principle of eternal peace will be nothing but an act of betrayal against the peoples of Asia and the victims of the Atom Bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
"America First? America Last? America at Last?," Lowell Lecture, Harvard University (20 April 1992)
1990s
“Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”
1950s, The Russell-Einstein Manifesto (1955)
Context: Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war? People will not face this alternative because it is so difficult to abolish war.
The abolition of war will demand distasteful limitations of national sovereignty. But what perhaps impedes understanding of the situation more than anything else is that the term "mankind" feels vague and abstract. People scarcely realize in imagination that the danger is to themselves and their children and their grandchildren, and not only to a dimly apprehended humanity. They can scarcely bring themselves to grasp that they, individually, and those whom they love are in imminent danger of perishing agonizingly. And so they hope that perhaps war may be allowed to continue provided modern weapons are prohibited.
This hope is illusory. Whatever agreements not to use H-bombs had been reached in time of peace, they would no longer be considered binding in time of war, and both sides would set to work to manufacture H-bombs as soon as war broke out, for, if one side manufactured the bombs and the other did not, the side that manufactured them would inevitably be victorious.
Values Voter Summit 2011-10-08, quoted in * Beck: "There Is A Race War That Is Going On In Our Country"
Media Matters for America
2011-10-08
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201110080003
2011-08-17
2010s, 2011
As quoted in an interview with The London Daily Telegraph (7 May 2008) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html
2000s
As quoted in "Giuliani Faults Bill Clinton for Terror Response in 1990s" (26 June 2007) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286849,00.html
“We had 10 years after the Cold War to build a new world order and yet we squandered them.”
As quoted in an interview with The London Daily Telegraph (7 May 2008) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html
Context: We had 10 years after the Cold War to build a new world order and yet we squandered them. The United States cannot tolerate anyone acting independently. Every US president has to have a war.
Source: 1970s, Take Today : The Executive as Dropout (1972), p. 152
“"It's the end of World War I / It's the end of World War II!" - It's the End of the Western”
Lyrics, Solo