Woodrow Wilson/George W. Bush: same coin different sides

Great Debates
1

Last week PBS had a biography series on Woodrow Wilson and I was struck by the similarities between him and George W. Yet the differences were enlightening too. I’m a strong believer in if you don’t study history, you’re doomed to repeat it. Plus, I also believe history progresses in cycles (woohoo The Fourth Turning and Toynbee!) What can we learn from Wilson’s presidency that could enlighten us now?
Wilson:

  • Born in 1856 Virginia to a pious Presbyterian household.
  • Dyslexic
  • Attended Princeton, UVA and Johns Hopkins.
  • Successful professor and scholar
  • Democrat
  • **Governor of New Jersey on a progressive platform.
  • Elected president in 1912 by only 42% of the popular vote.
  • Believed God had given him the position of President.**
  • Sent miltary intervention to revolution-torn Mexico.
  • Vigorous legislator: Underwood Act (lower tariffs and graduated federal income tax, Federal Reserve Act, established Federal Trade Commission, Clayton Anti-trust, and several labor laws.
    -Democrat majority of House and Senate.
  • Due to his childhood experience from the Civil War, he worked hard to keep America out of WWI. American public didn’t want involvement either.
    -** The sudden sinking of the Lusitania and murder of 128 Americans changed the national mood towards war.**
  • Basically abandoned his Progessive base. Ignored women’s suffrage and civil rights.
  • Narrowly won a second term as President.
    -The Zimmermann telegraph was intercepted. In which Germany fully supported Mexico’s conquest of Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico.
  • Wilson asks Congress for a declaration of war.
  • Passed Treason measures where war protestors could be arrested for speaking out against the war.
  • Left all WWI decisions to the military
  • Crafted the 14 points which included the League of Nations with the belief that nations working together can prevent wars.
  • Germany surrendered with the understanding that the 14 points would be the basis of surrender terms. France and England didn’t agree. Wilson and Germany got screwed over by the Treaty of Versailles.
  • Congress voted against the Versailles Treaty and never joined the League of Nations.
  • Wilson suffered from stress , high blood pressure and eventually stroked out. His wife and physician kept this secret.
  • Wilson died Feb. 3, 1924.

Bush

  • Born July 6, 1946 in New Haven, CT. Grew up in Texas.
  • Rumored to be dyslexic.
  • Attended Yale and Harvard.
  • Drinking problem. Sober since 1986.
  • Born Episcopalian then converted to Methodist
  • Republican
  • Profession: businessman. Arbusto Energy, Harken Energy (accused of insider trading) and general partner of Texas rangers.
  • **Two-term governor of Texas. Gained a reputation for bi-partisan leadership.
  • Won the presidency by 5 electoral votes and lost the popular vote in 2000.
  • Believed God had given him the position of President.**
  • Supports stronger relationship with Latin America and Mexico. Withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol and ABM Treaty. Imposed tariffs on imported steel. Cut funding of UNFPA due to supposed forced abortions/sterilizations in China. 2 tax cuts in 4 years.
  • The surprise attacks against America on 9/11/01 and murder of 3,000 Americans changed the presidency’s and nation’s focus.
  • Republican majority of House and Senate.
  • Passage of the Patriot Act and creation of the Department of Homeland Security.
  • War with Afghanistan and Iraq. Distancing from the U.N
  • Poll numbers slipping: second term??

In a lot of ways, Wilson seems to be the complete opposite of Bush yet there are striking similarities (I bolded several that jumped out at me). It’s interesting that Wilson’s personal experience of the devastation of war, made him reluctant to drag the country into war while Bush has never experienced war and eagerly has dragged the country into two. Both men were fervently religious and felt God had called them.
What can Wilson’s legacy teach us to expect for the future? Well, he won his second term based on the slogan “He kept us out of war”. Bush’s could be “He kept us safe from further terrorist attacks”. Yeah, a Bush second term looks pretty plausible in that light. But that might light a fire under Democrat’s butts to push for less unilateral action and use of the U.N. (if we can draw a parallel between the League of Nation’s initial U.S. treatment and reverse it.) Man, there’s enough material here for a dissertation analysis! Discuss…

2

There’s certainly an odd similarity in their foreign-policy messianism, a common strain in our history that allows us to see ourselves as the solver of problems, the savior of other nations, the role model. But you’re absolutely right that Wilson was ultimately a man of peace, while Bush thinks aggressive war is the means to make an uncomfortable peace eventually a more solid one. Wilson was an internationalist before his time - the ultimate failure of the League of Nations was hardly *his * fault, but could certainly in part be attributed to his opposers. Bush by contrast is uninterested in any views or interests he does not already have.

You’d also be correct to note that Wilson’s approach was ultimately proved correct, although US domestic isolationism (also still with us) and his own health made him unable to achieve it. To say Bush’s approach will ultimately correct requires an extraordinary leap of faith, its factual basis being so threadbare.

3

I don’t see much of a parallel here. I think you’d do better with McKinley and the Maine blowing up.

I’m not too sure whether Wilson was good overall, but he was at least literate. Unlike a certain chimp in a big white cage…

4

I’ve long thought a more appropriate comparason would be to Warren Harding: a decent enough guy on a personal level, but out of his depth on the national stage and easily misled by his venal advisors. Both men had limited political experience at the time of their nomination (Harding had more than Bush) and it came as a surprise to political insiders that either was nominated for the nation’s highest office. At the time of their inauguration both were hailed for the breadth of experience in their cabinets, but in both cases that early confidence proved to be misguided. Both men, while personally wealthy, affected a common touch. Both rejected internationalism and slashed taxes. Harding, like Bush, tended to make speeches that were vague and sentimental, but light on policy specifics.

Harding was an extremely popular president while he was in office. It was only afterwards in the cold light of history that he was judged harshly. We’ll see how history judges GWB.

5

I don’t see much of a parallel here. I think you’d do better with McKinley and the Maine blowing up.

I’m not too sure whether Wilson was good overall, but he was at least literate. Unlike a certain chimp in a big white cage…