Wilson's Moral Diplomacy: Impact On American Imperialism

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy was a shift in foreign policy from imperialism to a focus on moral values and democracy. Wilson's predecessor, William Howard Taft, had a policy of dollar diplomacy, which was based on economic support to improve bilateral ties. In contrast, Wilson's moral diplomacy aimed to curb imperialism and spread democracy by offering support only to countries with similar beliefs and democratic governments. This was based on the principle of self-determination, with Wilson believing that the US had a duty to spread democracy and promote peace. Wilson frequently intervened in Latin America, and his actions in Mexico, Haiti, and Nicaragua demonstrated his commitment to moral diplomacy, despite criticism that it led to military occupation and economic control. Wilson's vision for a new diplomacy and collective security through US leadership in organisations like the League of Nations marked a shift in American imperialism.

Explore related products

The Politics of Truth: A Diplomat's Memoir: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity

$19.6 $26.99

President Wilson And The Moral Aims Of The War (1918)

$25.66

Conservative Internationalism: Armed Diplomacy under Jefferson, Polk, Truman, and Reagan

$18.06 $35

The Tragedy of U.S. Foreign Policy: How America’s Civil Religion Betrayed the National Interest

$18.29 $33

Russia, the Near Abroad, and the West: Lessons from the Moldova-Transdniestria Conflict

$57

Reagan, Congress, and Human Rights (Human Rights in History)

$30.33 $48

Wilson's moral diplomacy was a shift from imperialism to a foreign policy based on moral values

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy represented a shift from imperialism to a foreign policy based on moral values. Wilson's predecessor, William Howard Taft, had pursued a policy of dollar diplomacy, which focused on providing economic support to improve bilateral ties. In contrast, Wilson's moral diplomacy aimed to curb imperialism and promote democracy and self-determination. This represented a significant departure from the strictly nationalist foreign policies of previous administrations, which had sought to expand American power and influence abroad.

Wilson believed that democracy was essential to a nation's stability and prosperity and that the United States had a duty to spread these democratic ideals worldwide. He saw moral diplomacy as a way to promote democracy and peace, particularly in Latin America, which was under the influence of imperialism. Wilson frequently intervened in the affairs of Latin American countries, including Mexico, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Panama. He used economic and military pressure to support countries with democratic governments and to weaken non-democratic countries, which he saw as potential threats to the United States.

Wilson's moral diplomacy was based on the principle of self-determination, which he defined as "the moral right of people to choose their form of government and leaders by democratic elections." He believed that moral diplomacy would empower developing nations to become self-sustaining and democratic, rather than extending American power. This approach was in line with the concept of American exceptionalism, which holds that the United States has a unique world mission to spread liberty and democracy. Wilson's vision for collective security through US leadership in international organizations, like the League of Nations, appealed to the public.

However, critics viewed Wilson's moral diplomacy as a form of American exceptionalism, presuming that American values are universally applicable and superior to all other alternatives. They argued that Wilson's efforts to spread American values abroad were a continuation of imperialist policies, albeit under the guise of morality. Wilson's interventions in Latin America, for example, often led to military occupation and economic control, undermining the self-determination he claimed to promote.

Wilson's belief in American exceptionalism and its role in spreading democracy

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy was a significant shift in American foreign policy, which, until then, had been driven by imperialist interests. Wilson's approach was rooted in his belief in American exceptionalism and the idea that the United States had a duty to spread democracy and liberty worldwide.

Wilson's notion of American exceptionalism held that the United States was a nation set apart by its values and principles. He believed that the "force of America is the force of moral principle" and that the country had a "plain destiny [to] serve [rather than] subdue the world." This belief system, which can be traced back to Alexis de Tocqueville, who first described the United States as "exceptional" in the 1830s, shaped Wilson's foreign policy approach.

Wilson saw himself as a champion of democracy and believed that the United States had a responsibility to promote democracy and peace globally. He opposed imperialism and sought to curb its growth, especially in Latin America, which was under the influence of European imperial powers. Wilson's moral diplomacy aimed to support countries with democratic governments and economically disadvantage non-democratic countries. He frequently intervened in Latin American countries' affairs, including Mexico, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Panama, to promote his democratic ideals.

While Wilson's vision of spreading democracy through moral diplomacy was ambitious, it faced challenges and criticism. His idealism was not immediately adopted, and the world witnessed the rise of totalitarian and communist regimes instead of progressive democracies. Additionally, Wilson's interventions in Latin America have been criticized for leading to military occupation and economic control, undermining the principles of self-determination he claimed to promote. Nevertheless, Wilson's ideas about American exceptionalism and its role in spreading democracy have had a lasting impact on American foreign policy, influencing policymakers and presidents in the following decades.

Wilson's refusal to recognise Victoriano Huerta, the Mexican leader, due to his illegal seizure of power

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy was a shift in foreign policy from the previous administration's imperialist interests to a focus on moral values. Wilson believed that the United States had a duty to spread democracy and peace throughout the world, particularly in Latin America, which was under the influence of imperialism. This belief in American exceptionalism held that the United States was different from other countries because it had a specific world mission to spread liberty and democracy.

Wilson's refusal to recognize Victoriano Huerta, the Mexican leader, due to his illegal seizure of power, is a notable example of his moral diplomacy in action. When Wilson was inaugurated in March 1913, Mexico had been experiencing a series of revolutions since 1910. Victoriano Huerta had gained control of Mexico through a military coup, forcing former President Francisco I. Madero to resign and subsequently assassinating him. Wilson, believing that the Mexican people must be governed by a democratic administration, refused to recognize Huerta's presidency, despite pressure from American businessmen in Mexico and most foreign powers.

To limit Huerta's authority, Wilson imposed an arms embargo and invaded Veracruz, which many interpreted as a call for the Mexican president to resign. Wilson also refused to return weapons captured from federal troops who had surrendered to the US at the border, prompting Huerta to turn to Europe and Asia for arms purchases. In addition, Wilson sent journalist William Bayard Hale to Mexico to gather information about the situation and appointed John Lind as the new presidential agent in Mexico to negotiate a cease-fire and free and open elections in which Huerta would not participate.

Wilson's actions towards the Huerta regime demonstrated his commitment to moral diplomacy and his opposition to imperialism. By intervening in Mexico's political affairs, Wilson sought to promote democracy and curb the growth of imperialism in the region. However, it is important to note that Wilson's moral diplomacy often led to military occupation and economic control over the territories it aimed to support, which can be seen as a form of neo-imperialism.

Explore related products

How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States

$14.19 $23

Super Imperialism. The Economic Strategy of American Empire. Third Edition

$27.99 $34

American Empire: A Global History (America in the World)

$18.33 $27.95

American Exception: Empire and the Deep State

$20.99 $32.99

Culture and Imperialism

$12.41 $20

A True History of the United States: Indigenous Genocide, Racialized Slavery, Hyper-Capitalism, Militarist Imperialism and Other Overlooked Aspects of American Exceptionalism (Truth to Power)

$22.95

Wilson's intervention in the affairs of other countries, especially in Latin America

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy was a shift in foreign policy from imperialism to a focus on moral values. Wilson believed that the United States had a duty to spread democracy and liberty, and that this was the best system to promote peace and stability. This was in contrast to the policies of his predecessors, Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft, who pursued a strictly nationalist foreign policy and sought to expand the American empire.

Wilson frequently intervened in the affairs of other countries, especially in Latin America, to promote democracy. In 1913, Wilson stated: "I am going to teach the South American republics to elect good men". He intervened in Mexico in 1914, Haiti from 1915-1934, the Dominican Republic in 1916, Cuba in 1917, and Panama in 1918. In these countries, Wilson used military, economic, and political pressure to support the development of democratic systems and values. However, this often led to military occupation and economic control over these territories, their governments, and their markets. For example, in Haiti, American troops forced the Haitian legislature to choose Wilson's selected candidate as Haitian President. Similarly, in Nicaragua, American troops were used to select the president.

Wilson's moral diplomacy was also evident in his actions in Mexico. When Victoriano Huerta gained control of Mexico in 1913, Wilson refused to recognize him because he had illegally seized power and imposed a bloody authoritarian rule on the country. Wilson supported anti-Huerta forces in northern Mexico led by Venustiano Carranza. However, when American sailors were arrested by Mexican officials in Tampico in 1914, Wilson used the incident to justify ordering the US Navy to occupy the port city of Veracruz, which ultimately led to Huerta's downfall. Wilson then recognized Carranza as the de facto president of Mexico. However, when Carranza threatened to defend Mexico's mineral rights against American oil companies, Wilson turned to support rebel forces, including Pancho Villa, who attempted to attack the United States in retaliation.

In 1915, Wilson responded to the revolution in Haiti, which threatened American banking interests, by sending American marines to restore order. He did the same in the Dominican Republic in 1916, but the military occupations that followed failed to create the democratic states that were their stated objective. Wilson's insistence on democracy in Latin America undermined the promise of self-determination for these countries. Additionally, Wilson's administration maintained troops in Nicaragua and used them to influence the selection of the country's president.

Wilson's moral diplomacy was based on the idea of American exceptionalism, which holds that the United States is different from other countries and has a specific world mission to spread liberty and democracy. This belief stems from America's emergence from a revolution and the development of a unique American ideology based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism, and laissez-faire. Wilson's goal was to curb imperialism and promote democracy, but his actions often led to military and economic control over other countries, particularly in Latin America.

Wilson's aim to dismantle the imperial order and promote self-rule

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy was a shift in foreign policy from imperialism to a system of support for nations with beliefs analogous to those of the United States. This was based on the principle of self-determination, which Wilson described as "the moral right of people to choose their form of government and leaders by democratic elections".

Wilson's moral diplomacy aimed to dismantle the imperial order and promote self-rule. In his 1914 address on "The Meaning of Liberty", he alluded to America's potential to be "the light which will shine unto all generations and guide the feet of mankind to the goal of justice and liberty and peace". He believed that the United States had a duty to spread democracy and peace throughout the world. In his view, moral diplomacy empowered developing nations to become self-sustaining and democratic, rather than extending American power.

In his Fourteen Points speech on January 8, 1918, Wilson advocated for a "general association of nations" that would guarantee the "political independence and territorial integrity" of all nations, regardless of size. He declared that "national aspirations must be respected" and that people could only be governed "by their own consent". This stance was reiterated in his "Fourteen Points" speech delivered to Congress on January 8, 1918, in which he called for a "new diplomacy" that would open up colonial holdings to eventual self-rule and grant immediate independence to all European sections of the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires.

Wilson's moral diplomacy was also evident in his foreign policy actions. For example, he refused to recognize Victoriano Huerta, who had illegally seized power in Mexico in 1913, despite pressure from Americans with economic interests in the country. Wilson's interventions in Latin America, including Mexico, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Panama, were attempts to support democratic governments and promote self-rule. However, these interventions often led to military occupation and economic control, undermining the promise of self-determination.

Wilson's version of self-determination was not without criticism. Some scholars argue that his ideas were compatible with imperial rule and racial hierarchy. His actions, particularly in Haiti, where American troops forced the Haitian legislature to choose the US-selected president, contradicted his rhetoric of self-rule and democracy. Additionally, his refusal to admit Black students to Princeton University and his authorization of Jim Crow segregation policies as president reveal a racist ideology that influenced his diplomatic vision.

Frequently asked questions