This entire week we have watched videos on Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Roosevelt had a very strong excitement for the reforms for the countries and the democratic views. He believed that the rich made too much, while the poor didn't make enough money which then resulted in a social revolution. He promoted others including Taft because he thought that Taft would be just like him and continue to be together. He called for new nationalism and was always ashamed of his emotions. Wilson is a progressive also and a professor that had no experience. He seemed to speak a lot about democracy though he took the side of a progressive with was very concerning to others. He introduced the four major reform bills which are anti-corruption, election reform, regulate corporations and workmen's compensation and every single one of these bills were passed. We can definitely concluded that they both are progressive but Roosevelt is more of a progressive than Woodrow Wilson. Now even they were both progressive Wilson wanted to break them all up while Roosevelt wanted to keep them together but regulate them.
I agree with you that both men were definitely progressives. Roosevelt's "Square Deal" and Wilson's "New Freedom" were both very well known at their times and supported this. But why is Roosevelt more progressive than Woodrow Wilson? I believe it is because of Wilson's views about African Americans and women. His views were not progressive because they supported making no progress or even reversing progress (through segregation) for these groups, which is the opposite of progressive. He did not believe in equality for all.
ReplyDeleteWhen you say that Wilson "introduced the four major reform bills" which made people view him as progressive politician, I'm pretty sure this is incorrect, as Congress first proposed these bills before he actually enacted them into law. Also, in terms of corporate regulation, I do agree that Roosevelt had strongly supported the regulation of trusts rather than breaking them all apart, however Wilson never actually busted any trusts himself based on what I've found. It was Taft who was considered a trust buster for choosing to break all trusts apart no matter how positive they could be considered, whereas Wilson only tried to weaken trusts through enacting the Clayton Anti-trust Act into law. So overall, even though you do make a clear argument about Roosevelt and Wilson being progressive presidents, there are a few inconsistencies and errors with the facts you used.
ReplyDelete