The Folly of Wilsonism

A hundred years ago the US was in the process of mobilization of troops to send to Europe and join in the defense of freedom in World War One…..

Wilson had kept the US out of the fighting until he found the proper time to insert the US into the fray.

Wilson was the only president to have a PhD….he was a raging racist and a Democrat……..not many politicians today say that they admire Wilson…..Trump has Jackson, Nixon had Lincoln, Reagan had Coolidge and every Dem has JFK…..but poor Wilson has been left out….even though his actions in WW1 is what lead to the US becoming the world power that it is today.

But American Conservative takes a look at Wilson and his interventionism…..

In the midst of the commotion generated by the U.S. missile strikes against Syria’s Al Shayrat air base on April 6, Rex Tillerson’s statement at Sant’Anna di Stazzema, Italy, received less attention than it deserved. Visiting a memorial to victims of Nazi brutality in World War II, the secretary of state declared: “We rededicate ourselves to holding to account any and all who commit crimes against the innocents anywhere in the world.”

Americans should pause to consider the breathtaking sweep of this statement—particularly in light of President Trump’s missile attacks, launched in response to a chemical-weapons assault attributed to Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad. Tillerson apparently wants the United States to respond anytime noncombatants get targeted anywhere in the world by armies or governments engaged in war.

Not even Woodrow Wilson ever uttered a statement so Wilsonian in tone and breadth. The essence of Wilsonism stems from the 28th president’s discomfort with American overseas actions conducted in behalf of U.S. interests. But humanitarian interests—now that was a crusade worthy of his countrymen. Even before he took America into World War I, as he sought to put himself forward as an interlocutor for peace among the European belligerents, he made clear in sweeping language that he spoke for a moral authority far higher than mere nationalism. “I hope and believe,” he declared, “that I am in effect speaking for liberals and friends of humanity in every nation … I would fain believe that I am speaking for the silent mass of mankind everywhere.”

Source: The Folly of Wilsonism | The American Conservative

Just another of the professor’s mini history lessons…..knowledge is never enough….

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “The Folly of Wilsonism

  1. A hundred years ago, we sent men to fight for Europe – and we’re still doing it. In your opinion, have the nations of Europe become complacent, assuming the US will come to their aid? That would explain so much lack of support to NATO. Will they ever be able to defend themselves?

    1. Good questions….yes I think they have become lazy and dependent….the US will not give them a chance to do things for themselves…so the attitude is they make the cash they can do the fighting……chuq

  2. Those are interesting comments from you and GP. The situation is seen rather differently here of course.
    American bases have been all over the world since 1945, not just in Europe. The Americans could have just gone home, had they wanted to, but they remained to exert influence on those regions, including most of western Europe. That led to the ironic situation that because those US bases were there, the Soviets considered them to be a threat, and built up the Soviet Bloc against them. That’s how the Cold War started, let’s face it, when the Russians similarly refused to leave the countries annexed after WW2, and both the superpowers faced off, in countries other than their own. Until the later proliferation of nuclear weapons, any war that ensued was going to be fought with mainland Europe as the playing field, not in Russia or America.
    As for the US entering WW1 under Wilson, my guess is he saw the chance to establish a former isolationist country on the world stage, and could see the economic and colonial benefits of defeating Germany. But he waited until almost the end, to make sure he was on the winning side. When it came to WW2, Roosevelt always wanted to get into that war too, and it took Pearl Harbour to wake up a reluctant country. If the US had not joined in, they would have faced a Europe dominated by the Nazis developing intercontinental missiles, and a Far East controlled by an aggressive Japan. I doubt they entered that war just to save Europe, in all honesty.
    Best wishes, Pete.

    1. I agree…it was all calculated and deliberate…Wilson wanted to jump in earlier but needed an excuse……FDR was the same….they both got their wish and BLAM!…welcome to the world of today…chuq

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s