Thursday, July 22, 2010

Dez Prez Rankings: The Dangers of Moral Leadership

#9 of 39:
Woodrow Wilson (28th president)
1913-21
Democrat


Woodrow Wilson was a president riddled with contradictions and a most fascinating individual. Much ink has been spilled analyzing both the man and his impact. He was a complex man who did not fit easily into broad categories like “liberal” or “conservative.” A man who finally pushed for the 19th Amendment (giving women the right to vote), yet a racist who oversaw the segregation of the federal government. An anti-Imperialist who militarily intervened in Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua and basically invaded Mexico. A man who distrusted labor unions and big business equally. A pacifist who led us into World War I with the hope of preventing all future wars. A Progressive “liberal” who had communists and Radicals arrested in a series of spectacular raids and had socialist presidential candidate Eugene Debs thrown in jail.


ABOVE: “He thinks he is another Jesus Christ come upon the earth to reform men.” – French president George Clemenceau on Woodrow Wilson

Where to start with Wilson? I struggled on where to rank Woody, in part because he does not fit into easy political ideologies and so much happened during his administration. To understand Wilson is to acknowledge that he governed with his own strict moral code that left no room for political compromise. Way before George W. Bush, Wilson had the attitude that you were either with him or against him, and there was no discussion about a middle ground. Since all decisions were filtered through his moral lens, if you disagreed with him you were morally corrupt. He did not govern based on ideology or from a political platform, but from his own moral compass on each issue, which is why he often pissed off his Democrat backers as much as the Republican opposition. His political fortunes swung wildly as well. At times he came close to being that Savior of the World that he so wanted to be, at other times he was ridiculed and counterproductive to his goals.




It is undeniable that he altered the domestic landscape of this country. Within his first two years in office, he lowered protectionist tariffs, pushed the creation of the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve system, and pushed for the Clayton Anti-Trust Act, which strengthened the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. In doing these things, he stabilized the U.S. economy more than it had been since Andrew Jackson’s homicide of the Bank of the U.S. almost a century before. Wilson was the last president of the Progressive Era, and he pushed for the 17th Amendment (direct election of U.S. Senators, before this amendment Senators had been chosen directly by state legislatures) and the 19th amendment (women’s suffrage), and also unsuccessfully opposed the misguided 18th amendment (Prohibition).

On the downside of the domestic ledger, Wilson was an outspoken racist who refused to extend the Progressive agenda to Civil Rights and who enthusiastically oversaw the official segregation of the federal government. He wanted social order above all else, and so he encouraged the Palmer Raids (named after his attorney general Mitchell Palmer), arresting over 6000 suspected radicals. He topped it off by arresting one of his three former presidential rivals in the 1912 election, socialist leader Eugene Debs.


ABOVE: Wilson sent Gen. "Blackjack" Pershing and the U.S. Army into the mountains of Mexico to hunt down bandit/revolutionary Pancho Villa (pictured above) after Villa had crossed the border and killed American citizens. We never got Villa, but he was eventually killed by rivals in Mexico.

For a man who did not want to be involved in foreign affairs, Wilson certainly dove in. His military intervention / invasion of Mexico only makes sense through his moral lens. Wilson was an outspoken critic of Teddy Roosevelt-style Imperialism, yet he invaded the port of Vera Cruz in order to protect American assets and to force the Mexican government to become more democratic (it made sense to Wilson) and he sent the U.S. Army tear-assing across Mexico in pursuit of bandit/freedom fighter/former Wilson ally Pancho Villa. He was deep within the Mexican morass when bigger problems arose in the shape of World War I.

Wilson had won his second term in part due to his promise to keep the U.S. out of the cauldron of World War I, but due to stupid German moves like unrestricted submarine warfare and the Zimmermann Note (an intercepted German cable to Mexico basically saying “we’ve got your back” if they wanted to invade the U.S. and take back Texas!), the U.S. dove in and saved the Allies. But, of course, Wilson had to justify our involvement with his moral code. He rightly determined that once the War was over, the U.S. could be instrumental in molding the postwar world. That was his justification, so we entered the fray.

The battle over Wilson’s 14 Points and the Treaty of Versailles is one of the more interesting events in our history. I spend a full day in class on this issue alone. Wilson boldly presented his 14 Points vision for a postwar world to the victors and defeated nations after World War I. Even our Allies were dubious, but Wilson went to Europe personally to negotiate the Treaty and to push his moral vision for a world without war. Wilson’s principles were noble, the 14 Points set forth a system of open and transparent diplomacy, self-determination for nations and a League of Nations to peacefully mediate international disputes (the predecessor to the United Nations). Wilson compromised on many of his Points, believing that the League of Nations could fix everything in the end. The League of Nations had no enforcement mechanism, and Wilson was convinced that the moral weight of the League would be enough to preserve peace.


ABOVE: Senator Henry Cabot Lodge was Lex Luthor to Wilson's Superman. Or was it the other way around?

Wilson triumphantly returned to the U.S. to push for ratification of the Treaty of Versailles, which included his precious League of Nations, but he met with fierce resistance from majority Senate Republicans, led by Wilson’s arch-nemesis Henry Cabot Lodge. The Wilson-Lodge battle over ratification was indeed epic, with Lodge cheekily proposing his own “14 Reservations” to Wilson’s Treaty. Lodge’s questions were indeed quite reasonable, and had Wilson been willing to compromise and address the issues, the Treaty probably could have passed. Lodge asked, for instance, were member nations of the League forced to commit their militaries to uphold League decisions? Lodge proposed an amendment stating that the Senate would have to approve the use of American military force to protect other countries. In essence, he did not want a League of Nations determining U.S. foreign policy. But Wilson would not compromise. His League was morally perfect as constructed. It is fascinating to read the back and forth debate between Wilson and Lodge, which I make my students read in detail. When asked by the French ambassador whether he would submit to Lodge’s reservations, Wilson said “I will consent to nothing. The Senate must take its medicine.”

Wilson decided to travel the country to muster public support for the Treaty without any changes. He exhausted himself, and suffered a massive stroke. He was sequestered in the White House, not seeing a soul for six weeks. His doctor and wife Edith were the only people with access to Wilson. First Lady Edith Wilson was essentially the president at this point, controlling everyone’s access to Wilson and filtering their messages.

Wilson forced votes on the Treaty, and it twice failed in the Senate. The United States never ratified the Treaty of Versailles and never joined the doomed League of Nations. The Allies were thus able to harshly punish Germany for World War I without an effective League of Nations in place (Wilson had unsuccessfully argued for more lenient treatment of Germany). The consequences were monumental. Had Wilson and Lodge come to an agreement and the U.S. ratified the Treaty of Versailles, the U.S. would have been much more involved in Europe in the ensuing decades, playing a moderating role. World War II can be seen as a continuation of World War I. Germany was punished harshly, humiliated and embittered, creating fertile soil for an angry young German WWI vet named Adolf Hitler to take power. Had the U.S. ratified the Treaty and been involved in European affairs instead of becoming isolationist as we did after the rejection of the Treaty, perhaps WWII could have been avoided. Wilson was responsible for proposing an alternate path from the devastation of the late 1930’s and 1940’s, yet his own stubbornness prevented his vision from becoming reality. That is the tragedy of Woodrow Wilson.


ABOVE: Could this have been avoided had Wilson and Lodge come to terms on the Treaty of Versailles?

Pros:
* 17th amendment
* 19th amendment
* lowered tariffs
* Federal Trade Commission
* Federal Reserve
* Clayton Anti-Trust Act
* World War I leadership
* Principles behind the 14 Points

Cons:
* Racism and segregation of Federal government
* Palmer Raids and jailing Eugene Debs
* Mexico misadventures
* Stubbornness sunk his own postwar vision
* Refusing to relinquish the office while he was incapacitated by stroke

7 comments:

brad said...

The 17th Amendment is the most egregious constituional amendment in American history. It undermines the purpose of having a bicameral legislature. How is destroying a central piece of constitutional wisdom from our Founding Fathers a PRO?

Zealand Shannon said...

Your nephew is starting to read this...thanks for all the good history! He also started a website zesportreview.com ck it out when you get a chance.

Dezmond said...

The three fiths compromise was also an original part of the constitution, brad. Keep that too? for those of you who do not remember the three fifths compromise, it counted slaves as three fifths of a person for representation purposes in the House. Merely because something was originally there is not a compelling argument. Why else is it a bad idea?

Dezmond said...

Thanks, Zealand. I will check out your site.

Dezmond said...

Also Brad, state legislators were chosen a bit differently back then than they are now. The idea was that these state legislators would be a bit more educated and wise and therefore pick quality people to be in the Senate. But living in Texas, I would feel no more secure having the Texas Legislature pick my Texas Senators than I do the electorate. Things done changed.

ANCIANT said...

Agree with Dez. 17 Amend actually pretty bad for country, I think. State legislatures were heavily influenced by machine politics, which meant that the US Senate became another casualty of the spoils system.

Not sure I agree with having Wilson this high, however. Seems like his foreign policy failures outweigh his domestic successes. He was a terrible politician, in the end--failed to engage his friends or foes, build consensus, get people to like him. In many ways his most direct parallel is W Bush. Both men believed that being right, in the end, was enough. They didn't see any need to justify or even explain themselves. There is wrong and there is right, and they knew the right. A strangely moving flaw, I think.

I've never liked Wilson much though for reasons I don't understand my wife loves him. A dour pedant, I say.

dre said...

Dez,

I thought you were an elitist and, therefore, I would have expected you to oppose the 17th amendment. Are you saying the Texas legislature would not qualify as members of the elite?