THEODORE ROOSEVELT & WOODROW WILSON.   Term Paper ID:19579 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Examines relationships of presidents to Progressive Era & differences in their attitudes toward Progessivism.... More...

5 Pages / 1125 Words 3 sources, 6 Citations, MLA Format $20.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Examines relationships of presidents to Progressive Era & differences in their attitudes toward Progessivism. Paper Introduction: This study will examine the relationships of Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to the Progressive Era and will compare the attitudes of the two administrations toward that era. The Progressive Movement, one of several progressive periods of the last century, extended from about 1900 to 1914 and represented a political and economic program which, in general, aimed at increasing the role of the people in government, and decreasing the role of establishment forces. The Progressive Movement was largely reform-based, but it is too simple to say that it was simply liberal or populist. Political considerations helped shape different areas of the progressive approach to reform, and there are clear differences between the progressivism of Roosevelt and Wilson. Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. " (Shannon, 1974, pp. . No one of his time better understood theoperations of American politics, and no one more shrewdly turned hisknowledge to the service of personal glory" (Wiebe, 1967, pp. 19 ). Chicago: Rand McNally, 1974.Wiebe, Robert. . As Hofstadter writes, "Wilson saw that Americans were living under 'anew organization of society,' in which the individual had been 'submerged'and human relations were pervasively impersonal. In fact, as Hofstadter writes, Wilson's progressivism was a productnot of his adverse view of big business per se, but of his view that"little business" did not have the chance to become big business in such aneconomic environment. and undermine freedom in general . The Progressive Era. . Wilson's hero, the risingindividual entrepreneur of classical economics and of earlier days ofdiffused property management, had been done in by just such impersonalorganization. . This study will examine the relationships of Presidents TheodoreRoosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to the Progressive Era and will compare theattitudes of the two administrations toward that era. Behind the flashing teeth and flailing armslay a keen-edged intelligence and an insatiable ambition for power withinthe framework of popular acclaim. 189-19 ). Indeed, in 1912Wilson . In fact, the era itself --- borne out of socioeconomic imperatives --- demanded that federal leadership turn toward a progressive form ofgovernment. . . Works CitedHofstadter, Richard. . The Progressive Movement, one of several progressive periods of thelast century, extended from about 19 to 1914 and represented a politicaland economic program which, in general, aimed at increasing the role of thepeople in government, and decreasing the role of establishment forces. The Progressive platform called for prohibition of child labor,workmen's compensation, minimum wages for women, and the establishment of afederal regulatory commission . Knopf,1974.Shannon, David. . The developments of the Industrial Age for decades hadadvanced the economic state of the nation and increased technologicalinnovations and power tenfold, but human beings had suffered because ofthose advancements. . It advocated mostof the popular extensions of political democracy: the initiative,referendum, and recall; the recall of judicial decisions but not of judges;nationwide presidential primaries; publicity about campaign contributions;and votes for women." Roosevelt "was himself lukewarm on the woman suffragequestion. In terms of their support of progressivepolicies, Roosevelt's passion and Wilson's capitalistic impulses happenedto coincide. Wilson, to the contrary, wasa friend to the little businessman who wanted to become a big businessman.Wilson came to favor regulation of big business not because he felt thatbig business was taking unfair advantage of the working man, but because hefelt that big business was taking unfair advantage of little business. 48). On the otherhand, their commitments were entirely different in terms of motivation,personally and politically. In Shannon, we read this progressive declaration from Wilson aimed atwhat he was claiming was false progressivism on the part of his opponentRoosevelt: " . Wilson, on the other hand, seems to have never pretended to be afriend of the working man, as did Roosevelt. If you will read [the Theodore Roosevelt 1912 platform]you will find that it rejects regulation of (monopolistic corporations] bylaw and proposes a commission which shall have the discretion to undertakewhat the plank calls 'constructive regulation.' As it handles thesegiants, so it shall shape its course. Rooseveltwas more the passionate man. . 5 ). This entrepreneurial hero --- referred to by Wilson as the'beginner,' the 'man with only a little capital,' the 'new entry' in therace, 'the man on the make' --- was the figure for whom he was particularlysolicitous" (Hofstadter, 1955, p. . it was no mistake that two essentially Progressive-oriented candidates were running for President in 1912. In his economicthought (Wilson) was an advocate of competition, but later he met and cameunder the influence of Louis D. The Search for Order, 1877-192 . Brandeis, a . TheProgressive Movement was largely reform-based, but it is too simple to saythat it was simply liberal or populist. 55). If Roosevelt was an advocate of progressive ideas and programsbecause of political expediency and a refusal to be pushed around by thebig business/big finance forces lined up against progressivism, Wilsonadhered more strictly to a particular political philosophy which wascertainly not opposed, passionately or dispassionately, to big business orbig finance. . Wilson was a far more well-reasoned man than Roosevelt, andhis progressivism reflected that fundamental reasonableness. More often than not, it was at this point thatRoosevelt's urge to power and the several national progressive movementsintersected. would destroy 'freeenterprise' . In other words, this Roosevelt passion for progressivism was actuallya matter of his rage at being confronted by opposition to his policies:"Soon after assuming office, Roosevelt set three interrelated goals: toestablish himself as the pre-eminent figure in the Republican party, toelevate the executive as the dominant force in national government, and tomake that government the most important single influence in nationalaffairs. declared (Roosevelt's program) . At almost every step he encountered the peculiar power of a fewcorporate and financial magnates, and he quickly marked these men as hisprimary opponents. The Age of Reform. Wiebe writes of the political ambition which lay behind theprogressive front of Roosevelt: "Countless reformers, mistaking vigor fordirectness, adored him . 223). reform lawyer whoadvocated a kind of regulated competition. His aim in moving toward a more regulation-orientedrole for government was not to punish big business, but rather to make itmore possible for the little man to thrive in business. It was not merelya matter of meeting Brandeis that led Wilson toward a more progressivepolicy toward big business and its regulation --- it was the era in whichhe governed, an era which demanded and required such a change. As Shannon writes, with respect to the Progressive platform ofRoosevelt, it "epitomized the era's middle-class reform. Wilson, more than Roosevelt, was committed to a political/economicphilosophy; he was, simply, more the capitalist than Roosevelt. . New York: Hill andWang, 1967.----------------------- 7 The Progressive Party of Roosevelt tried to throw all of the programsof previous progressive movements into one great pot, under the name of theparty, and Roosevelt undertook to be the banner-holder, although, asShannon notes, Roosevelt hardly agreed wholeheartedly with all the elementsof the program. Political considerations helpedshape different areas of the progressive approach to reform, and there areclear differences between the progressivism of Roosevelt and Wilson. . . The 1912 election pitted the two progressive candidates against oneanother, Wilson essentially the progressive Democrat and Roosevelt theprogressive Republican, although their attitudes toward progressivismitself were certainly contrasting. . In fact, in his campaigning in 1912, Wilson presented the moreprogressive approach which he did not at the time truly advocate, but whichhe would increasingly adhere to after his election. Wilson and Roosevelt, then, both advocated progressive approaches,particularly with regard to the regulation of big business. Roosevelt was the consummate politician whosaw the political winds, read them accurately, and aligned his politicalambition with the progressive trends in the country. Wiebe goes on to suggest that while Roosevelt was above all an astutepolitician who used progressivism to further his ambition and drive forpower, he did demonstrate passion in his support for progressive goals incertain circumstances --- namely, whenever he was confronted by theopposition to those progressive goals. As Shannon writes, "Wilson, in time and under pressure, slowlyapproached Roosevelt's position, but in 1912 he was quite opposed to such adesign for America (such as that proposed by Roosevelt). New York: Alfred A. That, gentlemen, is nothing morethan a legitimatized continuation of the present order of things with thealliance between the interests and the Government open instead of covered"(Shannon, 1974, p. . He recognized the historicalfact that industrial monopoly had developed during the era of governmentlaissez-faire, that from unbridled competition had come unbridled economicconcentration" (Shannon, 1974, p. Part of his leadership of the Progressive Party was duesimply to his political desire to gather behind the steam of allprogressive and reform-oriented forces in the nation. He was not apassionate progressive, but did display passion when he came up against thefoes of progressivism. To the degree that he found personal relevance in theirproposals, he joined the cause" (Wiebe, 1967, p. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.