To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Wilson, Woodrow, United States China.
Journal articles on the topic 'Wilson, Woodrow, United States China'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Wilson, Woodrow, United States China.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Mencel, Marian. "China Against the Decision of the Versailles Treaty – May 4 Movement. The State of China's International Environment and Changes in the System of International Relations in the Far East Region." Studia Gdańskie. Wizje i rzeczywistość XVII (May 1, 2021): 201–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0014.9105.
Full textAbstract:
Decisions made after World War I at the Paris Peace Conference had serious political consequences on a global scale. In Europe, new state entities disintegrated and created, the balance of power of the main po-wers changed, with the United States of America taking the first posi-tion. A bipolar system of international relations developed gradually. It reached its final form after World War II. Under the influence of the idealistic vision of the world of American President, Woodrow Wilson, the League of Nations was created. It was a universal international organization the main task of which was to ensure the "territorial integrity and political independence” of its members and to supervise the implementation of the provisions of the Versailles Treaty, regulating the global principles of international political and economic relations. They were expressed by W. Wilson in the so-called "14 points", announced in Congress on January 8, 1918. However, China was not among the beneficiaries of the "new world order" despite the fact that the Middle Kingdom participated in the war on the side of the Entente countries. The decisions made during the Paris conference were against China's raison d'état. For this reason, the country was still an economic base for strengthening its position as superpowers, especially Japan, which had been granted the rights to German concessions in China. The public protest resulted in the revolutionary May 4 Movement, which spread from Beijing to all major cities of the Republic of China, revealing the new face of Chinese society. The 100-year anniversary of these events gives rise to considerations aimed at determining the proper causes of the outbreak of the May 4 Movement and its impact on shaping internal social relations and changes occurring in the social and political space in China. The consi-derations presented in this lecture focused mainly on a synthetic appro-ach to the issue of changes occurring in the international environment, especially the policy of the powers towards China and phenomena obse-rved in Chinese society, resulting in the May 4 Movement. The material, published in subsequent volumes of "Studia Gdańskie. Wizje i rzeczywi-stość", is presented in four parts, due to the need to analyse a wide range of factors influencing the shaping of the social movement in China. In the first part, an attempt was made to indicate the conditions of the state of China's international environment and changes in the system of international relations in the Far East region in the period preceding the outbreak of World War I until its end. The changes observed in the Chinese political and economic system under the pressure of external factors and reactionary internal phenomena will be presented in the following part of the lecture. The third part will focus on the analysis of the phenomena occurring in Chinese society, especially in the context of the creation of civil society and the rejection of the Confucian tradition under the influence of liberal, socialist ideology and communism, of which the May 4 Movement was a consequence. The conclusion will involve an attempt to show the influence of the May 4 Movement on the socio-political phenomena seen during the rule of the Communist Party of China.
2
Roberts, Priscilla. "B. Morton (2008).Woodrow Wilson: United States." Diplomacy & Statecraft 23, no. 1 (March 2012): 182–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09592296.2012.651980.
Full text
3
KENNEDY, ROSS A. "Woodrow Wilson: United States - By Brian Morton." History 97, no. 326 (April 2012): 343–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-229x.2012.00554_35.x.
Full text
4
A. Turner, Henry, and Raimundo Xavier de Menezes. "Woodrow Wilson como Administrador." Revista do Serviço Público 75, no. 02 (January 31, 2020): 134–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.21874/rsp.v75i02.4284.
Full textAbstract:
Vinte e oito de dezembro de 1956 assinalou o centenário do nascimento deWoodrow Wilson , um dos presidentes mais complexos que até hoje nos governaram.Poucos contribuíram tão significativamente em campos tão variados,e apresentaram tal número de interessantes facetas em sua personalidade.W i l s o n , o sexto presidente da American Political Science Association, é conhecidocomo ilustre cientista político, em virtude de suas obras CongressionalGovernment, The State e Constitutional Government in the United States,além de numerosos ensaios sôbre o mesmo assunto. É tido como historiadorem atenção aos seus trabalhos History oí the American People e Division andReunion. Sua ação como Presidente da Universidade de Princeton bem comoas manifestações literárias sôbre temas educacionais granjearam-lhe fama deeducador. As reformas promovidas sob sua orientação, quando Governador deNew Jersey, distinguem-no como um dos Chefes de Executivo estaduais maisnotáveis, dentre os de sua geração.
5
Ambrosius, Lloyd E. "Woodrow Wilson, Alliances, and the League of Nations." Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 5, no. 2 (April 2006): 139–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s153778140000298x.
Full textAbstract:
People in the United States and other countries, if they know anything about Woodrow Wilson, identify this American president with the League of Nations. They regard his role in its creation as his major contribution to world history. Beyond this general consensus, however, there is considerable disagreement.
6
Kennedy, Ross A. "STRATEGIC CALCULATIONS IN WOODROW WILSON'S NEUTRALITY POLICY, 1914–1917." Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 17, no. 4 (September 26, 2018): 608–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537781418000269.
Full textAbstract:
This article analyzes Woodrow Wilson's view of the First World War's implications for U.S. national security and the way in which he related the balance of power between the belligerents at different points in time to his diplomatic objectives. It approaches this topic, which is a subject of much debate among historians, by comparing Wilson's view of the war from late 1914 to early 1915 with that of his secretary of state, William Jennings Bryan, and by examining how those perceptions shaped the response of the two leaders to the sinking of theLusitania. Bryan and Wilson both wanted the United States to stay out of the war, both wanted the United States to mediate an end to it, and both of them saw mediation as a doorway to reforming international politics. Unlike Bryan, however, Wilson saw Germany as a potential threat to the United States and paid close attention to the balance of power between the Allies and Central Powers; he specifically believed that the Allies were likely to win the war. These views led Wilson to reject Bryan's advice to de-escalate theLusitaniacrisis and to adopt a much more confrontational policy toward Germany, one of the most consequential decisions Wilson made in the neutrality period.
7
Thompson, J. A. "Woodrow Wilson and World War I: A Reappraisal." Journal of American Studies 19, no. 3 (December 1985): 325–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021875800015310.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson was the first American President to leave the Western Hemisphere during his period of office, and, as befitted him, the circumstances in which he did so were neither casual nor frivolous. He went to Europe in late 1918 to take part in the peace conference following a war that the United States had played a crucial part in bringing to a decisive end. His aim was to secure a peace that accorded with the proposals he had set out in his Fourteen Points address of January 1918 and in other speeches — a peace that would be based upon justice and thus secure consent, that would embody liberal principles(the self-determination of peoples as far as practicable, the prohibition of discriminatory trade barriers), and that would be maintained by a new international organization in which the United States, breaking its tradition of isolation, would take part — a league of nations that would provide a general guarantee of “political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.”The symbolism of this dramatic moment, with the American prophet coming to bring redemption to the Old World, imprinted on the minds of contemporaries an image of Wilson which has affected most subsequent historiography. Viewing events from Vienna, that special victim of the First World War, Sigmund Freud found “the figure of the American President, as it rose above the horizon of Europeans, from the first unsympathetic, and… this aversion increased in the course of years the more I learned about him and the more severely we suffered from the consequences of his intrusion into our destiny.”
8
Menger, Richard P., Christopher M. Storey, Bharat Guthikonda, Symeon Missios, Anil Nanda, and John M. Cooper. "Woodrow Wilson’s hidden stroke of 1919: the impact of patient-physician confidentiality on United States foreign policy." Neurosurgical Focus 39, no. 1 (July 2015): E6. http://dx.doi.org/10.3171/2015.4.focus1587.
Full textAbstract:
World War I catapulted the United States from traditional isolationism to international involvement in a major European conflict. Woodrow Wilson envisaged a permanent American imprint on democracy in world affairs through participation in the League of Nations. Amid these defining events, Wilson suffered a major ischemic stroke on October 2, 1919, which left him incapacitated. What was probably his fourth and most devastating stroke was diagnosed and treated by his friend and personal physician, Admiral Cary Grayson. Grayson, who had tremendous personal and professional loyalty to Wilson, kept the severity of the stroke hidden from Congress, the American people, and even the president himself. During a cabinet briefing, Grayson formally refused to sign a document of disability and was reluctant to address the subject of presidential succession. Wilson was essentially incapacitated and hemiplegic, yet he remained an active president and all messages were relayed directly through his wife, Edith. Patient-physician confidentiality superseded national security amid the backdrop of friendship and political power on the eve of a pivotal juncture in the history of American foreign policy. It was in part because of the absence of Woodrow Wilson’s vocal and unwavering support that the United States did not join the League of Nations and distanced itself from the international stage. The League of Nations would later prove powerless without American support and was unable to thwart the rise and advance of Adolf Hitler. Only after World War II did the United States assume its global leadership role and realize Wilson’s visionary, yet contentious, groundwork for a Pax Americana. The authors describe Woodrow Wilson’s stroke, the historical implications of his health decline, and its impact on United States foreign policy.
9
Eisenach, Eldon J. "Which Wilson Do We (Dis)Honor?" Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 758–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537592716001298.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
10
Hochschild, Jennifer. "Should APSA’s Most Prominent Award Continue to be Named after a Racist?" Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 760–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537592716001304.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
11
Jagmohan, Desmond. "In His Day: Awareness of Wilson’s Duplicity." Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 762–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537592716001316.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
12
Nunnally, Shayla C. "How We Remember (and Forget) in Our Public History." Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 764–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537592716001328.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
13
Strolovitch, Dara Z., and Chaya Y. Crowder. "Naming Rites for Naming Wrongs: What We Talk about When We Talk about Woodrow Wilson." Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 770–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s153759271600133x.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
14
Wilson, David C. "Righting Some of Wilson’s Wrongs." Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 776. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537592716001341.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
15
Pinderhughes, Dianne. "Education and Transparency: Changes in Campus Iconography." Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 766–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537592716002097.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
16
Shaw, Todd. "Transforming Silence into an Active, Present Awareness: What to do about Wilson’s Legacy." Perspectives on Politics 14, no. 3 (August 31, 2016): 768–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537592716002103.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson is the only American political scientist to have served as President of the United States. In the time between his political science Ph.D. (from Johns Hopkins, in 1886) and his tenure as president (1913–21), he also served as president of Princeton University (1902–10) and president of the American Political Science Association (1909–10). Wilson is one of the most revered figures in American political thought and in American political science. The Woodrow Wilson Award is perhaps APSA’s most distinguished award, given annually for the best book on government, politics, or international affairs published in the previous year, and sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation at Princeton University.Wilson has also recently become the subject of controversy, on the campus of Princeton University, and in the political culture more generally, in connection with racist statements that he made and the segregationist practices of his administration. A group of Princeton students associated with the “Black Lives Matter” movement has demanded that Wilson’s name be removed from two campus buildings, one of which is the famous Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (see Martha A. Sandweiss, “Woodrow Wilson, Princeton, and the Complex Landscape of Race,” http://www.thenation.com/article/woodrow-wilson-princeton-and-the-complex-landscape-of-race/). Many others have resisted this idea, noting that Wilson is indeed an important figure in the history of twentieth-century liberalism and Progressivism in the United States.A number of colleagues have contacted me suggesting that Perspectives ought to organize a symposium on the Wilson controversy. Although we do not regularly organize symposia around current events, given the valence of the controversy and its connection to issues we have featured in our journal (see especially the September 2015 issue on “The American Politics of Policing and Incarceration”), and given Wilson's importance in the history of our discipline, we have decided to make an exception in this case. We have thus invited a wide range of colleagues whose views on this issue will interest our readers to comment on this controversy. —Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor.
17
Bredovskis, Eriks. "Sketching America: German Depictions of the United States and Woodrow Wilson (1914–1918)." German Studies Review 42, no. 3 (2019): 469–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/gsr.2019.0077.
Full text
18
Arens, Olavi. "United States policy toward Estonia and the Baltic states 1918–1920 and 1989–1991 [Kokkuvõte: Ameerika Ühendriikide välispoliitika Eesti ja Balti riikide suhtes 1918–1920 ja 1989–1991]." Ajalooline Ajakiri. The Estonian Historical Journal, no. 3/4 (December 21, 2016): 347. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/aa.2016.3-4.02.
Full textAbstract:
The following paper deals with US policy toward the Baltic states at two different time periods (1918–20 and 1989–91) and by two very different presidents (Woodrow F. Wilson and George H. W. Bush). The first period represented the time that saw the emergence of the United States on the world stage. Woodrow Wilson seemingly advocated self-determination as was understood by a number of his advisers at the Peace Conference, but eventually decided to support the unity of Russia as part of an anti-Bolshevik policy. During the second period, George H. W. Bush negotiated a settlement to end another conflict, the Cold War. While self-determination of the Baltic states (on the basis of the US non-recognition policy) was not of prime importance for the US, it nevertheless was brought up at very summit meeting with Mikhail Gorbachev and came to be linked to the resolution of economic issues between the two major powers.
Ultimately the restoration of independence was decided by developments in the Soviet Union, but US policy made the Baltic question an international issue and helped resolve it peacefully.
19
Berg, Manfred. "“HE KEPT US OUT OF WAR!” A COUNTERFACTUAL LOOK AT AMERICAN HISTORY WITHOUT THE FIRST WORLD WAR." Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 16, no. 1 (January 2017): 2–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537781416000438.
Full textAbstract:
One hundred years after President Woodrow Wilson led Americans into the Great War, this essay ponders various counterfactual scenarios based on the assumption that the United States had not become a belligerent power in 1917. The methodological introduction makes a case for counterfactual analysis as a useful and indeed indispensable tool of historians. The second part demonstrates that contemporaries, including Wilson himself, did not consider American entry into the war a foregone conclusion. The third section looks at the possible consequences of continued American neutrality on the international position of the United States, while the fourth part focuses on the question which major domestic developments would have been unlikely had America remained neutral. Had the United States stayed out of the Great War, America's international role in the postwar world would not been very different from what it actually was in the 1920s, but the nation would have been spared the spasms of war hysteria that altered domestic politics.
20
Cullinane, Michael Patrick. "THEODORE ROOSEVELT IN THE EYES OF THE ALLIES." Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 15, no. 1 (January 2016): 80–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537781415000559.
Full textAbstract:
As Woodrow Wilson traveled across the Atlantic to negotiate the peace after World War I, Theodore Roosevelt died in Long Island. His passing launched a wave of commemoration in the United States that did not go unrivaled in Europe. Favorable tributes inundated the European press and coursed through the rhetoric of political speeches. This article examines the sentiment of Allied nations toward Roosevelt and argues that his posthumous image came to symbolize American intervention in the war and, subsequently, the reservations with the Treaty of Versailles, both endearing positions to the Allies that fueled tributes. Historians have long depicted Woodrow Wilson's arrival in Europe as the most celebrated reception of an American visitor, but Roosevelt's death and memory shared equal pomp in 1919 and endured long after Wilson departed. Observing this epochal moment in world history from the unique perspective of Roosevelt's passing extends the already intricate view of transnational relations.
21
Trani, Eugene P., and Donald E. Davis. "WOODROW WILSON AND THE ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR: A Hundred Years Later and Still Relevant." World Affairs 180, no. 4 (December 2017): 25–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0043820018762831.
Full textAbstract:
American-Russian relations have been troubled from Lenin to Putin, from Wilson to Trump. Woodrow Wilson insisted that no one power should dominate Europe. This detailed analysis shows that Wilson was the first “Cold War Warrior,” and his “quarantine” policy toward Russia was the precursor of the policy the United States has generally followed toward Russia since the end of World War II. Wilson tried to avoid taking sides in the Bolshevik Revolution but finally was drawn into it from relentless Allied pressure. Yet he kept intervention minimal. Afterward, he quarantined communism until FDR recognized Russia and, later, allied with Stalin against Hitler. Truman and his successors renewed “quarantine,” calling it “containment.” With the USSR’s collapse, the shape and stability of Wilson’s Europe reappeared. The West has preserved that Europe through the EU, NATO, and sanctions against Putin’s restoring a Soviet sphere. America should now be clear, as Wilson once was, in supporting European security.
22
Smith, Michael M. "CarrancistaPropaganda and the Print Media in the United States: An Overview of Institutions." Americas 52, no. 2 (October 1995): 155–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1008260.
Full textAbstract:
Despite the voluminous body of historical literature devoted to the Mexican Revolution (1910-1920) and U.S.-Mexican diplomatic relations, few works address the subject of revolutionary propaganda. During this tumultuous era, however, factional leaders recognized the importance of justifying their movement, publicizing their activities, and cultivating favorable public opinion for their cause, particularly in the United States. In this regard, Venustiano Carranza was especially energetic. From the inception of his Constitutionalist revolution, Carranza and his adherents persistently attempted to exploit the press to generate support among Mexican expatriates, protect Mexican sovereignty, secure recognition from the administration of Woodrow Wilson, gain the acquiescence–if not the blessing–of key sectors of the North American public for his Constitutionalist program, enhance his personal image, and defend his movement against the criticism and intrigues of his enemies–both Mexican and North American.
23
Papian, Ara. "The Arbitral Award on Turkish-Armenian Boundary by Woodrow Wilson (Historical Background, Legal Aspects, and International Dimensions)." Iran and the Caucasus 11, no. 2 (2007): 255–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157338407x265487.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe paper is a complex study of the history of the involvement of Woodrow Wilson (the 28th President of the USA, 1913-1921), in the fate of Armenian people after WWI and the Republic Armenia (1918-1920), especially in determining the boundary between Armenia and Turkey. It presents an analysis of Wilson's Arbitral Award according to the international law and the United Nation's official methodology. The article focuses on the historical background, legal aspects and political implications of Wilson's Arbitral Award (November 22, 1920), officially titled: Decision of the President of the United States of America respecting the Frontier between Turkey and Armenia, Access for Armenia to the Sea, and the Demilitarization of Turkish Territory adjacent to the Armenian Frontier. The Arbitration's significance goes beyond Armenian-Turkish and Armenian-US relations. Border conflicts are still relevant issues on the regional and international agenda. American involvement in the Middle East is one of the key components of the United States' present foreign policy. An accurate and a broad understanding of the nuances of the extremely complex legal situation in the region and the bases for the behaviour of the players can be vital for the security, political and economic interests of the region. Moreover, due to the active participation of the United States in the Armenian-Turkish relations through Wilson's Arbitration, the Arbitral Award becomes a logical starting point for a stronger historical, political, and legal understanding of the conflict-prone region. The article also contributes to the better understanding of President Wilson's policy towards the Middle East during the dramatic period of 1917-1921 and its possible consequences for critical relationships in the region today.
24
Christison, Kathleen. "U.S. Policy and the Palestinians: Bound by a Frame of Reference." Journal of Palestine Studies 26, no. 4 (1997): 46–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2537906.
Full textAbstract:
From the era of Woodrow Wilson, when the United States committed itself to support the Zionist program in Palestine, American public opinion on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been formed and policy has been made from a restricted, generally Israel-centered vantage point. This frame of reference has excluded the Palestinian perspective and, in the struggle for Palestine that culminated in the Palestinians' dispossession in 1948, has made it impossible for U.S. policymakers to take this seminal episode into account in shaping Middle East policy.
25
Simons, Thomas W. "Dennis Kux, The United States and Pakistan, 1947–2000: Disenchanted Allies. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2001." Journal of Cold War Studies 6, no. 4 (October 2004): 166–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jcws.2004.6.4.166.
Full text
26
FARBER, DAVID. "THINKING AND NOT THINKING ABOUT RACE IN THE UNITED STATES." Modern Intellectual History 2, no. 3 (October 10, 2005): 433–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s147924430500051x.
Full textAbstract:
John Skrentny, The Minority Rights Revolution (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002)Richard King, Race, Culture and the Intellectuals, 1940–1970 (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Press, 2004)Since June 1964, all three branches of the federal government have supported the goal of racial justice in the United States. John Skrentny, in The Minority Rights Revolution, explains how that goal and related ones have been implemented over the last sixty years. He argues that key policy developments since that time were driven less by mass movements and much more by elite “meaning entrepreneurs.” Well before the 1964 Civil Rights Act was made law, in the immediate post-World War II years, a bevy of transatlantic intellectuals responded to Nazi race policy by seeking a universalist vision that would unite humanity. Richard King, in Race, Culture and the Intellectuals, explores how intellectuals pursued that anti-racist universalist vision and then how African and African-American intellectuals in the 1960s, in particular, rejected universalism and began, instead, to pursue racial justice through cultural particularism. King's traditional intellectual history, when combined with Skrentny's sociological analysis of how elites managed ideas to pursue specific policies, reveals how American society, in pursuit of racial justice, moved from the simple stated ideals of the 1964 Civil Rights Act—equal opportunity and access—to the complexities of affirmative action and an embrace of “diversity” in American life.
27
Doig, Jameson W., and Mary Durfee. "Cross-border Hostilities and Regional Planning in the United States and Canada: What Role for Expertise, Insulated from the “Hurry and Strife of Politics”?1." Journal of Planning History 18, no. 4 (April 2, 2018): 239–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1538513218763961.
Full textAbstract:
Woodrow Wilson argued in a celebrated essay that governmental agencies could be insulated from political pressures, so regional planners and other experts could identify social problems systematically and implement desirable solutions efficiently. That goal is unrealistic under most circumstances. But are there conditions under which Wilson’s aspiration might be achieved? We argue that public agencies with divided “sovereignty” may, under certain conditions, insulate experts who can meet these goals. We specify factors that led to the creation of two such agencies and the variables that have permitted them to achieve significant success, but that have led, at times, to disappointment.
28
Quigley, John. "Leon Trotsky and the Prohibition against Secret Treaties." Journal of the History of International Law 19, no. 2 (May 16, 2017): 246–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718050-19231017.
Full textAbstract:
A requirement was written into the Covenant of the League of Nations that treaties be communicated to the League for publication. This innovation is widely attributed to US President Woodrow Wilson, who drafted the language for the League Covenant on this issue. What is less remembered is that behind Wilson’s initiative lay an action by Leon Trotsky, Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the fledgling Soviet Russian government, who revealed treaties that had been concluded secretly on the Allied side during World War i in which various states were promised territorial gains upon the anticipated successful conclusion of the war. Trotsky’s revelation gained world attention and mobilized public sentiment against secret arrangements between governments. Wilson took his initiative in this context. The registration of treaties, which later was carried over into the Charter of the United Nations, has become one of the most important institutions of the modern international order.
29
Sherman, Leah. "Creating Grand Teton National Park: A Case Study in Honor of the National Park System’s Centennial." DttP: Documents to the People 44, no. 3 (September 26, 2016): 13. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/dttp.v44i3.6119.
Full textAbstract:
In August 1916 President Woodrow Wilson founded the National Park Service (NPS) as a means of preserving the United States’ wildlands, battlefields, and historical monuments. Over the last century this agency has grown exponentially, rising to 409 sites of significance as of 2014. In celebration of this achievement and in time for the National Park Service’s centennial later this year I have chosen to focus on the origin of one site in particular: Grand Teton National Park. This article thus seeks to present a case study of the park’s creation narrative as told through government documents, and to provide a starting place for researchers interested in the National Park System and/or Grand Teton National Park.
30
Katznelson, Ira, and Bruce Pietrykowski. "Rebuilding the American State: Evidence from the 1940s." Studies in American Political Development 5, no. 2 (1991): 301–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0898588x00000274.
Full textAbstract:
From the vantage point of a critical moment in the history of statebuilding in the United States, we wish to take a fresh look at questions about the resources and wherewithal of the national state. Within modern American political science, a focus on state capacity is at least as old as the landmark essay by Woodrow Wilson on “The Study of Administration” and as current as the important scholarly impulse that has revived interest in the state at a time of struggle about the size and span of the federal government. The dominant motif of these various accounts of American statebuilding has been a concern with organizational assets, which usually are assayed by their placement on a linear scale of strength and weakness.
31
Daghrir, Wassim. "The United States' Global Realism: US Policy in El Salvador as a Case Study." JOURNAL OF ADVANCES IN HUMANITIES 4, no. 2 (December 9, 2016): 462–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.24297/jah.v4i2.1302.
Full textAbstract:
Should the United States’ global mission be to make the world “safe for democracy”, as Woodrow Wilson said, or, in the words of John Quincy Adams, should the US be “the well-wisher of freedom and independence of all” but the “champion and vindicator only of our own”? The debate between Idealists and Realists in US foreign policy has been going on forever. Idealists hold that the US should make its internal political philosophy, namely Democracy, the goal of its foreign policy. Realists, on the other hand, esteem that the US foreign policy should be mainly oriented towards the protection and enhancement of “the National Interest”. My line of reasoning is that the balance has always shifted towards Realism and, occasionally, aggressive Realism. U.S. interventions in Latin America offer telling case studies. They have taken the shape of a mixture of overt and covert interventions in conjunction with the significant political, economic and military pressures. Washington’s efforts to check hostile developments in the Americas necessitated the investment of considerable tax-dollars, political capital, and even American lives. To accomplish its political, strategic, and economic objectives in the area, the U.S. has devoted extensive human and material resources. The strategy to follow might differ depending on each country’s specificity or on the reactions of the U.S. Congress and public opinion. The big lines, however, remain unaffected, as we will try to find out through our study of the U.S. interventions in El Salvador.
32
Deaton, Angus, Gordon Rausser, and David Zilberman. "A Conversation with Angus Deaton." Annual Review of Resource Economics 12, no. 1 (October 6, 2020): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-111219-042601.
Full textAbstract:
The Annual Review of Resource Economics presents Professor Sir Angus Deaton in conversation with economist Dr. Gordon Rausser. Dr. Deaton is Senior Scholar and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Professor of Economics and International Affairs Emeritus at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and Department of Economics at Princeton University and Presidential Professor of Economics at University of Southern California. An applied economist, Deaton has made seminal contributions to the econometrics and estimation of demand systems, analysis of consumer behavior, understanding of commodity prices, the economics of health, nutrition and poverty, and most recently, deaths of despair and the future of capitalism, focusing on the United States. His work to improve welfare estimation in developing countries contributed to upgrading data collection efforts at the World Bank and other international agencies.
33
Delpar, Helen. "Frank Tannenbaum: The Making of a Mexicanist, 1914-1933." Americas 45, no. 2 (October 1988): 153–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1006782.
Full textAbstract:
On April 19, 1914—two days before the seizure of Vera Cruz by United States marines—North American radicals gathered at Carnegie Hall in New York City to protest the expected use of force against Mexico by the administration of Woodrow Wilson. One of the speakers, William (“Big Bill”) Haywood of the Industrial Workers of the World, threatened a nationwide general strike should the United States go to war against Mexico, and the crowd approved a resolution condemning any act of armed intervention.But the Mexican crisis was not the only issue that aroused the crowd at Carnegie hall. A second resolution was approved which denounced the imprisonment of a young immigrant called Frank Tannenbaum, who had recently been sentenced to a year in the penitentiary for participating in an illegal assembly. On March 4 — his twenty-first birthday — Tannenbaum had led an “army of the unemployed” into the Roman Catholic Church of St. Alphonsus on West Broadway and had demanded shelter. His arrest that night and subsequent trial had become acause célèbreamong liberals and radicals who believed that he had been the victim of a miscarriage of justice.
34
Burk, Kathleen. "The Lineaments of Foreign Policy: The United States and a “New World Order,” 1919–39." Journal of American Studies 26, no. 3 (December 1992): 377–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021875800031121.
Full textAbstract:
The idea of a “new world order,” of an opportunity to remake a broken world into a more liberal and democratic place, was very much in the air in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Some historians were encouraged to look at earlier periods with this concept in mind, and this essay is the result of one such attempt. The whole idea of an attempt to build a new world order has a very positive ring about it. At the least it seems to assume a plan, and an active personality or two behind the plan; it also assumes a global reach. If these are in any sense requirements, the United States during the interwar period fulfilled them only partially and erratically. Certainly, if one looks for the strong, general pattern in American foreign policy during this period, the culmination of many smaller plans and patterns, one can be found: the drive to convince the world to adopt policies leading to an international economy characterised by free trade, convertible currencies and open markets, and along with that, the drive to convince countries to disarm. All American administrations from 1919 to 1939 would have agreed with these policy imperatives. But what is undeniable is that they varied in their emphases, in the efforts which US governments themselves made to get these policies accepted. Only Woodrow Wilson had a plan, and only he sought to involve the US Government permanently in this process, to the extent of tying it down to future responsibilities: all others preferred, when feasible, merely to give indicative guidance.
35
Irwin, Julia F. "Teaching “Americanism with a World Perspective”: The Junior Red Cross in the U.S. Schools from 1917 to the 1920s." History of Education Quarterly 53, no. 3 (August 2013): 255–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hoeq.12022.
Full textAbstract:
The involvement of the United States in World War I, from April 1917 to November 1918, marked a high point in the history of American internationalist thought and engagement. During those nineteen months, President Woodrow Wilson and his administration called on Americans to aid European civilians and to support Wilson's plans for a peacetime League of Nations, defining both as civic obligations; many responded positively. The postwar years, however, saw a significant popular backlash against such cosmopolitan expectations. In 1920, Congress failed to ratify the Treaty of Versailles and rejected U.S. participation in the League. A growing chorus for 100% Americanism and immigration restriction, meanwhile, offered evidence of a U.S. public that was becoming more insular, more withdrawn from the world. Yet such trends were never universal. As scholars have begun to acknowledge, many Americans remained outward looking in their worldviews throughout the period, seeing engagement with and compassion for the international community as vital to ensuring world peace.
36
Zhang, Donglin, F. Todd Lasseigne, and Michael A. Dirr. "A Survey of Chinese Plants of Potential Ornamental Value for the Southeastern United States." HortScience 30, no. 4 (July 1995): 891A—891. http://dx.doi.org/10.21273/hortsci.30.4.891a.
Full textAbstract:
China, E.H. Wilson's “Mother of Gardens”, is a large untouched resource of ornamental plants to this day. Southeastern gardens and arboreta teem with plants from China, which boasts the most diverse temperate flora in the world with more than 30,000 species described. Because of China's unique geography, climate, and floristic similarities to the southeastern United States, many of these ornamental plants should be adaptable. Based on studies of the phytogeography, floristics, history of plan; hunting, and performance of plants already introduced into cultivation from central and southeastern China, ≈500 potentially “new” species of Chinese woody plants are presented for ornamental evaluation. Characterization of the species' geography and climatic preferences in China will allow horticulturists to more accurately predict the species' performance throughout the Southeast. Zone maps exist for the United States and China that equate geographic areas on a temperature basis. However, these zone maps do not reflect the wide microclimatic differences (such as those contributed by elevation) that occur in the climatic zones. The results of this survey should enhance interest in the wonderful diversity of Chinese plants. Maps of areas already explored in the past (George Forrest, Ernest H. Wilson, and other contemporary explorers) as well as maps of suggested areas which have not been fully botanized are presented for review.
37
Ambrosius, Lloyd E. "WORLD WAR I AND THE PARADOX OF WILSONIANISM." Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 17, no. 1 (December 20, 2017): 5–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537781417000548.
Full textAbstract:
One hundred years ago, on April 6, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson led the United States into the First World War. Four days earlier, in his war message to Congress, he gave his rationale for declaring war against Imperial Germany and for creating a new world order. He now viewed German submarine attacks against neutral as well as belligerent shipping as a threat to the whole world, not just the United States. “The present German submarine warfare against commerce is a warfare against mankind,” he claimed. “It is a war against all nations.” He now believed that Germany had violated the moral standards that “citizens of civilized states” should uphold. The president explained: “We are at the beginning of an age in which it will be insisted that the same standards of conduct and responsibility for wrong done shall be observed among nations and their governments that are observed among the individual citizens of civilized states.” He focused on protecting democracy against the German regime of Kaiser Wilhelm II. “A steadfast concert for peace,” he said, “can never be maintained except by a partnership of democratic nations. No autocratic government could be trusted to keep faith within it or observe its covenants.” Wilson called on Congress to vote for war not just because Imperial Germany had sunk three American ships, but for the larger purpose of a new world order. He affirmed: “We are glad, now that we see the facts with no veil of false pretense about them, to fight thus for the ultimate peace of the world and for the liberation of its peoples, the German peoples included: for the rights of nations great and small and the privilege of men everywhere to choose their way of life and of obedience. The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be planted upon the tested foundation of political liberty.”
38
Ayers, David. "The New Europe and the New World: Eliot, Masaryk, and the Geopolitics of National Culture." Modernist Cultures 11, no. 1 (March 2016): 8–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/mod.2016.0123.
Full textAbstract:
This paper asserts that while geo-politics is too often treated as an extrinsic force in cultural studies, it is in fact a culturally constitutive force and geo-political cultural actors should be treated as a dominant force in (national-) cultural formation. This is of especial importance in the relationship between Europe and the United States. The paper makes this point by comparing the cultural-political objectives of T. S. Eliot and Ezra Pound to the objectives of Thomas Masaryk. While the former are much-celebrated as cultural figures, they were only marginally and indirectly effective on the course of the shaping of European geo-politics. Although they frequently addressed such topics and plainly wished that their voices could be heard, they are mainly commentators. By contrast, Masaryk was the philosophy professor who founded the Czech nation in 1918 from his base at the School of Slavonic Studies at King's College London. The paper makes specific reference to Masaryk's methods of gaining influence in the United States, and with Woodrow Wilson in particular. Masaryk was an effective transnational cultural actor and his case therefore serves to expand the category of the transnational culture-subject beyond examples such as Ezra Pound, a tragic victim of geopolitics, or Eliot, whose strategy of American intervention in Europe was a commentary on actions and outcomes shaped by others.
39
Wegner, Armin T. "An open letter to the President of the United States of America, Woodrow Wilson, on the mass deportation of the Armenians into the Mesopotamian desert." Journal of Genocide Research 2, no. 1 (March 2000): 127–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/146235200112463.
Full text
40
Burnidge, Cara L. "The Business of Church and State: Social Christianity in Woodrow Wilson's White House." Church History 82, no. 3 (August 30, 2013): 659–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0009640713000681.
Full textAbstract:
Tall tales are often told in times of war. Stories of masculine courage under fire, of the fog of war, and of the grim realities experienced by embattled bodies dominate the genre. During the Great War, however, Americans told a different kind of story about their president. Rather than picture their president entrenched and fighting, Americans shared accounts of President Woodrow Wilson praying. Dr. Admiral Cary T. Grayson recalled a popular wartime tale about an unnamed Congressman who sought President Wilson's counsel. The story begins with a Congressman, distraught with the state of the war-torn world, insisting upon visiting the White House to speak with the President. Travelling through the White House residence, the Congressman searched for his Commander-in-Chief from the East room to the Green room to the Blue room; all to no avail. Finally, he came to the Red Room, where “he discovered the President on his knees wrestling in fervent prayer, like Jacob, with the Most High.” As Wilson's friend and physician, Grayson remembered that this story and variations of it were popular despite its complete lack of credibility. This folk tale, Grayson believed, began as a rumor by Wilson's opponents (one that poked fun of a President who preferred to kneel on the floor rather than prepare the country for war) but, after the United States declared war in April 1917, was taken more seriously (as a testament to a Commander-in-Chief who led a righteous war). What perhaps began as a joke at the president's expense, gained credence as a reflection of President Wilson's approach to the Great War: it was, for him, a part of his religious life.
41
Ellings, Richard J., Kimberly Rush, and Andrew H. Cushman. "Task Force: A Senior Seminar for Undergraduate Majors in International Studies." Political Science Teacher 2, no. 1 (1989): 6–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0896082800000465.
Full textAbstract:
Task Force is a small group seminar required of all seniors in the Henry M. Jackson School's International Studies Program at the University of Washington. Five or more seminars are offered in the winter quarter, and each focuses on a current policy issue. In recent years, Task Forces have dealt with such topics as strategic arms control, apartheid, United States policy towards Central America, the future of NATO, and United States trade with Japan. The following is an abridged version of the handbook which serves as a general guide for Task Force students, instructors, and evaluators.The International Studies Program at the Jackson School introduces undergraduate students to world affairs through traditional and multidisciplinary coursework. Its curriculum draws on economics, geography, history, political science, sociology, languages and literature, religious studies, and many other disciplines. The program also recognizes that the study of international affairs is rooted in policy issues and processes. It is this notion which underlies the concept of Task Force.The organization and operation of Task Force were inspired by the Policy Conference of Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. The Policy Conference, which was initiated in 1930, consists of 25-30 people and operates much like a Presidential Commission or other investigative group. Its members explore a policy problem through research and discussions with experts; they debate the merits of policy proposals and arrive at a set of policy recommendations.
42
Ngai, Mae M. "Fixing America's Broken Immigration System: Introduction." International Labor and Working-Class History 78, no. 1 (2010): 89–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s014754791000013x.
Full textAbstract:
In January 2008, at the meeting of the American Historical Association, I had coffee with two colleagues, Gary Gerstle and George Sánchez, with whom I share an abiding interest in labor and immigration history, as well as current politics. We hatched an idea to hold a conference on immigration policy reform, which we believed would potentially be back on Congress's agenda after the new administration—we did not know at the time who would be the next president—took office. Ours certainly would not be the first conference on immigration policy. But we wanted to bring two perspectives that are not commonly aired in policy debates today: the historical perspective and the international perspective. We decided to bring together historians, social scientists, advocates, policy analysts, and journalists for a gathering in Washington, D.C., where we hoped to get the attention of those on Capitol Hill. We were fortunate that the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Studies agreed to host and cosponsor the event and that we were able to work with historian Sonya Michel, the center's new director for United States studies. Additional cosponsors included Columbia University, the University of Southern California, and Vanderbilt University.
43
Rolfe, Mark. "Rhetorical Traditions of Public Diplomacy and the Internet." Hague Journal of Diplomacy 9, no. 1 (2014): 76–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-12341266.
Full textAbstract:
Summary Many calls have been made since 2001 for a ‘new public diplomacy’ of the information age that utilizes the internet to reach public opinion. They have been especially forthcoming from the Obama administration, although they have been just as popular with the political classes in the United States and elsewhere. However, such recent calls form only the latest instalment of a rhetorical tradition of public diplomacy that stretches back to Woodrow Wilson and beyond to the 1790s. There is a thematic recurrence in the rhetoric of public diplomacy, as there is in the rhetoric of democracy, and for the same reason: representative democracy has always involved a complex tension between, on the one hand, the political class of politicians and diplomats and, on the other, public opinion, which needs to be appeased since it confers legitimacy on representatives. This results in a recurring pattern of language involving suspicions of the political class, declarations of a new era of diplomacy and claims to credibility. There are hence frequent bouts of anti-politics politics and anti-diplomacy politics, sometimes utilizing a discourse of technological optimism, which politicians and diplomats attempt to assuage with similar calls for new political dawns.
44
Chen, Zihao. "The Failure of Collective Security in the Far East——Take the Japanese Invasion of Northeast as an Example." Lifelong Education 9, no. 4 (July 22, 2020): 133. http://dx.doi.org/10.18282/le.v9i4.938.
Full textAbstract:
Collective security was originally based on a reflection on the cruel reality of centuries of European international relations. 17th-century William Penn, 18th-century Saint Pierre, Rousseau, Kant, Bentham, 19th-century Saint-Simon, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson at the beginning of the 20th century and others have designed different blueprints for peace. Their peaceful ideals of "idealists" and "utopians" were adopted in the collective security theory of the 20th century. The first attempt at collective security was the establishment of the "International League" after the end of the First World War. However, because the balance of power system of the international community is declining and flourishing, and the organization has no coercive force and no clear obligations for member states to participate in military disarmament, the concept and practice of the international alliance ended in failure. Japan occupied Northeast China in 1932, and the Chinese government subsequently appealed to the League of Nations and sought help, but the League of Nations did nothing but send a delegation. Subsequently, Japan withdrew from the League of Nations in 1933, which accelerated the disintegration of the League of Nations and had to say that collective security failed in the Far East.
45
TYMCHENKO, Roman. "DIPLOMATS OF UNR AND ZUNR AT THE PARIS PEACE CONFERENCE." Contemporary era 6 (2018): 105–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.33402/nd.2018-6-105-118.
Full textAbstract:
In January 1919, the Paris Peace Conference began for the establishment of the world post-war order and solution of territorial conflicts and new national borders. Ukrainians, having proclaimed an independent state, hoped for the legal recognition. The negative attitude of the Entente states to Ukraine aggravated this situation, as well as the retreat of the UNR and ZUNR armies under the pressure of Bolshevik on the east and Polish troops on the west, that were not allies. These states wanted to establish their political domination on the Ukrainian lands. The necessity of the international recognition of the Ukrainian state had required the leadership of the UNR and ZUNR to pursue a common foreign policy. The Ukrainian delegation arrived in Paris very late and without an official invitation. The author determined that united Ukraine was represented by diplomats of different political orientations whose professional background did not suit the level of the tasks of the Peace Conference. A large number of members of the delegation have complicated the situation of Ukrainians at the conference because of different political and ideological positions. The case of Western Ukraine was on the agenda almost all the time, and united Ukraine was mentioned only sporadically. Therefore, the Galicians, hoping for the implementation of the principles of the Woodrow Wilson points, tried to act separately from the joint Ukrainian delegation. They issued their own papers and appeals, which often contradicted the statements of the joint Ukrainian mission. Eventually, the internal confrontation led to a split of the joint Ukrainian delegation, and in December 1919, Galician representatives Vasyl Paneiko and Stepan Tomashivsky dismissed from the joint delegation. As a result, the delegation did not fulfill the task: The Entente had never recognized the sovereignty of the Ukrainian People’s Republic. The pessimistic attitude towards the Ukrainians of the Entente states, the domestic split of the Parisian delegation, and the inability to clearly represent “the Ukrainian issue” did not bring the success. Despite this, Ukrainians denied part of Entente’s stereotypes and were able to outline some issues, especially concerning Eastern Galicia. Keywords Paris Peace Conference, Ukrainian People's Republic, West Ukrainian People's Republic, Eastern Galicia, diplomacy.
46
Bensel, Richard. "The State and Social Investigation in Britain and the United States. Edited by Michael J. Lacey and Mary O. Furner. Cambridge: Woodrow Wilson Center Press and Cambridge University Press, 1993. Pp. xii, 440. $49.95." Journal of Economic History 55, no. 1 (March 1995): 208–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022050700041000.
Full text
47
Benson, Laura L., Warren F. Lamboy, and Richard H. Zimmerman. "Molecular Identification of Malus hupehensis (Tea Crabapple) Accessions Using Simple Sequence Repeats." HortScience 36, no. 5 (August 2001): 961–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.21273/hortsci.36.5.961.
Full textAbstract:
The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS) currently holds 36 separate accessions of the `Yichang' clone of Malus hupehensis (Pamp.) Rehd. The `Yichang' clone originally entered the United States in 1908 as seed collected for the Arnold Arboretum by E.H. Wilson near Yichang, Hubei Province, China. The original description of M. hupehensis omits fruit characters, and botanists frequently augment these omissions with descriptions of the `Yichang' clone. Apomixis occurs in Malus, including M. hupehensis, and is strongly associated with elevated ploidy levels. Simple sequence repeats (SSRs) were used to characterize 65 accessions of M. hupehensis. To check for polyploidy, a set of M. hupehensis accessions was evaluated with flow cytometry. The simple sequence repeat phenotypes and ploidy information revealed the `Yichang' clone under various accession names in arboreta. It was neither known nor suspected that the U.S. National Plant Germplasm System held many duplicate accessions of the `Yichang' clone prior to their molecular characterization. Germplasm conservation decisions for Malus species can benefit from an increased knowledge of the genetic variation or lack thereof in naturalized populations and ex situ collections.
48
McCoy, Alfred W. "A Rupture in Philippine-U.S. Relations: Geopolitical Implications." Journal of Asian Studies 75, no. 4 (November 2016): 1049–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021911816001674.
Full textAbstract:
“Your honors, in this venue, I announce my separation from the United States … both in military, but economics also,” said Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte to a burst of applause from an audience of officials in Beijing's Great Hall of the People, the symbolic seat of China's ruling Communist Party. At the Philippine-Chinese trade forum that same day, October 20, 2016, Duterte opened his speech by asking, “What is really wrong with an American character?” Americans are, he continued, “loud, sometimes rowdy, and they have this volume of their voice … not adjusted to civility…. They are the more forward commanding voice befitting obedience.” Evoking some deep Filipino racialist tropes, Duterte then mocked the flat, nasal American accent and rued the time he was questioned at the Los Angeles airport by a “Black” officer with a “black” uniform, “black shoes,” and a “black” gun. Moving from rhetoric to substance, Duterte quietly capitulated to Beijing's relentless pressure for bilateral talks to settle the dispute over the South China Sea, virtually abrogating Manila's recent slam-dunk win on that issue before an international court (Demick and Wilson 2016; DU30 News 2016).
49
Massie, Justin. "Haftendorn, Helga, Georges-Henri Soutou, Stephen F. Szabo et Samuel F. Wells Jr., The Strategic Triangle. France, Germany, and the United States in the Shaping of the New Europe, Washington, dc/Baltimore, ma, Woodrow Wilson Center Press/The John Hopkins University Press, 2006, 411 p." Études internationales 38, no. 4 (2007): 623. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/018301ar.
Full text
50
Sundquist, James L. "Tank-Thinking: Its Evolution and Its Current Milieu - Michael J. Lacey and Mary O. Furner, eds., The State and Social Investigation in Britain and the United States (Washington and Cambridge, England: Woodrow Wilson Center Press and Cambridge University Press, 1993. Pp. 425. $59.95). - David M. Ricci, The Transformation of American Politics: The New Washington and the Rise of Think Tanks (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. Pp. 238. $30.00)." Journal of Policy History 8, no. 2 (April 1996): 267–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0898030600005182.
Full text