The Neutralist Policy on Tibet and Eric Margolis Is Awarded "Best Article of the Week" Whether He Wants It Or Not

As Chairman and only member of the Neutralist Association of The US, I deem it policy that I avoid expressing my personal feelings. Still, I do have them. One of them is that personally, at heart, I am a secessionist or at least a decentralist. The more power that accretes to an imperial center, the less well off a nation.

So, I am for Israel out of Palestine and Palestine out of Israel. England out of Ireland and Ireland out of England. France out of Brittany. Russia out of Chechnya and Independence for Lower Slobbovia.

As to our own unpleasantness 1860-1865, I am glad the South is still part of the US, but I can't think of a constitutional reason that secession was illegal. Of course if it can be proven that the men who approved the constitution burned holy cards in their hands as they approved it, then I would concede the point. We Nortenos forget the Hartford Convention or that the Empire State specifically reserved the right of leaving in their ratification.

Having said that, here is the official statement of The Neutralist, It should be the policy of the American Republic never to involve itself in disputes of other political entities as to what constitutes the official territory under government.

Notice the period at the end of that statement. That's it period. We again reiterate Adams that America "goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy" as well as the Irish proverb that only a fool gets involved in the religious wars of churches to which he does not belong.

Having reiterated the policy, we recommend the article by Eric Margolis, HOW TO RESOLVE THE TIBET CRISIS It is quick lesson on how we got to where we are and where are we going. We tend to forget that India is just south of Tibet and may have interests that do not coordinate with China's. The Tibetans are oppressed by China. It could not be otherwise no matter how well intentioned the uninvited guest may be.

His suggestions are wise, but will probably not be heeded. This is sad, but "face" is big in Asia. Heck, it's big here to, we just pretend it isn't.