The Long Ago Times

LONDON, February 5, 1824 — In a recent edition, our discussion on legislative debates regarding the Address consumed much of our space, leaving scant room for editorial commentary. However, the paramount issue currently dominating our pages is foreign policy, a topic that has eclipsed most others in urgency. The British Foreign Secretary has voiced strong opposition to any third-party intervention in the ongoing disputes between South America’s colonies and Spain, a stance we find ourselves aligned with. It is a principle we believe should be universally applied: the same standards we set for ourselves ought to be expected of others.

The direct involvement of France, aiming to subdue and claim the South American states, would constitute an act of piracy, reminiscent, yet far more reprehensible, than Sir Walter Raleigh’s historical ventures in the same region. Unlike Raleigh’s era, the South American nations are now fully recognized and engaged with the global community, having given no provocation to any European power. The moral transgression, we argue, would only be compounded if France managed to secure Old Spain and used it as a base to deploy native forces against their South American kin under a Bourbon or French dominion. It is our hope that the British government will remain steadfast in its commitment that no foreign power should intervene militarily between Spain and its former colonies, pausing any contention until France’s withdrawal.

Moreover, the egregious violations of rights and freedoms by Austria and its allies, dubbed the Holy Alliance, against their subjects and neighboring states, do not, in our view, justify a belligerent response. However, these undeniable atrocities underscore the necessity for Britain to offer refuge to those fleeing persecution. The British Alien Act, which has been a point of contention, should no longer be a subject of debate. There have been numerous instances where the infringement of Swiss neutrality by its oppressive neighbors might have justified a military response from Britain.

In essence, while the geopolitical landscape has evolved, the principles guiding our critique of foreign policy remain steadfast. The call for a consistent and principled stance against external interference, the condemnation of imperialistic ambitions, and the advocacy for sanctuary to the oppressed, align with our enduring values. These issues, as dissected in our coverage, reflect the complexities of navigating international relations while upholding the tenets of sovereignty, justice, and human dignity.

⁂

The content on this website is for entertainment purposes only.
Much of it has not been thoroughly reviewed by humans,
although we do get a blast from reading it ourselves.
But it should absolutely not be cited
as a source for anything other than itself.

We use OpenAI’s GPT-4 API to extract text
from the public-domain archive of The Times,
and rewrite this to contemporary standards.
Graphics are also largely AI-generated.

This website is supported by advertising and donations!
Please consider supporting our sponsors
by clicking the affiliate link on today’s lead article.
Please also consider making a donation here—
we get so excited every time we hear the bell ding,
and there’s no donation too small!