-Caveat Lector-

Interestingly JFK listed Woodrow Wilson as 'America's Worst President'.
flw

WILSON'S DESTINY, Part II By Byron King

Yesterday, we began to explore the impact President Woodrow Wilson has had on
the international system. The world, we wrote, still spins on a Wilsonian axis.
Yet how did one man manage to impart such a lasting legacy - one that has shaped
national and world events ever since?

Wilson clearly could not have achieved what he did without the help of a few key
tools. The first year of his presidency say the advent of three elements which
would, as Wilson put it, greatly assist him in putting government "at the
service of humanity." Today, we look at how Wilson used these tools...and how
his actions have shaped the world we know today.

Wilson was an activist in expanding the federal role in the economy, pushing
through such legislation as the establishment of the Federal Trade Commission
(1914) and the Federal Farm Loan Act (1916). Both of these laws brought the
federal government into the daily lives of Americans, in a way that would have
been incomprehensible to the Founding Fathers.

On the international front, during his first term Wilson embroiled the U.S. in
Mexico's civil war, up to and including invading Mexico, a bone of contention
between the two nations ever since. (In his second term, Wilson would send U.S.
troops into Russia to oppose the Bolshevik Revolution, but this gets ahead of
the story.)

When the Great War broke out in Europe in 1914, Wilson's administration of U.S.
international trade and monetary policy was decidedly lopsided, and certainly
lacking in a sense of balanced neutrality towards all belligerents. The Wilson
administration forbade "loans" by U.S. banks to the warring powers. Yet Wilson's
administration permitted U.S. banks to extend massive "credits" to the French
and British, thus creating an economic situation in which the U.S. bankrolled
their conduct of the Great War.

Without U.S. "credit" to fund their purchases in 1914 and 1915, such credit
extended into the economy by the U.S. Federal Reserve and its "elastic
currency," it is quite likely that Britain and France would have run out of cash
after a few months of fighting. In all likelihood, Britain and France would have
had to make some accommodation for peace with Germany, and bring the War to a
relatively swift conclusion. But absent peace imposed by the pocketbook, the
European war went on and on, sucking more nations into the fray and wrecking the
lives and cultures of many peoples.

It cannot be overstated that, during Wilson's first term in office, European
combat was funded and supported on the Allied side by U.S. money, its elastic
currency, and U.S. materiel. Meanwhile, Germany, a militaristic culture lacking
any real internal political process that would sanction failure of its armed
forces to prevail, had little choice but to dig deeper into its economy and
fight on.

In essence, Wilson's economic and trade policies, abetted by the Federal
Reserve, perpetuated the European War. They also led to (and even required, from
a military standpoint) German submarine warfare on the high seas. That is, with
submarine technology at its disposal, German military strategy had no other
option but to sink ships carrying war materiel to Britain and France. So long as
U.S. "credit" paid for the materiel, the ships would sail and the cargoes, once
landed, would threaten Germany.

There was deeply rooted opposition in the U.S. electorate to any direct American
participation in the European War. However, the nation enjoyed the economic boom
times caused by the war-related orders pouring in from Britain and France.
Mines, mills, factories and farms all posted and received premium prices for
their wares, courtesy of U.S. "credits" to the Allies and the newly created
Federal Reserve and its elastic currency. The economic myth was that the Allies
were supporting the booming U.S. economy with their purchases of war materiel.
The reality was that the Allied purchases were based on U.S. credits, supplied
ultimately by Wilson's new creation, the Federal Reserve. Thus, the war boom was
at root simply inflation created by the FED.

Running for his second term in 1916, Wilson's campaign slogan was "He kept us
out of war." This was not quite correct, because by 1916 the U.S. was deeply
invested in the British and French role in the fighting. After Wilson was safely
re-elected for a second term, his obstinate pursuit of his otherwise failed
economic and trade policies favorable to Britain and France led to a point where
German submarine warfare became an American cassus belli. Less than ninety days
after beginning his second term, Wilson called upon Congress for a declaration
of war against Germany.

Domestic opposition to Wilson's policies was intense, particularly within the
large Irish and German populations in the U.S. But Wilson, the learned scholar
of Government and former President of Princeton, was prepared to control this
dissent with some of the most sweeping laws ever passed to limit free speech and
political dissent. And Wilson's Federal Reserve and newly enacted national
income tax funded the war effort, all the while giving Wilson the resources he
needed to expand his domestic vision of a powerful central government that
literally took over many elements of U.S. industry.

According to historian Robert Nisbet, "The blunt fact is that when (under
Wilson) America was introduced to the War State in 1917, it was introduced also
to what would later be known as the total, or totalitarian, state."

As if the foregoing accomplishments would not be enough for any president,
whether or not "ordained" by God to govern, another of Wilson's enduring
legacies was a direct outgrowth of U.S. participation in the Great War. This was
Wilson's effort to shape the peace and his remarkable turn of phrase, to "make
the world safe for democracy." This term, and its underlying panglossian concept
of remaking the world in a Princeton-honed image of American participatory
government, has haunted U.S. policy ever since it was uttered. Nine decades
later, U.S. foreign policy is fundamentally Wilsonian. The concept of a world
"safe for democracy" has such Jovian gravity as to be inescapable, and
essentially all modern political debate in the Western world is framed in its
terms.

But a "world safe for democracy" requires certain underlying assumptions of
power and price, which are the key elements in "making" anything happen
anywhere, and certainly in "making the world safe for democracy." Whether he
understood the implications or not, Wilson had a Federal Reserve, an elastic
currency, and a national income tax with which to do his bidding. Not all
peoples, races and nations are so fortunate.

Had Woodrow Wilson never been president, would the U.S. and the world have had a
far different 20th Century? Or was Wilson just one man in a particular time of
great change, a man who articulated concepts that were beneath the surface and
waiting to be revealed? When Wilson walked into the White House in 1913, Germany
and Italy had already spent 40 years creating and building centralized,
debt-financed governments. In this regard, Wilson was an imitator, not an
inventor. So did Wilson make history, or perhaps give it a shove in a particular
direction, or was he merely governed by historical forces whose time had come?

These types of questions are endless, and just asking them certainly gives one
thoughts of a world far different from this one in which we live. Absent Wilson,
would there have been a U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, to fund the type
of world economy that has evolved? Absent Wilson, what would U.S. politics have
done with the 16th Amendment, the income tax amendment? How did Wilson's
presidency effect the direction of the national income tax? And absent the tax
revenue, what would have happened with the early growth under Wilson of
centralized federal power in the U.S.?

Absent Wilson's inept neutrality, his biased diplomacy and willingness to throw
U.S. dollars into the Great War on the side of Britain and France, would the
U.S. have become involved in what was later named World War I? Would the Great
War have lasted so long and caused so much damage to the fabric of European
civilization and colonial influence? Would the world ever have heard, just a few
years later, of war veterans such as Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini?

Absent U.S. participation in the European War, would a pedestrian lawyer, and
middling state-level politician named Franklin Delano Roosevelt have found his
first federal job as Assistant Secretary of the Navy? Would the U.S. ever have
bred such soldiers as Douglas MacArthur and Harry Truman, and most of the rest
of the list of future political-military leaders of mid-century?

Absent events put into motion by Wilson, would the Great War have lasted so long
as to cause Russia to break up and descend into a Bolshevik Revolution? Absent
Wilson, would U.S. troops have gone ashore in Russia to take sides in the
matter? In another region of the world, absent Wilson, would the Ottoman Empire
have dissolved, to spawn the modern politics of the Middle East? And absent
Wilson, would the concept of League of Nations/world governance ever have gained
the traction it did?

Woodrow Wilson said that he wanted to put government "at the service of
humanity." But when you distill things to a basic essence, Wilson bequeathed his
nation, the world, and "humanity" the legacy of federal credit, national debt, a
large centralized government, and an imperious, if not crusading, international
moral ideology built and financed thereon.

What is more, Wilson's legacy has lasted for nine decades and today seems
immutable. None who are alive have experienced anything different from a
Wilsonian world. No one can remember or recall first hand any time when this
world of ours worked otherwise. And when things change, and change they
certainly will, most people will be trapped in a Wilsonian paradigm and not
understand what is happening.

Regards,

Byron King

Byron King has been engaged in the private practice of law for 14 years and
currently serves as an attorney in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He received his
Juris Doctor from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law in 1981 and is a
cum laude graduate of Harvard University.

www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to