Woodrow Wilson Individualism

8. Individualism is one of the most prized sections of America’s moral DNA. Indeed, America isn’t simply individualistic, it’s fiercely individualistic. This is the core of the reason that we would not join the League of Nations after World War I. This can be seen quite plainly in the 1920 political cartoon, “Interrupting The Ceremony” This depicts Woodrow Wilson officiating the marriage of a woman labeled “foreign entanglements” and Uncle Sam from a book labeled “League of Nations”. As Wilson asks if anyone objects, a man labeled “U.S. Senate” breaks through the window with the constitutional rights. Here we can see the reason is twofold. First and foremost, the United States wanted full power to decide when and if it went to war. The League
Woodrow Wilson, like many so called “great men”, was a complicated figure. His character provides much room for interpretation and conflicting views. Jan Schulte-Nordholt and Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman proved quite different views of him in their, “Woodrow Wilson: A Life for Peace”, and, “American Umpire”, respectively. The first depicts him as a man of principle to a fault. He attempted to apply american values to Europe, and as such, was bound to fail. Moreso, he was so obsessed with doing this, that he dropped his more practical ideas for peace, in favor of the more radical League of Nations. Indeed, he implies that this led to a “bad peace” creating World War II, that may have been prevented by adhering to his fourteen points. While the second also sees him as a moral figure, it shows that none of his ideas were radical. As she states, “Wilsonism, therefore, preceded the birth of Woodrow Wilson by decades if not centuries.” This makes perfect sense, as Wilson was not, in fact, a politician, but a political science academic, who would have studied the proposed and actual political institutions of the past similar to the League of Nations. As to which was more correct, that is a more complicated question. Wilson was very much a dreamer who hoped for a peaceful utopia, or at least, this is what he presented. However, the means by which he hoped to get there were in no way new. They were used on an unprecedented scale however. He didn’t just want peace in Europe, he wanted
Though World War I was a gruesome war indeed, in America we tend to focus on World War II. This may be due, in part, to the fact that World War II was the direct consequence and conclusion of the first world war. The first reason that World War I lead to the second was the massive remunerations placed on Germany. It's people were starving in the streets creating the perfect conditions for the rise of a dictatorial regime. The second is again due to the unfair nature of the peace terms. Though it is little known in America, many Germans believed that they could have, if not won the war, at least gotten a better deal by continuing to fight. This led to a great resentment in its proud people, and a distrust in the agencies in power, again, creating perfect conditions for a autocratic, warlike regime. In addition, the british attempts to undermine the new Russian government in this time period led to an increased distrust of all western/capitalist powers, perhaps allowing Hitler to be more bold his attacks, without fear of Russian response. In the end, the eastern government's inability to adapt to the new world presented during World War I cause a drastic increase in the likelihood of a