polity of American government—werenhistorically “inevitable.” Yet man doesnnot live by concepts of inevitability, andnAmerican isolationists in the interwarnperiod especially ought not to be faultednfor their fears and reservations based,nperhaps, for the most part on a perceptionnof historical forces they recognizednonly dimly. Certainly they do not deserventhe obloquy heaped on them bynColonel Stimson when he wrote afternthe attack on Pearl Harbor that “Thisncountry united has practically nothingnto fear, while the apathy-and divisionsnstirred up by unpatriotic men have beennhitherto very discouraging.” Thesensame “unpatriotic men,” as with thenclarity of hindsight we can see today,nhad better historical foresight than he.nTheoretical isolationism may be as dangerousn(almost) as compulsive interventionism,nbut strategic isolationism isnprudent statecraft; intervention in theninterest of national security is one thing,nintervention on behalf of national “ideals”nanother. And if the Borahs andnSmoots and Rankins were indeednwrong, as probably they were, aboutnWodd War II, their anti-interventionistnheirs were probably right about Korea,nVietnam, Panama, and Kuwait.nOn the penultimate page of the textnof The Colonel, Godfrey Hodgsonntakes out after what he calls “the newnconservatives,” the “right-wing operativesnwho trooped into Washington tonadvise Ronald Reagan in 1980.”nThese people, Hodgson claims, werenessentially the heirs of the isolationistsnwhom Stimsonnfought so vigorously in publicnand despised so heartily innprivate. They did not opposenforeign intervention; theynapproved of it, so long as it wasnshort, cheap and effective. Butnthey did not share Stimson’snpicture of a wodd kept peacefulnby collective security,nguaranteed by American powernbut striving for internationalnalliances. Their aspiration wasnnot so much to the leadershipnof the world, moral ornotherwise, as to the building ofna system that would protectnAmerica from thencontamination of foreignnentanglements and the persistentnperversity and troublesomeningratitude of foreigners. . . .nAbove all, their instinct wasnnot for the center but for thenextreme.nTHE WISDOM OF THE PLANNED GIFTnAnd he quotes the “first hero” of thesen”new conservatives,” Barry Goldwater:n”Extremism in the defense of liberty isnno vice, moderation in the defense ofnliberty is no virtue”!nIn the words of Colonel Stimson, onnthe occasion of a Texas attorney tellingnhim that he hoped he had spent thennight before in sin, as the Texan himselfnhad done: “What is this man talkingnabout?” Where did Mr. Hodgsonnspend the 1980’s? (In England, apparently.)nWho are these “new conservatives”nwhose first hero was Barry Goldwater?nSurely not Jeane Kirkpatrick,nKen Adelman, Richard Perle, ElliottnAbrams, and their numerous supportersnin the media and in the foundationsnwho, early on in the Reagan years,ncaptured the administration’s foreignnpolicy and put it in global service to then”ideology of democracy” that HenrynStimson helped to develop and thatnGodfrey Hodgson extols. <^nThere are a variety of ways to give to educational and charitable organizations, likenThe Rockford Institute, publisher of Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.nMost people make outright gifts which result in a “charitable deduction” from a person’ntaxable income.nAnother option is to establish a Charitable Remainder Trust. For example, supposena person bought some stock at a cost of $20,000 many years ago that is now worthn$50,000 and pays 3 percent in dividends. One way to lock in the current value,navoid capital gains tax, and derive more income would be to create a CharitablenRemainder Unitrust. Pay-out percentages can be fixed from 5 percent to 8 percent,nand the investments are in secure income-producing investments. If the trust earnsnmore than the agreed pay-out amount, that additional money is added each yearnto the trust so that the size of the trust increases. Upon the death of the donor or hisnbeneficiary, the trust would become the property of the Institute or other charitiesnof the donor’s choice. Estate taxes are eliminated and there is a sizeable charitable deduction in the year the trust isnestablished. The amount of the charitable deduction depends on the age of the donor and the income retained.nLegacy Program, The Rockford Institute, 934 North Main Street, Rockford, IL 61103nD Please send me general information on the various “Planned Giving” options.nD Please send me infonnation on the Institute’s Charitable Remainder Trust Fund.nNAME.n.ADDRESS.nCITY _nSTATE ZIP PHONEnIf you have a specific asset, such as stocks, that you are considering for a contribution, and if you would like the Institute to evaluate the financialntax unplications for your gift, please include the following information:nSS # SS # (SPOUSE)nCOST OF ASSET ESTIMATED MARKET VALUEn30/CHRONICLESnnn