Woodrow Wilson (2009)
4.5 Stars out of 5
John Milton Cooper
Sometimes it seems like, nothing ever
really changes. Americans in the last days of the Summer of 2015 are starting
our quadrennial obsession with the presidential nominating process; something
that in times past would not have started for another 6-9 months. What is
similar, painfully so, to the election of 1912 and 1916 when Woodrow Wilson was
nominated and then elected in the general election to become the 28th
President of the United States is the absolute intransigency of partisan politics.
Now as then (at least in the 1916 election) the Republicans would do anything
to frustrate the Democratic nominee/electee. Barack Obama has his Mitch
McConnell; Woodrow Wilson had his Henry Cabot Lodge. The virulence of the
opposition by Lodge as with his 21st century confreres took on the
passion of religious belief. John Milton Cooper’s 2009 biography “Woodrow
Wilson” describes an era roughly a century ago where the details were
different, but the endless party bickering was exactly the same.
Wilson’s biography by Cooper falls into the category of “definitive
biography”. In other words, at least in the case of “Woodrow Wilson”, Cooper
details the life of Wilson in numbing detail. This is a pity because in certain
sections (especially the prolog, Chapters 8, 16, and 21-23) his attention to detail
coupled with his analysis can be profoundly enlightening and the strongest
aspects of this book. But at 702 pages, there are clearly sections that would
benefit by some judicial pruning. That being said, Cooper’s excellent summary
of Wilson’s achievements and various aspects of uniqueness as outlined in the
prolog are worth reading as a standalone introduction to Wilson. Additionally,
Cooper’s summation and analysis of the similarities and differences between
Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt in Chapter 8 after the 1912 election is possibly
the pinnacle of the book (at least in my opinion). Cooper does nearly as well
in summarizing the election of 1916 in Chapter 16 and the endless battles that
Wilson performed with respect to the League of Nations (as outlined in Chapters
21-23) are other major points in the book.
Woodrow Wilson was born 1856 and raised by his Presbyterian
minister/father in the South. His father and the region Wilson grew up played
major influences on the nature of Wilson the man and Wilson the politician. In
his early adult life Wilson was trained in the law, but this was to be the one
area of expertise where Wilson proved at the beginning of this professional
career and much later at the end of that career where he would largely be a
failure. Deciding that the law was not his love (far from it, actually), Wilson
turned his attention to scholarship. He was heavily influenced by Walter
Bagehot’s description of parliamentarianism. Thus, he chose to begin his scholarly
career by writing on the topic of constitutional government versus
parliamentarian styles (most especially the British system) in a book that
remains in print to this day, “Congressional Government” (1885). Wilson’s
devotion to the concept of an executive that could be removed by a vote of no
confidence would guide his political thinking as he neared the end of his first
presidential terms in 1916, and then again as his second term neared its conclusion
in 1920.
Using his rising notoriety as a scholar, Wilson obtained
various positions as a University lecturer while he finished his Ph.D. After
several positions of increasing academic stature, he eventually found a professorial
position at Princeton. Cooper spends a considerable amount of time detailing
Wilson’s rise from Professor to the Presidency of that college and of the
various battles he engaged in as he strove to change Princeton’s reputation of
a school for the lazy rich into an academic institution capable of challenging
Harvard and Yale for scholarly rigor. As he neared the end of this time at
Princeton, Wilson found himself in a battle over the graduate school that
involved politics that were so severe; Wilson felt he was well prepared for
life in the world of non-academic politics. That next step was the Governorship
of New Jersey. While he held this position for only two years (he progressed directly
to the US presidency after those two years), Wilson spent considerable time and
energy fighting the political machines that then ran the governments to be
found in New York and New Jersey. More significantly, Wilson began his
conversion from a staunch conservative to a vigorous Progressive.
His anti-machine actions and various attempts to pass Progressive
acts while Governor of New Jersey, brought Wilson into contact with both
Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft. Despite the fact that they were both
Republicans and held very different attitudes towards regulation of the various
Trusts, both beheld Wilson and his views with some fondness; at this point in
time they beheld him with fondness, their views would most definitely change by
the election of 1912 when all three would run against one another for the US
Presidency. Roosevelt would go to his death despising Wilson and his foreign
policies, while Taft would in fact come full circle to re-embrace Wilson and
those very same policies, at least as they pertained to the League of Nations.
The election of 1912 when Taft and Roosevelt split the Republican ticket to
lose to Wilson and the Democrats would mark the beginning of one of the most
significant periods in US history with respect to legislation.
During Wilson’s first four years, when he would hold
Congress in session for 18 months (to this day the longest ever), Wilson and
congress passed the Federal Reserve Act, the FTC act, the Clayton Anti-Trust
Act, the Revenue Act (re-establishing an income tax and reducing the Tariff),
and the Adamson Act (creating an 8 hour workday); this era would be the most
active and progressive era in US history short of the years under the second
Roosevelt and those under Lyndon Johnson. Other notable events during this
first term would be Wilson’s re-institution of the State of the Union address
(not used since 1801) and the Mexican insurrection in 1913 lead by V. Huerta; an
insurrection that would pit the US against Huerta and his erstwhile opponents,
the Constitutionalists led by V. Carranza. Then as now, the US found itself in
the unenviable position of deciding on whether the US should engage in nation
building. Wilson did authorize a military action in Vera Cruz after a provoking
incident by the Mexicans. Did our invasion of Vera Cruz which resulted in the
deaths of 19 American servicemen and 126 Mexicans (many of them adolescents
from a local military academy) accomplish anything beyond alienating both sides
in the Mexican civil war; do I really need to answer this question? There were
some post-invasion events of note: Pancho Villa would later invade New Mexico
in an attempt to draw the Americans into a more prolonged war, General John
Pershing would chase Villa (never catching him), but would establish Pershing’s
credentials as the commanding US general for the pending World War I, and
Wilson would gain a campaign slogan – “he kept us out of war”. The irony of
that campaign slogan would soon be made clear in WWI.
And it is WWI that is at the heart of Wilson’s legacy, not
his progressive policies, not his political battles (though the League of
Nations battle with Lodge is important), not his political beliefs (those his
moral beliefs are critical); no it is his passionate and stubborn insistence on
his vision of a world at peace that is the hallmark of Wilson’s legacy. Wilson
believed that the horrors of war, most especially those of WWI where over 17
million people lost their lives (ca. 116,000 of them American combat deaths)
was a human institution that had to be tamed and controlled. He felt that failing
to do so would result within one generation a new war, one more terrible that
the last would come to be; it was not his only incredible example of prescience.
Wilson’s tool for preventing such a war was to create the League of Nations and
to tie its formation to the peace treaty with Germany and the other Central
Powers. Modern arguments against what Wilson hoped to accomplish with the
League (and I would be one to use such arguments) would include that he was at
best hopelessly idealistic that the signatories to the League document would
fulfill their duties and obligations. Wilson’s contemporary opponents focused
on Article 10 of the League document. Lodge et. al. felt this article obligated
the US to respond to any request for military assistance anywhere in the world
in order to put down any instance of war or war-like behavior. That Lodge and
company felt this was an unwarranted intrusion on American sovereignty is
understandable. Wilson made his argument based on a moral basis, not a legal
one. He felt the US could always refuse on legal grounds any such request, but
would in all likelihood respond on a moral basis, acting always on the side
whereon the title of Right resided. That many felt Wilson stood on very firm
moral grounds was justifiably shown by him being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
in 1919 for his efforts on the League treaty.
Historians have investigated this era in infinite detail.
They argue (Cooper included) that Wilson missed many opportunities to find a
compromise with Lodge, but he refused to do so and thus lost the League. The
question that remains to me but not to Cooper is why. Cooper is quick to blame
Wilson’s cabinet members for some of Wilson’s faults: his evident racism is
allowing his Post-Master General Albert Burleson to permit and promote segregation
within many government divisions, or his intolerance of dissenting political views
by allowing his Attorney General Alexander Palmer to exercise his various Red
Scares. Cooper also uses the severe ischemic stroke that Wilson suffered in
late 1919 to explain away his mood swings and his own intransigence with
respect to compromise on virtually any issue that arose in 1919-20, most
especially the League treaty. Cooper spends a great amount time detailing just
how forceful and single-minded Wilson was throughout his career; was he truly
especially stubborn at the end of his career due to the stroke, or because he
was isolated by his second wife, Edith following the stroke? This remains for
me an unanswered question.
The book’s style is very similar to that of a college level
text book, and for the reader to work his way through will require some
dedication. That being said, reading this book is worth the time and effort for
anyone interested in the era leading up to WWI. The contrast and similarities between
TR and Wilson are the highlight of the book, and would be a great book in
itself. The weakness of the book, if I were to choose one, is a weakness often
found in biographies. The author often becomes enraptured with their subject.
It seems at times as if Cooper does not use as un-jaundiced an eye as he should
when discussing Wilson’s only barely latent racism and intolerance for dissenting
views. This latter part is another potential rich vein to survey as regards
Wilson. He was most tolerant with respect to allowing his cabinet members to
run their department with little to no oversight from Wilson, but on the other
hand, once Wilson staked out a position, especially a public position, he like
TR was far from liberal in terms of hearing any truth in those opposing views.
By the end of his fight for the League, it was strictly Wilson’s way, or you’re
wrong. In the final analysis, Wilson’s internationalism, his moral fundamentals
and his vision for world peace are hard to argue with as goals, but as always
the devil is in the details; and while the US did finally drop the shroud of
isolationism in WWII, the details to achieve world peace eluded Wilson as they continue
to do so to 21st century America.
No comments:
Post a Comment