Jump to content

Talk:Woodrow Wilson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Magraggae (talk | contribs) at 22:38, 16 July 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured article candidateWoodrow Wilson is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 19, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
January 30, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
May 15, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
June 15, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former featured article candidate

Template:Wikipedia CD selection

Introduction of Segregation

It strikes this reader that this article's introduction is rather hagiographic in that it fails to even make mention of that great stain on Wilson's presidency - his introduction of racial segregation into the federal government. Indeed, I have just noticed, rather ironically, that one of the articles cited in the introduction is 'Woodrow Wilson and Racial Segregation', yet no mention of the word appears in the body text. Cripipper (talk) 13:26, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are many other racist threads running through Wilson's career, such as his denying blacks admission to Princeton, his support of the film "Birth of a Nation" and Dixon, author of The Clansman, the novel the film was based on. See http://reason.com/archives/2002/12/18/dixiecrats-triumphant . The article as currently written seems to drastically underplay Wilson's racism. I'm not a Wilson scholar or historian, but clearly there seems to be an awful lot that's not documented in the Wikipedia article. Freond (talk) 07:27, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

there is a lot of misinformation and POV about Wilson and race. on Birth of a Nation, for example, Wilson was the first person to see the movie and he privately denounced it, saying that he had been set up by Dixon, an old college friend. Princeton, like the great majority of elite colleges, never admitted blacks. Wilson kept the same policy, but did not introduce it or change it. As for segregation of the federal government, that was permitted by the Supreme Court, and was not Wilson's idea, but rather the Southern cabinet members that he appointed. Wilson in fact reached out to blacks in the 1912 campaign, even though the great majority were Republicans, and he did make sure that they were drafted and given the same pay scale in the Army during the war. Rjensen (talk) 07:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to see this discussion. It's possible to present the facts and a nuanced evaluation if we avoid argumentative sources. I struggled with some similar issues regarding racism, antisemitism, and homophobia in the career of Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell. Mostly, instead of "racist threads", we need facts relating to how Wilson engaged on the issue of race. I'd consider the Reason article cited above a bad source, though a good place for a list of issues that require research. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 14:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a bit of whitewashing (pardon the pun) of Wilson's record on segregation. I don't think we can take the claim that Wilson endorsed "Birth of a Nation" seriously, as it was obviously a ploy to promote the movie. What should be of more interest is the extensive quoting from Wilson's History in the movie either endorsing the KKK, or at least showing sympathy for them. As far as segregation is concerned, the fact that the Supreme Court allowed it isn't the point. If the Supreme Court had ruled the Administration's attempt to "Jim Crow" the Federal Government illegal, would that have proved that Wilson was against racism? Hardly! The Court didn't MAKE Wilson introduce segregation, nor is talking about Southerners in his Cabinet being the drivers of the policy the point either. Wilson, after all, appointed those people to his Cabinet, and as President, he would have had to authorize such policies - which he would hardly have done if he opposed segregation. What next? That LBJ had no responsibility for sending combat troops to South Vietnam because McNamara was Defense Secretary? Whilst Wilson shouldn't be painted out as the embodiment of original sin because of this, there is no getting away from it either. For one thing it proves that progressivism and racism are not mutually exclusive thought patterns, particularly at that time.

I believe the articles main emphasis needs to be on Wilson's segregation policy as President, since that had military implications. As President Wilson was commander in chief of the Armed Forces and could enforce segregation by using the military. Wilson believed in the federal power to enforce segregation and was not a "states rights" President. The Nobel Peace Prize commission at that time may have endorsed Wilson's segregation policy, or refused to acknowledge, since he won the Nobel Peace Prize. Cmguy777 (talk) 16:24, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was Wilson in the KKK?

Actually, I've heard that both Wilson and Calvin Coolidge were members of the Ku Klux Klan (the Klan had millions of members at this time and was considered more of a fraternal organization like today's service clubs, and the Klan controlled several state legislatures so it's conceivable, but their membership rolls were secret). Warren G. Harding was supposed to have been our first black President (Harding even said one of his ancestors "may have jumped the fence"), thus predating Obama. If Wilson was in the KKK, that may explain his segregationist stance. Does anybody have any hard evidence as per Wiki guidelines? This is certainly a subject worthy of some research. Remember, Lincoln said that he would preserve slavery if it kept the country together. These politicians are always sitting on the fence.71.157.182.68 (talk) 07:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)Sgt. Rock[reply]

No RS says Wilson joined the kkk--he was an invalid out of the White House at the time. Rjensen (talk) 15:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original Klan was effectively destroyed by Federal troops acting under President Grant's orders in the early 1870's. The "Second Klan" wasn't formed until 1915 by which time Wilson was already President, so it is highly unlikely he was ever a member as he would have been underage for the first Klan, and the President when the 2nd formed. Also I would point out that you do not need to be a member of the KKK to be a racist! You don't need to be white either! Wilson was a white southerner of his time, and segregationist views, negative connotations of the Reconstruction Era (and consequent sympathies with the KKK and the other groups that opposed it) were widely held by southerners (and many northerners too). Obviously he believed in Segregation. It's one thing to not act against established Jim Crow laws in the South, but quite another to bring in segregation into the Federal Government - as he did. I would suggest that he's views were conventionally racist by the standards of his time and society. I think he is evidence that being "progressive" and being "anti-racist" are not synonymous, and certainly that you cannot claim that all racists are conservative, or uneducated and ignorant (Wilson was certainly neither).

Wilson was a federal segregationist having used his power as President to enforce segregation in Washington D.C. Although not a member of any racist group, possibly there were none to join at the time, however, his segregation policy was popular in the South. Wilson was anti-progressive in terms of race relations. Cmguy777 (talk) 18:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nobel Prize/Time Magazine cover succession boxes

If being on the cover of Time qualifies as an award/honor worthy of a succession box, then so must winning the Nobel Peace Prize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.205.149.37 (talk) 03:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

misuse of quote

I read this recent addition: When he was asked, in 1914, "can't you let anything alone?" he answered: "I let everything alone that you can show me is not itself moving in the wrong direction, but I am not going to let those things alone that I see are going down-hill."

In fact Wilson said in a 1914 speech that he had once been asked this during his college years and had given this answer. The speech is here. And the context is not about his desire to tinker with the economy and society. His point is that leaving things alone doesn't leave things static, that you have to attend to things because otherwise they will deteriorate on their own: "There isn't anything in this world that will not change if you absolutely let it alone, and therefore you have constantly to be attending to it to see that it is being taken care of in the right way and that, if it is part of the motive force of the world, it is moving in the right direction." Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 15:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Bias

In some parts there are hints of bias that the author liked Woodrow Wilson. Particularly in the first and last few paragraphs. I don't have the time to revise certain areas of this page. Maybe one of you could go and remove any hints of bias? This isn't a debating website its a website of facts presented in an easy to read fashion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.192.230 (talk) 23:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I didn't make any change because I do not want to screw this up but I have a hard time believing that the following elements are true:

-Thomas Woodrow Wilson (December 28, 1994 – February 3, 2008) -28th President of the United States In office March 4, 1994 – March 4, 2011 -13th President of Princeton University In office 1994–2011 Preceded by Francis Patton Succeeded by John Stewart (Acting)

Especially considering that: Born December 28, 1856 Staunton, Virginia, U.S. Died February 3, 1924 (aged 67) Washington, D.C., U.S.

For those of you in the United States that care about your country's history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hsibo047 (talkcontribs) 22:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anyway to have this article proteted to keep this from happening? This is an important person and should be treated as such.P0PP4B34R732 (talk) 22:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hegel

Not a SINGLE MENTION of Hegel's influence on Wilson to be found in the entire article.

Wikipedians, you fail us miserably as always. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.187.8.149 (talk) 02:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you be bold and add it yourself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juggalo1010 (talkcontribs) 17:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not many historians think Hegel had a direct influence--only Ronald J. Pestritto makes that argument. Was Wilson a Hegelian in the 1880s? keep in mind that he was a conservative at that point, not a "liberal" or "progressive". By 1910 there was little Hegelianism left as Wilson gave up his conservatism and became a progressive; like most intellectuals by 1910, was more aligned with pragmatism. Rjensen (talk) 06:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of racial view point Wilson was a Virginia conservative and his segregation policy never changed. Wilson, like Jefferson, held enlightenment ideals, but this did not apply to race, particularly to African Americans. Cmguy777 (talk) 18:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Depression of the 1920's

This Wiki article fails to even mention the depression of 1920. It doesnt speak on the government intervention which made things worse. Warren G Harding brought America out of this Wilson depression, by limiting govt involvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.183.246.114 (talk) 03:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

there was indeed a sharp short cyclical recession in late 1920- summer 1921 but Wilson was not himself involved (he was an invalid) -- nor was Harding--the recession ended itself by summer/ fall 1921. Rjensen (talk) 03:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Military Intervention in Latin America

We need a section on this. Juggalo1010 (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incapacity

Does the article address the incapacity issue adequately? Who was running the Presidency? Was Wilson's wife, Edith, making all the decisions for Wilson? Cmguy777 (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Southerner?

I find "Wilson was the first Southerner in the White House since 1869". It occurs to me that Andrew Johnson, who LEFT OFFICE March 4, 1869, was a Southerner. But Wilson was from New Jersey when he became president (although he ORIGINALLY was from Virginia). So maybe qualify by saying "Wilson (as a native of Virginia) was ..."? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 21:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Attempt for third presidential term

The article about the 22nd amendment of the constitution mentions the following: "Wilson himself tried to get a third term in 1920, by deadlocking the convention. Wilson deliberately blocked the nomination of his Secretary of the Treasury and son-in-law, William Gibbs McAdoo." Nothing about this is mentioned in the article about Wilson. magraggae 00:38, 17 July 2012 (CET)