During this essay we will be looking at President Woodrow Wilson’s 14 points [comma] paying particular attention to the three points that were the most important to him. I will also identify the history behind why these 14 points were established and drafted, to include the mindset and core beliefs of the President (particularly his formal years). Next we will take a look at the politics of the Treaty of Versailles, explicitly looking at why it failed in the United States Senate and the individuals who were responsible for its demise. The final part of this essay will give notice to foreign policy in the United States during the 1920’s under President’s Harding and Coolidge; also, their administrations handling and stance on the three principle points from the fourteen.
BODY:
Before we begin to dissect and describe Presidents Wilson’s 14 points we must first understand who he was, his core beliefs and his upbringing, this is important because it shapes Wilson’s beliefs in not only politics and foreign affairs but also his principles. The son of a Presbyterian minister born in 1856, his childhood included memories of education by his father and union soldiers of the civil war. Wilson attended college at the College of New Jersey (later renamed and now known as Princeton), and his graduate degree from John Hopkins. Both degrees were in history with the graduate degree including political science. Wilson’s wife Ellen (prior to her death) encouraged Woodrow to work for the poor and social reforms. As the President of Princeton and the Governor of New Jersey, Wilson sought to reform policies and procedures such as eliminating elitist rites on campus like social eating clubs which he wanted to replace with common e...
... middle of paper ...
... congress “the league is as dead as slavery”. So obsessed with their hatred of the league they refused to open any correspondence from Geneva, and threatened the league with sanctions if they tried to enforce or include America in any of its policies. Specifically they were eluding to “the United States would disrupt any attempt of the League to carry out a program of collective security through the use of sanctions, Leuchtenburg, Perils of Prosperity, pg. 106”
CONCLUSION:
In summary we have looked at the fourteen points of President Woodrow Wilson, identifying the three major points from them. We discussed the senate’s response to the 14 points to include their stance on the League of Nations, giving special attention to those who opposed the ratification. Finally, we ended with a brief description of foreign policies under Harding and Coolidge.
In the book, America’s Great War: World War I and the American Experience, Robert H. Zieger discusses the events between 1914 through 1920 forever defined the United States in the Twentieth Century. When conflict broke out in Europe in 1914, the President, Woodrow Wilson, along with the American people wished to remain neutral. In the beginning of the Twentieth Century United States politics was still based on the “isolationism” ideals of the previous century. The United States did not wish to be involved in European politics or world matters. The U.S. goal was to expand trade and commerce throughout the world and protect the borders of North America.
Wilson, T. W. (n.d.). "Fourteen Points" Avalon Project - Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy. Retrieved April 14, 2011, from http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/wilson14.asp
Based on Wilson’s war message to Congress, It was believe that the United States had a moral and humanitarian obligation to intervene in World War I and “make the world safe for democracy” (Wilson). Luce’s point in The American Century was not imperial, but idealistic. It was America’s time to shine, “to be the powerhouse from which the ideals spread throughout the world and do their mysterious work of lifting the life of mankind from the level of the beasts to what the Psalmist called a little lower than the angels” (Luce). Both sources demonstrate that the ideals of Woodrow and Luce inspired many Americans and shaped much of the foreign policy for the remainder of the twentieth century and on. The more significant viewpoints are the differences.
Following World War I, President Woodrow Wilson became the mastermind for the creation of an international organization (Dudley 72). Eventually he was successful in the creation of the League of Nations and fighting for it to become a part of the Treaty of Versailles (Dudley 72). Although the League became a point in the Treaty of Versailles, the United States still had to ratify the Treaty to become a part of the League themselves (Dudley 76). Americans became split about whether the United States should have a place in the League or not, and the U.S. Senate had a decision to make (Dudley 76). On one side of the argument was a Democratic senator of California, James D. Phelan (Dudley 74). Mr. Phelan believed that the United States should join the League of Nations because it is the duty of the U.S. to uphold our ideals and support Democracy (Dudley 76). However, on the opposing side of this argument was people like Lawrence Sherman, a Republican senator from Illinois (Dudley 76). Mr. Sherman felt that the United States should not join the League of Nations because that would go against the policies of isolationism he felt the U.S. should follow, and he believed that the League of Nations would bring America too much into the conflicts of Europe (Dudley 76).
Woodrow Wilson was the 28th President of the United States and held the office from 1913-1921. He became known as “the Crusader” due to his foreign policy theory that America should be a beacon of liberty and aggressively pursue the spread of democracy throughout the world. His policy would enable America to prosper economically and develop an international security community through the promotion of democracy in other nations. While former Secretary of State Kissinger writes in his book Diplomacy that 20th century American foreign policy has been driven by Wilsonian idealism, an analysis of 21st century US foreign policy reveals that, in fact, US foreign policy has been influenced by ideals that can be characterized as Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, and Jacksonian as well.
Link’s book was published in 1979 and was written based upon privet manuscript collections, government archives from the U.S, Brittan, France and Germany, as well as newspapers. Link also reaches from monographs, biographies, and articles from numerous colleagues. (Link.pg 129) Each of these sources are solid and reliable sources, and were well used to put together a book packed with information on Woodrow Wilson’s life. Link uses many firsthand accounts from Wilson himself, but seems almost suspicious of accounts that were not presented first hand. Though Link is extremely selective in what he chose to present, the book clearly presents these facts, but has a very bias opinion of Wilson as discussed earlier. Link’s evidence, though selective, fits nicely in the monograph and makes the aspects of Wilson that he does cover clear and easy to read
The 1920s was a time of conservatism and it was a time of great social change. From the world of fashion to the world of politics, forces clashed to produce the most explosive decade of the century. It was the age of prohibition, it was the age of prosperity, and it was the age of downfall.
The progressive era was a period of social activism and political reform in the United States. The political climate was ripe for reform and America was seeking leaders who could provide a new, more beneficial direction. Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were two of the most renowned presidents of this era. One kindred goal of both of these presidents was to monitor and rectify large trust and monopolies in the U.S. Despite the fact that Wilson and Roosevelt’s domestic policies were correlative of each other, their foreign policies were very different from one another. Roosevelt tended to become more involved with foreign events. On the other hand, Wilson favored remaining impartial in foreign affairs. Wilson didn’t want to become entangled in World War 1 until the United States had been directly stricken.
In 1919 Woodrow Wilson wrote a statement to Henry Cabot Lodge the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in order to convince him to be in favor of the League of Nations. Woodrow Wilson believed, that the League of Nations was the best way for achieving an equitable peace for all the nations in the world. He said, that the United States should not interfere in any case, where one nation has their own restriction. In addition, Wilson mentioned that the United States is not going to be involved with immigration, tariff or naturalization of other nations, because each country have their own rights to deal with those question. Moreover, Wilson established that the United States will have to agree to “respect and persevere as against
...essives, they still recognized the utility of local government. In that sense, the Wilsonian system was the most integrated. The political parties were broad organizations, spanning from local to national politics and hopefully fostering some sort of interconnectivity. Wilson acknowledged the danger and rigidity of a two-party system, but also realized that parties would balance a government's tendency to accumulate excessive amounts of power. The individual was able to engage himself in politics, but the functionality of the Federal Government was never impeded upon. Somehow, Wilson had nearly resolved the differences that had been plaguing American politics for the preceding century. He was the first president to recognize that he possessed two responsibilities as a party leader and policy-maker and that is why his system was so admirable, enduring and emulated.
The United States (US) President Woodrow Wilson “Fourteen Points” speech was initially thought to be an acceptable proposal for peace following the First World War; however, they sparked many controversial issues and were not readily accepted by all the nations involved. His idealistic views were in favor of American Foreign Policies, Allied bias and additional powers in Western Europe. The Fourteen Points were less beneficial to the problem that Europe was encountering and more favorable to the Allied Powers, as the United States main focus was to become a more dominant nation, while the Great Britain wanted more rule over the seas and France on the other hand was seeking vengeance.
Wilson's 14 Points vs. the Treaty of Versailles. When the peace processes were to start after the end of World War One, there were four people who were major components in the treaty of Paris: Clemenceau, George, Orlando, and Wilson. Clemenceau wanted revenge on the Germans by punishing them through the treaties because he believed that they were at fault for the war; George was in agreement with Clemenceau although he did not feel that Germany should suffer severe punishment; Orlando who wanted the irredenta to be re-established; and President Wilson of the United States of America wanted to create a mild peace with Germany in a fair way. In view of this, Wilson created fourteen points that he wanted accomplished in full as a result of the peace treaties. His fourteen points were his plan for a world peace and included plans for the end of secret treaties, freedom of the seas, free trade, arms reduction, the just settlement of colonial claims, the establishment of a League of Nations, and the evacuation of occupied territories and national self-determination.
In the United States the league was met with fierce opposition from those who thought it unwise to enter America into a collective organization, which would restrict its power and influence. Congress especially concerned with Article X, which morally bound the U.S. to aid any member of the League of Nations that was victimized by aggression, and revoke...
Lenin’s decree states good points on how to achieve a brief period of peace and opens it up to negotiations on how to alter the decree to better serve the purpose of peace. The Fourteen Points directly say exactly what Wilson believes is needed and is included in his declaration of entering the war. The Fourteen Points possibly would have been the best plan for the world and did help with the good aspects of the conclusion of the war; however, every country in Europe had it’s own agenda that did not adhere to the wants of the foreign United States of America. In the course of human history, what is best for the people of the world is not what transpires and this is evidently seen in the ambitious ideals put forth by Vladimir Lenin and Woodrow
He did not want administration to be influenced by political interest instead of operating in the interest of the people in a country. ‘The doctrine of dichotomy implied that the politicians and their direct appointees have the right to make policy decisions for the polity but it is the duty of the bureaucrats to carry those policies in good faith’ (Pfiffner, 2004, p. 2). Wilson advocated for politicians to deal with the duty of policy formulation and for civil servants to implement those policies.... ... middle of paper ...