Does purpose bear pride? Does pride serve a purpose? Though quite possibly discordant when placed naked and in the face of each other, prearranged to be examined and analyzed thoroughly, the notions of pride and purpose are an intriguing set to look at as they are so contrary to each other in appearance but yet so frequently found within each other’s constituents and possessive of similar roots. Wilsonian Idealism or “Wilsonianism” and American Exceptionalism are, collectively, in and of the same enigmatic relationship as are purpose and pride. Wilsonianism, a term officially originated in the span between 1913 and 1921, can be defined as the passionate, no matter how idealistic, ambition to establish democracy, free trade, open borders, open diplomacy, and collective security, among other things, throughout the world (Pearlmutter 30). Wilson’s promotion of this idealism was a policy consisting of a myriad of different elements, such as those which came to constitute his “Fourteen Points” and better define Wilsonianism today: national self-determination, world disarmament, and the use of the U.S. as both an “indispensible nation” and as God’s “chosen nation”. The policy hinted at a reduction to nationalism and the introduction of a new concept to the American people�"putting the well-being of the world before their own national and individual identity, or “internationalism,” as it is vaguely labeled within Wilsonianism (Magyarics). American Exceptionalism is a concept all too often glorified or ridiculed, but never explicated to an extent which is proportionate to its significant moral means. In relatively simple terms, it is the nationalistic belief that America, as a whole, is ‘exceptional.’ Expanding on the term means divulging into the many aspects of American society which lead and have led it to be a considerably great country. These aspects, among other things, are republicanism, i.e. the notion of having a limited government with more rights, along with those “self-evident truths” which the nation was built upon, among them, democracy, civil liberty, civil virtue, the common good, fair play, private property, and constricted government (Lafayette). Despite Wilson’s prominent identity as a type of nationalist, and the use of his idealism to promote the idea of America as the chosen land of God, there are some points of the Wilsonian foreign policy framework which contrast strongly with the provincial creeds of American Exceptionalism. Along with being a nationalist who took pride in his country, Wilson was also an internationalist, who, especially after the end of the famously devastating Great War, viewed the image of a world at peace as the most desirable object he, his country, or the rest of the earth could possibly participate in (Pearlmutter 28-30). Despite a number of significant similarities between the two and even the presence of one within the other, Wilsonianism and American Exceptionalism are unable to agree fully just as pride and purpose are, due to their contrasting principles for the American people, and the pride with which they pursue the fulfillment of those principles.
Within a perfect world, all men would be granted an equal amount of the personal liberties of freedom. There would be no violation of rights, no terrorists, and most significantly no heroes due to a lack of demand for them�"and to this effect, no exceptionalism would occur at all, unless, improbably and contrary to the word's meaning, it were, in some way or another, applied to every single individual on the planet. Wilsonianism, like so many of the other “isms” of the world today, sought out to sculpt that perfect world, where democracy was universal and the charity of such “exceptional” nations as the U.S. would one day not be so violently needed. However, as Wilson soon learned, the world is not a ball of clay, and not so easily can an individual, even one as prominent as the President of the United States, morph it into something just because he sees it vital. Even establishing his Wilsonian doctrine proved nearly an impossible task because, like any ideology of the idealistic nature, it faced the constant ramifications of reality�"a realist world containing realist people possessing realist issues. Wilson, though a stark American nationalist, was also an internationalist, and he incorporated the two contradicting concepts into his policy’s effort to bring about world peace after the Great War (Pearlmutter 28-29). On the one hand, Wilsonian Idealism’s campaign enacted national and individual “moralistic activism” (Schonberg). This was an equal effort, by Americans and their government, and all the world’s people and leaders alike, to better the world both around them and abroad. This part of his Idealism is where internationalism came into play as an exigency to the task of democratizing the world. Internationalism, “the doctrine that nations should cooperate because their common interests are more important than their differences” (Wordnet) can be considered, vaguely, the antecedent to nationalism, an ambiguous term which often constitutes that nations should act independently, not collectively, to achieve any desires, and that one’s nation is of a higher aspect than another’s. That which then can be said of Wilsonian Idealism is an even murkier concept. The use of impressions like God’s ‘chosen land’ and American Excpetionalism had served to Wilsonian Idealism’s purpose as encouraging the American people to forget any parochial habits of mind they were raised to and instead put their pride in improving the greater good of the world (Magyarics). However, as their nationalist origin states, the individual nation comes first, and pride in their country’s exceptionalism may have contributed to the consistent duration of a struggle there was to make Wilsonian Idealism a reality. Thus, to this extent, comes the double-edged sword that is pride. Taking a healthy amount in one’s country may be beneficial, but, when it comes to foreign relations, it has the ability to hinder or slow the reaching of a result.
The concept of Wilsonianism is an astonishing object to anatomize given the complex events, prerogatives, and logistics surrounding its origin. The international relations policy based on 28th president Woodrow Wilson’s ideologies was of the conviction that the U.S.’s foreign policy mission should be to promote democracy throughout the world, i.e. “national self-determination” (Smith). This term, referring to the right of a people to determine who their government leader is and what elements they wish their chosen nation to have, is part of Wilson’s campaign which sought to democratize the world so that other nations could be, like America, exceptional ones. Wilsonian Idealism called out to the downtrodden, suffering people of the world to take a stand against their oppressive governments and make the changes which they had a right to make. However, on a historical basis, this object very much contradicts with the idea of American Exceptionalism, as it suggests the states’ right to power over national federal government. As he was raised in the south, Woodrow Wilson’s nationalism stemmed from an inescapable influence imposed by the civil war Confederates, a group whose patriotism and national self-determination remained far longer than the war’s 4-year span in the 1860s (Pearlmutter 28). This aspect of his idealism, although relatively neutralized by the policy’s internationalist elements, contradicts in context with the moral basis of American Exceptionalism. When Alexis de Tocqueville came to this country in 1835, he coined the term on the basis of America’s social virtues, political systems, and, above all, its unification. Therein lays its contradiction to the principle of Wilsonian Idealism. The “national self-determination” of the Confederacy, a group resistant to all things “Union” or of the official United States during the Civil War, is the same national self-determination promoted by Wilsonian Idealism in post-Great War era America. The cause for world peace, as Wilson admitted it, must entail “the purpose of affording…territorial integrity to great and small states alike” (Wilson). What then, may have happened, if Wilsonian Idealism had been applied and promoted by the American government some 60 years earlier? The national self-determination of Confederates, if it had had the support which Wilsonian Idealism would give to it, would have broken the exceptionally unified nation in two. And so is the result when comparing the means of this policy to American Exceptionalism, a concept which reaches far back before even the civil war and which takes its pride out of the U.S.’s ability to remain united even after its troubled times.
The cause for world disarmament was also a significant (and controversial) aspect of Wilsonian Idealism. Established by the conflict-fearing president of a conflict-fearing nation after the last major brink of World War I, Wilsonianism called for the initiated disarmament of all nations as part of the effort for a world without war. His proposal, which certainly took idealism to the extreme, suggested that the more nations adopted internationalism, that is, working together and putting the common good of the world before their own, the less weapons would be in the world, and therefore, the less war and all the more peace would exist. Putting the world’s interests before that of the nation is not, however, an ideal compliant to American Exceptionalism for the simple fact that Exceptionalism is based off of the U.S. as it has achieved success for itself, not the world. The basis of any nationalist feeling is to provide praise to its subject country, and, furthermore, to merge individual status into that of a whole national identity. Wilson’s idealist notion of a democratic world, without weapons, war, nor political differences, therefore contradicts American Exceptionalism, because it leaves no differential margin for America to be an exceptional nation in the first place.
Wilsonianism, the purpose to which we seek ourselves and the world free, and American Exceptionalism, the pride with which we set ourselves apart, are of such a nature that they can never fully intertwine because with which aspect one sets itself apart, it cannot achieve unification with another. The unification of two such contrasting objects like pride and purpose is a possibility which may occur only with the same strain and hard work it took and is still taking to strive for Wilsonian Idealism’s mission for a peaceful world. The day in which human beings can live comfortably with their neighbor’s humble pride and the day in which humans learn to possess pride and humility at the same time is the day that two ideas like Wilsonian Idealism and American Exceptionalism will meet peacefully with each other. Perhaps that will be the day of divine reawakening for the world’s inhabitants, the day of some infamous tragedy which occurs within and effects the entire earth and all of its nations, or the day when a well-awaited supreme being of some sort, the subject of such great religious passion over the course of so many years, takes hold of the world’s forces and creates the harmony which was always meant to be in the first place. Whatever the time it takes, devastating, tragic blows which strike the earth on a daily basis are merely forerunners to the end, and a sign that we are one step closer to that time. But until then, Wilsonian Idealism’s objective of a peaceful world has yet to be fulfilled, and the paradoxical strong points of American Exceptionalism remain immoral in the eyes of disbelievers.
WORKS CITED
"Internationalism." Wordnet. Princeton U, 2006. Web. 17 May 2010.
<
Lafayette, René. "American Exceptionalism." American Studies II-Honors. 6 Sept.
2009. Lecture.
Magyarics, Tamás. "Wilsonianism - a Blueprint for 20th century American Foreign
Policy?" Cold War History Research Center. Corvinus U of Budapest, 2010.
Web. 17 June 2010. <
wilsonianism.html>.
Pearlmutter, Amos. Making the World Safe for Democracy: A Century of Wilsonianism and Its Totalitarian Challengers. Chapel Hill, N.C., 1997.
Schonberg, Karl. "Wilsonian Unilateralism: Rhetoric and Power in American Foreign Policy since 9/11" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006. 2009-05-25 <
Smith, Tony. "Wilsonianism." Encyclopedia of the New American Nation. N.p.,
2009. Web. 16 May 2010. <
Wilsonianism.html>.
Wilson, Woodrow. "The Fourteen Points." United States Congress. Washington, D.C. 8 Jan. 1918. American Nation. By Paul Boyer. Austin: Holt, 2003. 650.
Print.
Share This
Email
Facebook
Twitter
Read Request
My Library
Subscribe
Flag Writing
