Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on American Exceptionalism
Essay on American Exceptionalism
Essay on American Exceptionalism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on American Exceptionalism
President Wilson, those in his administration and other Americans who believed in the supremacy of democracy might’ve thought it was the best form of government for others around the world simply because they were arrogant, in denial, believed heavily in the idea of American Exceptionalism and were idealists.
I don’t think that Wilson and those like him honestly thought that true democracy was a great idea for everyone mainly because the people who were advocating for it the hardest did not practice it at home. Wilson when urging for U.S. involvement in the war and even during his declaration of war against Germany asserts that the U.S. is fighting to save Europe from German aggression and militarism and to make the world safe for democracy, but how does one make the world safe for democracy to continue spreading when the U.S. isn’t even practicing the democracy it wants to see around the world? I think this contradiction is where Wilson and his supporters are in denial. It wasn’t simply
…show more content…
Wilson, like any other ordinary American, was deeply patriotic so it was not that strange for him to believe that the way that his nation went about conducting itself on the world stage in comparison to other European nations that had had a history of fighting amongst themselves and attacking smaller or weaker nations in order to add them to their empires, would make it easier to convince those who had been under European control that American democracy was the best government for them after their new independence because the “people” would be the ones to rule and not a single family or party. It seems like besides creating more “democracies” in the world, this also would’ve strengthened the American economy as there would’ve been more capitalist -styled nations with a wide arrange of markets for the U.S. to trade
David Kennedy’s Over Here: The First World War and American Society demonstrates Americans connection to global society. President Wilson “called the newly elected 65th Congress into special session on April 2 to receive his war message.” Wilson’s message would impact America socially, economically, and politically; that would continue to influence America throughout the twentieth century. Wilson presented to Congress four proposals on how America was to wage war: a bold tax program, a compulsory draft of young men into the nation’s service, “for the enforced loyalty of all Americans in a cause to which many were indifferent or openly hostile, and, by implication, at least,” and the expansion of presidential powers.
Basing his diplomatic action in his very American democratic and Christian values, his intentions were misinterpreted by nations globally, as his basis of morality differed from the nations he attempted to deal with. Governments were taken over on Wilson’s basis of morality and those views were impressed and forced upon them. In addition, forced was resorted to, although on a much smaller scale than previously exercised. Wilson’s brief instance in which Mexico was not recognized as a country displayed the gap between his moral foreign policy and actual foreign necessary for global relations. All in all, Wilson gained a “preachy” reputation that was not well received, and followed him into the drafting of the Treaty of
The United States has a long history of great leaders who, collectively, have possessed an even wider range of religious and political convictions. Perhaps not unexpectedly, their beliefs have often been in conflict with one another, both during coinciding eras, as well as over compared generations. The individual philosophies of William Jennings Bryan, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, with regard to America’s roles in world affairs and foreign diplomacy; are both varied and conflicted. Despite those conflicts however, each leader has left his own legacy behind, in terms of how the U.S. continues to engage in world affairs today.
Throughout the 20th century, successive presidents pursued foreign policy in different ways but with one objective and that is to make America the most powerful nation on earth. Despite the challenges of each administration during this century, presidents found a way to put American at the frontline as the undisputed super power. President Taft pursued an aggressive foreign policy by introducing dollar diplomacy which was meant to encourage U.S. investments in the Latin America and the Caribbean. He used government officials to promote this policy in hope that it will create markets for American products in the region. President Wilson made a promise to the American people that he will focus on domestic policy agenda and rarely will his administration
Between 1895 and 1920, the years in which William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft, and Woodrow Wilson reigned in the presidents, the United States struggled for not only justice at home but abroad as well. During this period policies such as Roosevelt’s Big Stick diplomacy, William Taft’s Dollar diplomacy, and Woodrow Wilson’s Moral diplomacy were all used in foreign affairs in hopes of benefit for all involved. However, it would be appropriate to say that self-interest was the most important driving factor for American policy and can be exemplified through economic, social, and political relations.
...n and defeated, Wilson believed firmly that his vision of America leading a world community of nations would eventually be embraced by the American people. Twenty-five years later, the United Nations built its headquarters in New York, a tangible symbol of the bipartisan support that Wilsonian ideals had gained after a second world war. But Wilson's legacy was not confined to foreign policy. His progressive domestic programs helped stabilize and humanize a huge industrial system, and his success in making the presidency the intellectual and political leader of the American government enabled the United States to deal effectively with the challenges and threats of the modern world. But don't forget the credit of Roosevelt's "New Imperialism", it became the hallmark of American foreign policy in the new century, positioning America as the leader of the western alliance.
When World War I broke out in Europe, Woodrow Wilson announced that the United States would stay out of European affairs and remain neutral. Wilson was aware that the United States had no interest in the matters that did not directly affect the interests of American citizens. He hoped that the United States would remain neutral and continue to trade with warring nations. The American view of neutrality meant we were entitled to safely and freely trade with either side at war as long as it was out in the open seas. The United States hoped to stay out of the way because war was viewed as wasteful, irrational, and immoral.
Woodrow Wilson was the 28th President of the United States and held the office from 1913-1921. He became known as “the Crusader” due to his foreign policy theory that America should be a beacon of liberty and aggressively pursue the spread of democracy throughout the world. His policy would enable America to prosper economically and develop an international security community through the promotion of democracy in other nations. While former Secretary of State Kissinger writes in his book Diplomacy that 20th century American foreign policy has been driven by Wilsonian idealism, an analysis of 21st century US foreign policy reveals that, in fact, US foreign policy has been influenced by ideals that can be characterized as Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, and Jacksonian as well.
Link’s book was published in 1979 and was written based upon privet manuscript collections, government archives from the U.S, Brittan, France and Germany, as well as newspapers. Link also reaches from monographs, biographies, and articles from numerous colleagues. (Link.pg 129) Each of these sources are solid and reliable sources, and were well used to put together a book packed with information on Woodrow Wilson’s life. Link uses many firsthand accounts from Wilson himself, but seems almost suspicious of accounts that were not presented first hand. Though Link is extremely selective in what he chose to present, the book clearly presents these facts, but has a very bias opinion of Wilson as discussed earlier. Link’s evidence, though selective, fits nicely in the monograph and makes the aspects of Wilson that he does cover clear and easy to read
The progressive era was a period of social activism and political reform in the United States. The political climate was ripe for reform and America was seeking leaders who could provide a new, more beneficial direction. Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were two of the most renowned presidents of this era. One kindred goal of both of these presidents was to monitor and rectify large trust and monopolies in the U.S. Despite the fact that Wilson and Roosevelt’s domestic policies were correlative of each other, their foreign policies were very different from one another. Roosevelt tended to become more involved with foreign events. On the other hand, Wilson favored remaining impartial in foreign affairs. Wilson didn’t want to become entangled in World War 1 until the United States had been directly stricken.
...essives, they still recognized the utility of local government. In that sense, the Wilsonian system was the most integrated. The political parties were broad organizations, spanning from local to national politics and hopefully fostering some sort of interconnectivity. Wilson acknowledged the danger and rigidity of a two-party system, but also realized that parties would balance a government's tendency to accumulate excessive amounts of power. The individual was able to engage himself in politics, but the functionality of the Federal Government was never impeded upon. Somehow, Wilson had nearly resolved the differences that had been plaguing American politics for the preceding century. He was the first president to recognize that he possessed two responsibilities as a party leader and policy-maker and that is why his system was so admirable, enduring and emulated.
Democracy in the United States became prominent in the early to mid 19th century. Andrew Jackson, the 7th president of the United States, was inaugurated in 1829 and was best known as the person who mainstreamed democracy in America. Because he came from a humble background, he was the “genuine common man.” (Foner, pg. 303) He claimed he recognized the needs of the people and spoke on behalf of the majority [farmers, laborers]. However, critics of Jackson and democracy called him “King Andrew I” because of his apparent abuse of presidential power [vetoing]. These critics believed he favored the majority so much that it violated the U.S. constitution, and they stated he was straying too far away from the plan originally set for the United States. Because of the extreme shift of power to the majority, the limiting of rights of the few [merchants, industrialists] and the abuse of power under Jackson’s democracy, the foundational documents set in the constitution was violated, and the work of the preceding presidents were all but lost.
The political culture that defines American politics shows that despite this compromise, America is still very much a democratic society. The very history of the country, a major contributor to the evolution of its political culture, shows a legacy of democracy that reaches from the Declaration of Independence through over two hundred years to today’s society. The formation of the country as a reaction to the tyrannical rule of a monarchy marks the first unique feature of America’s democratic political culture. It was this reactionary mindset that greatly affected many of the decisions over how to set up the new governmental system. A fear of simply creating a new, but just as tyrannic... ...
Wilson’s idealism further resulted in the Europeans nations having a challenge to pursue the fourteen elements, predominantly the issue of self-governance which prevailed throughout most of the points. In reading the article, one might quickly conclude that the Allies favored all aspects of self-governance without partiality and/or favor but presumably this was not the case, as there were a lot of biases to it. Self-governance was in favor of self-interest for the US; this is evident in point five which states that “all decisions regarding the colonies should be impartial”. Basically, this has in fact restricted self-governance for most nations, by interchanging the European rule in a more discrete manner. A few countries, for example Poland was allowed independence, whereas others were being denied, as a consequence they became mandates. The meat of the matter was that the fifth proposal allowed the Allies a greater advantage of controlling colonialism in particular Great Britain. This whole issue of self-governa...
Wilson makes a comparison between the government systems of America and Europe and his intentions were not necessarily for America to do the same as Europe, but for us to explore and research other governments and public administrations, so that we can analyze and master our own. It is questionable why other governments have been more successful with certain matters than our own here in America. Wilson expresses relevant concerns and arguments that government systems should be further studied and improved as, it is crucial and ultimately beneficial to the nation and it’s