• Latest
  • Podcast
  • Topics
    Christianity & CrisisChristian EthicsChristian RealismDemocracyHuman RightsInternational Religious LibertyJust War TraditionNationalism and PatriotismPeaceTrade & EconomicsTerrorismWarObama AdministrationTrump AdministrationBiden Administration
  • Contribute
    Writers GuidelinesContactContributors
  • Campus Program
  • Christianity & National Security
    About CNS2024 Conference2023 Conference2022 Conference2021 Conference2019 Conference2018 Conference2017 Conference
  • Events
  • Elshtain Fellowship
Donate

Woodrow Wilson & Moralistic America

By Mark Tooley on September 3, 2019

read
Book Review | WWI
American Exceptionalism | Woodrow Wilson

Mark Tooley is IRD’s president and editor of IRD’s foreign policy and national security journal, Providence. Prior to joining the IRD in 1994, Mark worked eight years for the Central Intelligence Agency. He is a graduate of Georgetown University and is a native of Arlington, Virginia. He is the author of Taking Back The United Methodist Church, published in 2008; Methodism and Politics in the 20th Century, published in 2012; and The Peace That Almost Was: The Forgotten Story of the 1861 Washington Peace Conference and the Final Attempt to Avert the Civil War, published in 2015.

Follow Mark on Twitter: @markdtooley

Woodrow Wilson is now unfashionable. Many on the left dismiss him as racist & an American interventionist. Many on the right deride him as virtual founder of American progressivism. In foreign affairs, because of his Ahab-like obsession with the League of Nations, he’s chided as a delusional idealist.

Patricia O’Toole’s Wilson biography, The Moralist: Woodrow Wilson and the World He Made, offers plenty of ammo to all critics but also affirms Wilson’s unassailable perch in America’s presidential pantheon. His vision of America’s role in the world haphazardly prevailed.

Reviews of O’Toole’s book reveal the division over Wilson. David Goldman in The Claremont Review of Books, who viewed this new bio as “hagiographic,” portrayed Wilson as a neo-Confederate motivated by revenge against Yankee democracy:

What Patricia O’Toole and others miss is that the lost battle for ratification of the League of Nations treaty was the last of the guerilla actions that elements of the Confederacy undertook against the victorious Union.

But John Daniel Davidson in National Review saw O’Toole’s bio as vindication of conservative critique of Wilson:

Wilson’s muddled notions of self-determination and disarmament, coming in the wake of the collapse of four empires, would cost lives — not thousands but hundreds of thousands. The program for peace he foisted on Europe would play no small part in sowing the seeds for the next world war. By devoting a biographical study to Wilson’s exaggerated sense of moral rectitude, O’Toole has done students of American history a great service. She has exposed, in meticulous detail, the vanity and vacuity of Wilson the moralist.

Ron Capshaw’s Free Beacon review, which similarly implicates Wilson in 116,708 World War I American deaths, and which faults his “unrealistic” hopes for leading to Lenin, Hitler and World War II, commends “this largely excellent and (for fans of Wilson) sometimes devastating biography, [in which] Patricia O’Toole attempts to give a yin and yang to Wilson’s idealism,” which “is merely reflecting how conservatives and liberals have long regarded him.”

Capshaw asserted that left and right “largely occupy common ground in the assertion that Wilson disastrously involved the United States in World War I” but “his idealistic foreign policy managed to split both conservatives and liberals:”

Hawkish cold warriors like Ronald Reagan promoted the belief that American idealism would lead to a Soviet collapse. Those of a more realpolitik variety, however, namely Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon, saw such idealistic goals as a disaster.

From the left, Jennifer Szalai in The New York Times concluded that The Moralist should have been renamed The Hypocrite. After all:

He called for an end to secret treaties while negotiating secretly with the Allies in World War I. He declared himself unwilling to compromise with belligerents abroad while showing himself very willing to compromise with segregationists at home. He pursued a progressive economic agenda while approving a regressive racial one. He spoke of national self-determination in the loftiest terms while initiating the American occupation of Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

Maybe the most level review came from presidential historian Richard Norton Smith in The Wall Street Journal:

It is in the author’s subtitle that Wilson’s larger legacy is defined. However stony the soil of 1919, seeds of Wilsonian idealism and global co-operation would take root in the United Nations, NATO, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Marshall Plan and more contemporary efforts to combat global warming. Despite recent setbacks, and Donald Trump’s helter-skelter challenge to the postwar order, “the world of the twenty-first century is still more democratic than it was before Wilson threw his moral force against imperialism, militarism, and autocracy.” It is a fitting conclusion to this elegantly crafted portrait of a president as polarizing as he is consequential.

Unmentioned in the reviews, O’Toole quotes Wilson’s claims, similar to Thomas Jefferson’s about the Declaration of Independence, that his political vision merely synthesized America’s self-understanding. His adversaries, contemporary and current, would disagree, but Wilson was supremely a product of America. He was a Presbyterian American Exceptionalist who dreamed of a world governed by morality and transcendent order, mediated through international structures, but ultimately dependent, though he was loathe to admit it, on American power, military, economic and, most importantly, spiritual. His venture via the League of Nations failed. But it was ultimately implemented by his craftier and more charming disciple, FDR, whose idealism was more fluid and practical.

Wilson is tagged as hypocritical partly because his own pragmatism in pursuit of ideals lacked FDR’s panache. He was cold, unbending, nearly friendless, sanctimonious, unforgiving, repressed, and lacking FDR’s talent for effortless political chicanery with a smile. Yet Wilson’s ideals were indeed as he claimed, the direct fruit of America’s soaring Puritan ambitions for a world of at least approximately godly order, with generous accommodation for profit and ambition.

If Wilson remains unassailably in the upper ranks of presidential hierarchy, it’s because he succeeded in his professed synthesis of American spiritual aspirations for a paramount global role. In this vision, America sustains world order and its own interests through both cold realpolitik and high-minded democratic principles.

This seemingly incongruent combination of self-interest and righteousness earns for Wilson, as well as for America, the frequent accusation of hypocrisy. Yet the basic framework, for which Wilson is the articulator but not really the originator, has persisted for a century. And the alternatives to it, if less hypocritical, are also more unsavory. The Moralist: Woodrow Wilson and the World He Made is a presidential biography, but it’s also the political and spiritual narrative of a nation.

Providence is the only publication devoted to Christian Realism in American foreign policy and is primarily funded by donors who generously help keep our magazine running. If you would care to make a donation it would be highly appreciated to help Providence in advancing the Christian realist perspective in 2025. Thank you!

Events & Weekly Newsletter Sign-up

Receive the weekly email for all the latest content.
Select Lists
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Enjoy this article?

Please Support Providence Today:


Donate

Related articles

Why Nations and National Self-Interest Are the Building Blocks of International Order

Bryan T. McGraw
June 3, 2025

Book Review
Can America Be Exceptional Again?

Robert Nicholson
May 28, 2025

Book Review
True Liberty Requires Limits: Review of Brad Littlejohn’s ‘Called to Freedom’

Howe D. Whitman III
May 22, 2025

Book Review
Is There a Right to Immigrate? Review of “Migrant God: A Christian Vision for Immigrant Justice”

Mark Amstutz
May 13, 2025

Book Review
Foreign Policy ProvCast, Episode 85 | Early America: Christian Republic—or Republic of Christians?

Robert Nicholson & Miles Smith
May 7, 2025

America’s Founding

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.

Select Lists
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Institute on Religion and Democracy
1023 15th Street NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005

Visit

  • The IRD
  • Juicy Ecumenism

Connect

  • About
  • Writers’ Guidelines
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Contributors
  • Internship Opportunities




© 2025 The Institute on Religion and Democracy. All rights reserved.

Search

Get Your Providence Mug and Pin!

Support Providence‘s mission of arguing for Christian realism and receive a Providence mug and/or pin!

With a $25 donation, we will send you a Providence pin, and with a $50 donation, you will receive a pin and a mug.