Democracy Was Not The Global Result Of World War I

After winning the election of 1916 barring the slogan, “We kept us out of war!” Wilson began his “peace without victory” crusade. (Zieger, 44) He failed to identify the secret treaties that were entered between the Allies during the war and Germany’s unwillingness to concede anything from a war they did not lose. When it was apparent that a “peace without victory” would be unattainable all that was left was a catalyst and the United States

Out of the many speeches given by President Woodrow Wilson regarding World War One, two in particular serve as a sort of showcase of the changing role of the United States in global politics during the early 20th century. The first is Wilson’s Address to the Senate of the United States: “A World League for Peace” (“World League”). The second is Wilson’s Address to a Joint Session of Congress on the Conditions of Peace, also known as his 14 Points. Although the themes of these speeches have similar ideals such as the quest for self-determination and multiple countries uniting to prevent aggression, the proceedings at Brest-Litovsk make 14 Points speech both a continuation and a shift from the “World League” one. Wilson’s 14 Points speech reflects the commitment of the United States to enter the war and enforce its own agenda (as well as that of the other Allies), a drastic change from its earlier neutrality.

Thus, United States involved in the promoter and freedom of the democracy throughout the world. The United States fought for freedom throughout the world by promoting the peace. President Wilson made a Fourteen Point Plan to promote a peace in the world after the World War and it was designed to prevent further diplomatic problems happening throughout the world. “It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in” tells that Wilson planned for world to live safe and in peace. (Document B).

“It is true; democracy, votes for men and votes for women, making slow but certain progress in 1914, have suddenly become established facts in many lands in 1917. Already our one-time Mother Country has become the standard bearer of our Americanisms, the principles she once denied, and—cynical fact—Great Britain, not the United States, is now leading the world on to the coming democracy. Any man who has red American blood in his veins, any man who has gloried in our history and has rejoiced that our land was the leader of world democracy, will share with us the humbled national pride that our country has so long delayed action upon this question that another country has beaten us in what we thought was our especial world mission.” (Catt, 1917)

Many historians continue to argue about president Woodrow Wilson’s success at the Paris Peace Conference, however the conference is regarded as one of Wilson’s biggest failures during his days. The Paris Peace Conference’s main goal was to establish the terms of peace after World War One. Moreover France and Britain which are known as the dominant powers of the Triple Entente, were seeking revenge and wanted to make Germany suffer after their glorious victory against the Triple Alliance. On the other hand president Woodrow Wilson was looking to “make the world safe for democracy (1).” President Woodrow Wilson outlined what he wanted in his famous fourteen points. His polices led to economic instability in addition to “ he invaded a number of

When other nations jumped into WWI in 1914, America adopted a policy of neutrality. News of the horrors of the war convinced Americans that they had taken the right approach. Many could not believe that a civilized society could resort to such atrocities. Germany’s use of U-boats in unrestricted submarine warfare finally pushed the U.S. to declare war. President Wilson urged for peace based upon the idea of a League of Nations, where many nations would act as one to preserve the peace of all. Although WWI pitted country against country, it also galvanized America, ushering in an era of massive change. Wilson dictated that “Peace had to be a peace of reconciliation, a peace without victory, for a victor’s peace would leave a sting, a resentment, a bitter memory upon which terms of peace would rest, not permanently, but only upon quicksand” (Trueman). Peace came in 1918, although it was not a peace without victory, and a colossal shift in the way of life followed soon after (Trueman).

Most of the World’s major Nations were in a state of turmoil from the year 1914-1918, during the conflict of World War I. This War to End all Wars began with the German’s pushing other European Nation’s buttons, including the progression of militarism, imperialism, nationalism, and the creation of alliances among all of the Nations. After the course of three years of grueling trench warfare the tide of the Germans was receding, and President Woodrow Wilson of the United States presented his famous Fourteen Points, in hope that he would direct all Nations to aspire for the establishment of world peace.

Wilson’s Fourteen Points embodied his vision of a better world governed by fairer principles. He felt guided “by the hand of God.” His vision of a peacekeeping “League of Nations” was, in his view, the key element to a “secure and lasting peace” and was the “most essential part of the peace settlement.” If the diplomats

When World War 1 started in 1914, United States president Woodrow Wilson promised non-participation of his country. The conflict appeared characteristic of the rottenness of old Europe, which favored the neutrality position of majority of American citizens. However, a series of implacable events dragged the United States into the war. This paper will discuss the events that justified the United States entry into World War 1 while exploring the roles which public opinion should play when making such decisions in comparison to expert policy makers’ opinions. In addition, other available options that should have been put into consideration will be explored.

Wilson’s relationship with the peace movement was varied through his entire presidency, and especially so through the wavering beginning of World War I. The extent to which he allowed the peace movement to shape his stance on World War I can be further analyzed by investigating the context surrounding his constantly shifting views on the coming war and his relationship with the effort. In the very beginning, Wilson and the aggregating peace movement were in a symbiotic relationship, as Wilson had been the initial figure head for the peace movement (Brewer, 50-53). However, Wilson saw Germany’s violence increasing greatly and becoming a threat to the safety of the United States, and that his responses were greatly limited to ensure citizen

The Selfish, Woodrow Wilson The Wilsonian Moment: Self Determination and the International Origins of Anticolonial Nationalism, written by Erez Manela focuses on the 1919 Paris Peace Conference not from the perspective of the core, but instead from the edge. The usual concentration on the post war peace process as it both affected and was affected by the major European powers, Manela centers instead on the impact of the peace process on the edge of empire, namely, the colonial states, using the specific examples of China, Egypt, India, Korea, and Germany. Crucial to his thesis is the Wilsonian message of national self-determination and equality among states. The impact and in tie with ripple effect of Wilson's rhetoric from 1918 through the end of the Paris peace conference is what Manela defines as

After World War I started in Europe in 1914, the U.S wanted to maintain a policy of non-intervention. The U.S wanted to avoid conflict and negotiate peace. Woodrow Wilson was trying to seek out Americans to help the war effort in 1917. Wilson pledged to, “Make the world safe for democracy” (Wilson). Making the world safe for democracy was a noble pursuit to Americans who struggled with all the limited freedoms.

In the early months of 1918, the dynamics of The Great War ravaging Europe changed dramatically. On March 3rd, Germany and the Russian Bolsheviks signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, officially ending Russia’s involvement in the war and freeing Germany’s forces previously occupied on the Eastern Front . That same month, Germany launched an extensive attack in France along the Somme River, knocking a devastating blow to the Allies. By the summer of 1918, the United States had escalated it’s involvement in the war, sending over mass amounts of troops and coordinating with European powers to essentially back the German offensive into a position of little advancement. As Germany recognized its failing position in the war, the officials in the German High Command began quietly pursuing negotiations of peace and cease fire, not from their European counterparts, but from American President Woodrow Wilson . Germany was hoping to benefit from President Wilson’s ideals of peace and justice for all, ideals he had laid out publicly that year in a January speech outlining his “blueprint for a new democratic world order.” These Fourteen Points became the cornerstone of Wilson’s contribution to the peace negotiations following the armistice that ended the war in November of 1918. Focusing on the belief that an established system of democracy, communication and peace would prevent further atrocities like World War I, the Fourteen Points centered on equal representation and opportunity

It can be argued convincingly that the United States emerged from World War I as the world superpower because of U.S intervention and President Woodrow Wilson’s diplomatic leadership. America had now become the ‘saviour of Europe.’ The United States left World War I with a major confidence boost. The war resulted in the death of empires, the birth of nations and in national boundaries being redrawn around the world. It ushered in prosperity for some countries while it brought economic depression to others. It influenced literature, changed culture and politics; social and economic climate was also impacted.

Fukuyama and McFaul make strong arguments for the importance of democracy promotion, but it is not without its flaws. The world is fragmented by ethnic, linguistic and religious differences, and as such, the notion that there exists 'moral universals' is viewed as dangerous (Dunne 2001, pp. 179). Gray (1995, pp. 146) aptly articulated that "the universalizing mission of liberal values such as democracy, capitalism and secularism undermine the traditions and practices of non-Western cultures." And that may illustrate the rejection of Liberalism thus far. Democracy, when promoted by Western states, is inextricably tied in with other Western ideals such as capitalism and secularism. These ideals often do not mesh well with prevailing cultural practices, resulting in dissent and potential military conflict, results contrary to Liberalism's ultimate goal. This leads to the second rationale: national security.