Woodrow Wilson, Defense of the League of Nations, 1919
Who Wrote:
Woodrow Wilson, President of the United States from 1913-1921, issued on September 26, 1919
Audience:
It is apparent throughout the address that Wilson was not only speaking to his countrymen but also the Senate and entire world. Wilson reiterated that his address was for all his countrymen regardless of their origins.
Represent:
Through the Defense of the League of Nations, Wilson redefined the purpose of the league and treaty to drum up support. At the onset of the proclamation Wilson rallied for support for the League of Nations with an opening argument of what the League of Nations really meant and what the covenants of the treaty were. Immediate action was necessary to persuade the Senate and Americans that the League of Nations was an “instrument to preserve liberty and the peace of the world, to take the future and lives of millions from petty dictators and give them back to the people.”
What being said:
Predominantly, Wilson’s Defense of the League of Nations was targeting Germany and dictatorships. The objective of the treaty was to implement government control to be “in the hands of the people.” Wilson also stated that this was the first of many treaties to come that would establish democracy, and intended to be proactive for liberation of men in Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey. Using the metaphor “fall down like a house of cards,” Wilson demonstrated that America is an important element to the covenant of the League of Nations.
Additionally in his speech, Wilson stated that “United Moral forces” will be mobilized to fight for the liberation regardless of the strength or weakness of the country. However, Wilson established that Germany was not ready to join. Wilson explained that America and the other nations entering the agreement of the treaty were promising “never use their power against one another for aggression,” and additional stipulations that would never resort to war without fair judgment by the League of Nations. By agreeing to the treaty the nations made a pact: express their intentions of war in advance so the other nations were able to judge the reason for the conflict and the opposing nation’s intent of “right and justice.”
Further into the address Wilson defends Article X and Article XI in the covenant of the League of Nations. He used metaphors again to convey his argument; Article X was an agreement by the nations to respect each nation’s territories and political independence. Article XI allowed members to advise the league of any disturbance of the peace. Wilson was striving to protect the Shantung Province with Article XI, and stated that China was also joining the league.
In the closing of his address, Wilson emotionally rallied America together. He took blame for sending the soldiers overseas (“I ordered their sons overseas.”), and wanted America to know it was for liberty and justice. Wilson reiterated that America went to war in France in hopes that we would not be in war again, and with our membership in the league these lives of the soldiers who died in combat would mean something.
How being said:
Wilson was very compelling (almost obsessive) about his views of the League of Nations. His address appealed to the logic and emotions of his countrymen. Wilson believed it was imperative that America join, and sought support for the League of Nations. Very descriptively Wilson described the hillside in Paris where American soldiers were buried to psychologically plead his cause. Wilson admitted that future war may not be avoided; however that nine months of “cooling space” would help nations re-think their cause. In his closing Wilson laid all his “cards” on the table with that America stood for “the truth of justice, and of liberty, and of peace.”
What proof:
Wilson blended use of logic and emotional appeal, along his own perceived character to persuade the audience that for peace to exist so did America’s association to the League of Nations. Wilson was extremely intelligent and strategically planned the use of his rally in Colorado to justify the passage of the League of Nations. As Wilson quoted, “It is not merely a settlement with Germany; it is a readjustment of those great injustices which underlie the whole structure of European and Asiatic society.” From the heart (or fixation) Wilson knew what was best for America and for democracy was to join the League of the Nations. Unfortunately even though Wilson was passionate about joining the league, in the end it was his arrogance to blame that we never did.
Valerie-
ReplyDeleteExcellent job analyzing the Defense of the League of Nations. In your summary you did a very thorough job of covering all the aspects of the speech including who, what, why and breaking down what was being said. The way you presented you analysis of what Wilson was saying made it easier for me to understand. I appreciated that you divided it into sections starting with the audience that Wilson was speaking to and the other key elements such as a closer analysis of what was being said and proof to back it up.
Some things that really stood out to me: I liked your point about how Wilson used the Paris hillside where the soldiers were buried to play on the emotions of the American public. You did an excellent job of not only analyzing the text but also analyzing Wilson’s character and how he used his intelligence and emotional appeal to play on the emotions of the American people. I also really like the closing statement, it is unfortunate the League of Nations was not meant to be during Wilson’s time as president however I agree that his arrogance did play a big part in this.
Again, nice job!
--Andrea Nieman
This was a very in depth and well thought out analysis of Wilsons’ speech in Defense of the League of Nations. I like how you broke the speech down, it made it easy to identify and understand what Wilson was speaking for and about.
ReplyDeleteWilson’s claims were that this treaty would protect the people from dictatorship and place the power in the hands of the people connected this speech to his War Address speech. It is no wonder that Wilson later relays his feelings of obligation to those who died for this very idea. When he refers to Article X and XI he provides a basis for how this new method of governing and peace will work. He points out that this agreement will rely heavily on respect, political independence, and the right for its members to report any disturbance of peace.
As you covered, Wilson stressed the fact that by entering into the peace treaty there would be protection from unjust and unrighteous wars. The 9 months of breathing room and cooling off would in his view eliminate the immediate response of anger and retaliation while facing conflict. I liked the example that Wilson used about his friends who had a bad swearing problem. Who were then coaxed by some of their other friends to make a promise to never swear within the town limits. When they were tempted to curse they would take a ride in a streetcar to the outskirts of the town. After their journey they realized that their impulse to anger was foolish and only led to unnecessary detours.
Wilson felt that by joining the League of Nations America would be honoring and showing respect to those who had fought to the death for rightness, justice, and peace. He did feel at blame for the loss of the soldiers who had died fighting for his own ideology, and as consequence he carried a burden of moral obligation to the dead. As you stated his underlying use of psychological and emotional messages was meant to encourage and rally his fellow Americans to feel the same way and to support the pending contract out of moral duty, responsibility, and obligation.
Wilsons did indeed lay all his “cards” on the table in that America stood for “the truth of justice, and of liberty, and of peace.” He passionately summoned America to rally in the continued conquest for all of these truths. Wilson’s logic that the League of Nations was the answer to reach these goals was valid and commendable. I do agree with you, however, that through his own arrogance he destroyed what he wished to accomplish. Oh, the irony! Excellent analysis, I enjoyed reading it very much.
I agree with what you said about Wilson being almost obsessive, however i think the strongest part was when he spoke of "sending their sons" overseas... this part really plays on the emotions of the readers and listeners because he really brings in the feelings of a mother into here. he says that the mothers blessed him... and why? "i ordered their sons overseas. i consented to their sons being put in the most difficult parts of the battle line, where death was certain... why should they weep upon my hand and call down the blessings of God upon me? because they belive that thier sons died for something that vastly transcends any of the immediate and palpable subjects of war." this little section really got me believing everythin he said since he made himself seem so evil and bad, yet mothers trust him with their own children... her he takes something that is so dear to every person, a mother and shows that even with their sons death, they believe in the cause, in what wilson is doing which really got me onto his side...
ReplyDeleteI really like the part where Wilson stated that "United Moral forces" will be mobilized to fight for liberation regardless of the strength or weakness of the country. You really made me believe and understand that Wilson was trying to promote peace and fairness by expressing their intentions of the war in advance so that the other nations were able to judge the reasons for their conflict and so they did not feel their argument is in vain because the other nations entering the agreement were promising "never use the power against one another for agression". I really feel it is a shame that we never joined the League of Nations.
ReplyDeleteRashel,
ReplyDeleteWilson was very intuitive indeed to use this part of his address to sway the votes of mothers. As a mother too, the love for a child runs deeper than the words themselves.
Val,
ReplyDeleteGreat job! I really feel like you understood, not only the text, but the motives of the man himself. One of the big things for me was also his example of the French hillside, not only because he invoked the unnamed soldiers, but because by mentioning how protective the French were of these buried men, it made me feel like we were all one and the same, and how I'd hope Americans would do the same for foreign soldiers who might come to our aid and die on our land. And to think that we are all alike, as one people, it allows me to slip further into the thought that he was right. He invoked some pretty powerful language. I wouldn't necessarily call him obsessive. I believe he felt a tremendous guilt for the extent of death among the ranks, and truly felt like this idealized grouping of nations would help to create a more peaceful world. I think it's sad that we will never know if it could have prevented what came in the next fifteen years.
Holly,
ReplyDeleteI had the same thought: What would have happened in history if America had joined the League of Nations? That is why I feel Wilson was obsessive; it was his arrogance and unwillingness to compromise that may have caused America to lose that opportunity.