The founders of the American republic did not, by and large, like political parties. Their whole political tradition taught them to identify “faction” and “party” with the irrational and disruptive tendencies in human life, with “passion” and “interest.” Against this they set constitutions, first the British Constitution, then the written American Constitution of 1787 as rational artifices or constructions designed to thwart “the spirit of party and faction.” Yet the very men who left their political testaments against party were also the creators of the first American party system, the heroes whose rites the parties celebrate down to the present.

From 1950 to 1954 American politics were dominated as never before by one man, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, and by the phenomenon of “McCarthyism.” Yet many of the questions raised by those years of turmoil and controversy remain unanswered. What was the source and nature of the power that McCarthy wielded over the United States Senate? Why did the members of that body acquiesce, for nearly five years, in his continued abuse of the democratic process? Beyond this, were the McCarthy years aberrational? Did they represent some malfunction in our political machinery? Or were they the natural and inevitable by-product of that system itself?

In March, 1939, less than two weeks after Hitler marched into Prague, betraying the desperate hope of Munich and crushing the forlorn Czech republic, Franco marched into Madrid, concluding the grim Civil War and extinguishing the last faint hope for the survival of the Spanish Republic. With war clouds gathering over Europe, it seemed only too clear that Nationalist Spain was little more than an Axis satellite, for as Hitler himself a year later observed, without German and Italian aid during the Civil War, “there would today be no Franco.” Yet there was far less gratitude in Spain than there might have been, had the Germans not so avidly sought economic and political returns on their investment in goods and manpower. By the end of the Civil War, German economic interests had penetrated Spain and Spanish Morocco as never before, thanks to a ruthless policy of exacting contractual concessions from the Nationalists as the price of continued support. Moreover, there had been bitter dissension between Hitler and Franco over the latter's declaration of neutrality during the Sudeten Crisis, and an acrimonious discussion over his reluctance to publicize Spain's accession to the Anti-Comintern Pact, which was only brought to an end when the matter was leaked to the press without Spanish approval.

The contemporary position of Roman Catholics in Northern Ireland (Ulster), is inextricably entwined in historical origins of religious, political, economic and social webs. Depending upon one's knowledge of history or emotional disposition, it can be traced back to Strongbow in the tenth century, or to the defeat of James II in 1690. For the more pragmatic and less academic, the Government of Ireland Act of 1920 and the London Agreement of 1925, which divided Ireland into the North and South, will suffice. While many will disagree, it seems that most Irish, North or South, if pressed long and hard enough, admit that the basis of the conflict is partition of the six counties in the North (Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Donegal, Fermanagh and Tyrone) from the 26 counties in the South.

Most of the historical analysis of the American fight for a League of Nations in 1919–1920 centers strictly on the struggle between Wilson and Lodge. In such a narrow approach, certain vital forces at work during this epic struggle have been overlooked or largely ignored. One such case is the story of the Anglo-French attempt to help the American nation out of the partisan deadlock that developed around the League issue. This episode takes on added dimensions as an Allied intervention in the internal affairs of the United States that in the end had a dynamic effect. Additionally, the effort came very close to providing the means for compromise. The story properly began with the signing of the German Treaty in Paris and the departure of most of the American delegation.

The present essay brings together through the technique of illustrative analysis certain reflections on political obligation which seem to be of critical importance if contemporary civil disobedience and widespread erosion of established public authority are to be understood. The attempt is here made to sketch the theoretical and historical context of the current American crisis in political obligation. This context is, however, so vast that a genuinely comprehensive analysis cannot be given within the scope of a brief essay. I have, consequently, resorted to illustration; and rather full notes have been supplied in order to indicate the range of relevant materials and to allay at least some of the misgivings that must inevitably arise from oversimplification.