a) What were the ideological results of Wilson’s proclamation of World War I as a “war to end all wars” and “a war to make the world safe for democracy?”
b) Was it necessary to suppress dissent in order to win the war?
c) Was the Treaty of Versailles a violation of Wilson’s high wartime ideals or the best that could have been achieved under the circumstances?
d) What was the fundamental reason America failed to join the League of Nations?
15 comments:
Was the Treaty of Versailles a violation of Wilson’s high wartime ideals or the best that could have been achieved under the circumstances?
The problem was that the Germans had no influence over the terms. The Treaty of Versailles was a vindictive Treaty which punished Germany harshly instead of helping it to recover from the war and resolve the problems which had instigated it. The Treaty was a DIKTAT, which meant they had to sign it or go back to war. In reality most Germans did not want to sign the Treaty or end the war. Thus, those that did were denounced as the "November Criminals" and people believed they had betrayed Germany. The ramifications of this were huge, since being blamed for the Treaty of Versailles agreement seriously weakened the Weimar Republic. In his speech on April 17th 1923, Hitler declared "this Republic was founded at the moment when Germany was humiliated" and that "the Treaty was made in order to [...] ruin the German nation".
Thus, the leading powers at the conference were more concerned with saving their own backs - by weakening Germany's military strength so that it could not invade them again, rather than helping Germany to resolve its issues. Therefore, the Treaty of Versailles wasn't the best, yet was a necessary act that could have been achieved under the circumstances.
B. Was it necessary to suppress dissent in order to win the war?
I think that suppressing dissent was necessary to win the war. Necessary because if discrimination toward German Americans had continued, war within the United States would have erupted also. With this being said, the United States would have been taking part in two wars, which would have destroyed them socially, as a world power, and economically. Allowing it to continue would have looked bad on our part, as we would have been divided during a war, instead of unionized. Dissent may have caused the German Americans to support Germany instead of America. Creating spies and sabotage against us. Therefore, putting an end to this allowed for some peace and a win for the Allies.
a) What were the ideological results of Wilson’s proclamation of World War I as a “war to end all wars” and “a war to make the world safe for democracy?”
Wilson wanted to put an end to all wars with war. Basically fighting fire with fire in hopes that it would make the world "safe for democracy". His excuse for fighting in war was that it would help create and shape international democracy, which as a result would remove fear of dictators and militarists. Wilson had now convinced the nation to support the war, which was a switch from the original platform of not supporting it. But after WW1, the United States went back to Isolationism and refused to get involved in World War II.
c) Was the Treaty of Versailles a violation of Wilson’s high wartime ideals or the best that could have been achieved under the circumstances?
I think the Treaty of Versailles was not a bad idea that could have came up. The Treaty of Versailles was forced upon Germany and only bebifitted the winners of the war. It caused a great burden and forced humiliation upon Germany which later left a resentment towards United States, France, Britian, etc. The Treaty also caused conflicts between that American immigrants. German-Americans felt the treaty was too harsh on Germany, Italian-Americans were upset that the treaty forced Italy to give up land captured during the war, and Irish-Americans were angered that Wilson spent so much time and effort in Europe, but refussed to support Irish independence.
D.) America most likely chose not to join the league of nations because they wanted to keep that isolationist position, and not interfere in any foreign affairs. They also felt betraye, because they made an agreement with Germany and they got more ships bombed in return. So they thought why join the enemy. Why not fight back? So that's what they did.
B.) Was it necessary to suppress dissent in order to win the war?
In my opinion, I believe suppressing dissent was necessary to win the war because passed the Espionage Act, which was basically a violation of civil rights because it came into play with freedom of speech. Lincoln considered it necessary- he had people arrested without trial, even Judges and Congressmen.
Last thing to support how suppressing dissent wins the war is generally, every speaking-culture considers the war as a fight for its life
The Treaty of Versailles was the best that could have been done under those circumstances. Nations were angry with each other and the ones that were power and land hungry (Germany and Italy) needed to be put in their place. It was a well deserved punishment for the Germans. However, a punitive peace treaty should have included the people being punished. I think the treaty was also too harsh
C. Was the Treaty of Versailles a violation of Wilson's high wartime ideals or the best that could have been achieved under the circumstances?
I believe that the Treaty of Versailles was not the best idea that could have come up at the time even under the circumstances. First of all, the Treaty of Versailles that was forced upon the loser (Germany) and only benefited the winners of the war. It caused a great burden and forced humiliation upon the Germany, which later left resentment towards those who are considered the winners (United States, France, Britain, etc.). The Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations also create a possibility of creating another world war with the entangling of alliances and perpetuating groups of countries having large stakes in the interest of other nations. The League of Nations would have a system where the nation would supply soldiers and weapons for battle, despite whether or not that nation would want to give up these resources. To allow other countries to decide our place in battle and in peace is constitutionally wrong. The Treaty of Versailles was not the best it could have been even under the circumstances that Wilson was under due to the issues it caused in America. The Treaty also caused conflicts between American immigrants. German-Americans felt the treaty was too harsh on Germany; Italian-Americans were upset that the treaty forced Italy to give up land captured during the war, and Irish-Americans were angered that Wilson spent so much time and effort in Europe, but refused to support Irish independence.
B. Was it necessary to suppress dissent in order to win the war?
Suppressing dissent was unnecessary in order to win the war. No matter who it is or what is happening, there will forever be supporters along with objectors. America is built on the principles of natural rights, which include the "Freedom of Speech". Suppressing dissent is an action that clearly contradicts that idea. Also, although suppressed dissent can be expressed physically and verbally, it will be extremely difficult to control and change people's internal thoughts.
C) I don't think the Treaty of Versailles was too harsh on Germany as a united nation; they Germans were punished for what they deserved. As for German-Americans social conditions were a bit discriminatory. They were harassed , murdered etc. all because of where they were born. Although the Treaty only helpedthe Allies who won the war. The losers, like Italy was forced to give their captured land away from the war to the Allies because unlike the Central Powers the Alloes had that extra lead way to do so.
A) the ideological results from Wilson's statement was that watt was inevitable. Making it"safe for democracy" was pathos he used to to make Americans believe tht this was a wear we could not ignore but it threaten their way of life, their precious democracy that most of the other European counties didn't have. those words made Americans feel obligated to protect thier republic, a their ancestors had done in the paSt & the possible spread of republic all around the world. Wilson made them believe that they were not joining the fight for selfish reason like the European countries, but for a just cause, the preservation & protection of democracy which allowed them to keep their American pride while joining the war.
A) Following a pledge not to sink passenger vessels in May 1916, Germany resumed unrestricted submarine warfare on February 1, 1917, provoking American entrance into the conflict. Wilson asked for a declaration of war on April 2; Congress complied four days later. The president quickly emerged as a skilled wartime leader by molding public opinion with such optimistic phrases as “a war to make the world safe for democracy” and “a war to end all wars.” In saying that WWI would be a war to end all wars we got support to enter the war. This idea also made the Americans think they were doing something really important by entering this war, not just helping democracy but the world
What was the fundamental reason America failed to join the League of Nations?
The fundamental reason America failed to join the League of America was because at the beginning of the war, America was an isolationist. With that in mind, ,despite America joining the war, joining the League of Nations could possibly draw them into future European conflicts.
Was it necessary to suppress dissent in order to win the war?
It wasn't necessary to suppress dissent in order to win war because each citizen have their own assumption or impression about the war. As Yun said, America is built upon the natural rights, so people have their right to express their own opinion. The Creel organization sent out an army of 75,000 men to deliver speeches in favor of the war. George Creel was created to sell the war to those people who were against it or to just gain support for it.
(did the wrong number)
a) What were the ideological results of Wilson’s proclamation of World War I as a “war to end all wars” and “a war to make the world safe for democracy?
Wilson used optimistic phrases such as "a war to end all wars" and "a war to make the world safe for democracy" to mold the public opinion. He believed that with America's industrial advancement made to possible to fight this war and that democracy would prevail without any tyranny. With that he stepped off the platform as an isolationist.
Post a Comment