Sunday, October 3, 2021

The Progressive Rejection of the Founding and the Rise of Bureaucratic Despotism


 Curriculum Guide 
Guide and Notes
Concept: The Progressive Rejection of the Founding and the Rise of Bureaucratic Despotism
Overview of this concept:

The principles of the American Founding, embodied in the Declaration of Independence and enshrined in the Constitution, came under assault by Progressives of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Progressivism rejects the Founders’ ideas of natural rights, limited government, and the separation of powers, representation, and federalism. Progressive government, exemplified by the modern administrative state, has fundamentally transformed key aspects of the American way of life.
Progressives taught that stringent restrictions on government power were no longer necessary to protect liberty, since human nature and science had advanced greatly during the 19th century. Progressives did not believe that individuals are endowed with inalienable rights by a Creator; rather, they believed that rights are determined by social expediency and bestowed by the government. In conjunction with this new theory of rights, Progressivism holds that government must be able to adapt to ever-changing historical circumstances.
One of the important events that led to greater progressive involvement in American life came with the test of disaster relief. On Sept. 8, 1900, an unnamed hurricane slammed into the unprotected barrier island of Galveston, Texas, killing between 6,000 and 8,000 people. More than 111 years later, the natural disaster stands as the worst in the history of the United States. Citizens were viewed as incapable of taking care of themselves and middle-class reformers substituted Federal government assistance instead of the individuals, families, communities, and local government self-reliance.
In addition to reshaping the political process in order to ensure that middle-class goals were more easily met, reformers also sought measures to ensure that the right person got the right job. Sometimes this impulse meant that Progressive reformers made certain government positions exempt from voting altogether. One chronic complaint against city political machines was that important administrative posts always went to friends of the “bosses” rather than to experts, and middle-class Progressives wanted to make sure their values were implemented.
To get rid of cronyism, most Progressives supported the creation of a professional corps of administrators. The corps required anyone who wanted a government job to take a competitive exam. Only those who passed could get a job, and only those who excelled could rise to influential, decision making positions. Ideally, no matter what political party won each new election, jobholders would be allowed to maintain their positions. This system claimed to provide continuity and efficiency rather than a chaotic turnover of personnel each time a new party came into office.
            Progress of Reforms
One by one, states adopted these various reforms, mostly beginning in the West and the Midwest. In Wisconsin at the turn of the century, Robert “Battling Bob” La Follette, the first Progressive governor of Wisconsin and a Republican most of his life, created a Legislative Reference Bureau that became known as the “Wisconsin Idea.” It was a board of experts such as Richard T. Ely, who ensured sound drafting of Wisconsin’s laws for such things as worker’s compensation, government regulation of railroad companies, and conservation of natural resources. The keys to reform were appointed commissions of experts working in the name of civil service.
Fighting Bob LaFollette Film 1924, 2:14
Washington D.C. August 11, 1924
https://youtu.be/d5plfw9dV24
New York City, where political machines remained strong, also changed local politics. In response to residents’ complaints, and in the aftermath of the Triangle Shirtwaist Company Fire, leaders of Tammany Hall began to advocate moderate reforms. These included the abolition of child labor and the improvement of safety standards in the workplace.
Student Sources/Handouts that will be used for discussion/evaluation for this concept (in order of introduction)
Overarching Questions/Themes Students will be evaluating at the end of this unit:
  • In what ways did Progressives reject the principles of the American Founding?
  • Why is it important for us today to know about the Progressive rejection of the Declaration of Independence and the Progressive concept of rights?
  • Many of the critiques of the King listed in the Declaration of Independence have become features of the modern bureaucratic state.
  • What does Woodrow Wilson mean when he states that government should be accountable to Darwin instead of Newton? What does this accountability to Darwin have to do with the idea of a living Constitution?
·         Why did Progressives believe that America needs to move beyond the principles of the Founding?
·         Which person, who served as president of Princeton University, governor of New Jersey, and as America’s 28th president, was one of the earliest Progressive thinkers?
·         What was the 28th president’s critique of the Founding?
·         What were the most articulate expressions of the Progressive movement’s core beliefs?
·         What did Woodrow Wilson argue about the separation of powers established by the Constitution?
·         How did Wilson seek to render government more accountable to public opinion? Wilson held that the business of politics—namely, elections—should be separated from the administration of government, which would be overseen by nonpartisan, and therefore neutral, experts.  The president, as the only nationally elected public official, best embodies the will of the people, resulting in a legislative mandate.
·         How does Progressivism represent a radical departure from the Founders’ understanding of the purpose and ends of government?
·         Compare and contrast the arguments of the Founders and of the Progressives regarding six key principles of government: the meaning of freedom; the purpose of government arising from the meaning of freedom; the elements of domestic policy; the extent of foreign policy; the centrality of the consent of the governed; and the size and scope of government.
·         How is Progressivism not a logical outcome of the Founders’ principles, but rather a conscious rejection of them?
Additional Resources for Teacher:
History of a Free Nation, Chapters 23-24
Day 1
Objectives:
·         SWBAT to relate how Progressives differ from the principles of the American Founding.
Student Sources/Handouts that will be used for discussion/evaluation for this lesson:
·         Source #3 (Excerpt from Socialism and Democracy - Woodrow Wilson)
Review—Key Question (s)
·         What rights are those summed up in the American Declaration of Independence? (The rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Among the natural rights is that of property, originating, according to the Declaration, in the fact that an individual has produced value through his labor within society).
·         What are three historical circumstances of the late nineteenth century that Progressives look to when arguing that the principles of the American Founding were no longer operative or valid? (Industrialization, Immigration, and Economic conditions).
·         The Election of 1912 was contested among three political parties. What was the third party, led by Theodore Roosevelt? (The Progressive Party).
·         Which American President caused Woodrow Wilson to turn his attention from the Congress to the Executive branch as the best means of achieving Progressive policy goals? (Theodore Roosevelt)
·         Up until the Progressive Era did the U.S. federal government get involved in local affairs? Why not? (Largely not since individuals and voluntary associations handled local problems).
·         What European religious movement favored individualism and personal responsibility, in short, the theory of individual natural rights? (Source #2, the Protestant Reformation).
·         What are the three co-equal branches of government in the Constitution?
·         What is the classic definition of socialism?
Suggested Key Discussion Points/Questions:

·         Guide students in a discussion of the Declaration of Independence and the original ideas of liberty in the American Founding documents.
·         The Declaration of Independence refers to the “Laws of Nature and of ___________” (Nature’s God).
·         What is the primary purpose of government, according to the Declaration of Independence? (Securing natural rights).
·         The Declaration of Independence lists three fundamental natural rights. They are: (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness).
·         What self-evident truth, named in the Declaration of Independence, was at stake in the Civil War? (Equality).
·         What do Progressives understand by the word “equality”? (All human beings have the right to possess economic and material equality).
·         The American Founders and the Progressives disagreed about their definition of equality; they are incompatible.
·         Identify three key structures of the Constitution that are included as grievances against the King in the Declaration of Independence. (Limited government, Representation, and Checks and Balances).
·         The Progressives rejected the idea of a government limited in purpose to the security of individual rights.
·         How does administrative government contradict the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? (It takes sovereignty away from the people; it rejects the idea of limited government; it ignores the doctrine of separation of powers.)
·         Progressivism has some roots in the pro-slavery arguments of the pre-Civil War South, insofar as both believe that modern science renders the principles of the American Founding invalid.
·         Progressives believe that the scientific guidance of government can improve—and even perfect—human nature.
·         Progressivism may be defined as a philosophical movement intent on “progressing” or moving beyond the principles and practices of the American Founding.
·         Progressives do not believe that natural rights exist.
·         The core Progressive doctrine of “historical contingency” means that there are no permanent or immutable principles. Rather, truth is dependent upon the particular circumstances of history.
·         Progressive philosophy is predicated on the belief that human nature is changeable.
·         The Progressives did not share the Founders’ fear of direct democracy.
·         Progressive proposals aimed at increasing direct democracy included Referenda, Ballot Initiative, and Recall.
·         The Progressives wanted government to respond quickly and efficiently to the peoples’ demands.
·         The Progressives believed the old Constitution to be both “irresponsible” and “Inefficient."
·         The Progressives did not argue that the unelected administrative state should be modified and or otherwise affected by elections and politics.
·         One of the important events that led to greater progressive involvement in American life came with the test of disaster relief. Read Source #1
o   On Sept. 8, 1900, an unnamed hurricane slammed into the unprotected barrier island of Galveston, Texas, killing between 6,000 and 8,000 people.
o   More than 111 years later, the natural disaster stands as the worst in the history of the United States.
o   Who should help in cases of public welfare and safety such as hurricanes and natural disasters?
o   Citizens were viewed as incapable of taking care of themselves and middle-class reformers substituted Federal government assistance instead of the individuals, families, communities, and local government self-reliance.
·         Before the Progressive Era, how would people deal with the tragedy?
·         During the Progressive Era, how would a progressive deal with the tragedy?
·         What is the difference between the two ways to handle a tragedy?
·         Should the federal government be involved in disaster relief? Why or why not?
Ø  Who is qualified to be in government service?
Ø   How should government workers be appointed and by whom?
·         What clause in the Constitution is invoked by liberals to justify the idea that government might and should be an instrument for securing and extending the liberties of individuals? (Source #1 the “public welfare” clause).
·         What type of liberty is this? (Source #1 actual as distinct from merely legal liberty).
·         What characterizes the existing order? (Source #1 brutalities and inequities).
·         How does government right the wrongs in the existing order? (Source #1 productivity is cooperatively controlled in the interest of effective liberty and cultural development).
·         What is the remedy? (Source #1 organized social planning, industry and finance are socially directed for the cultural liberation and growth of individuals).
·         To be objective progressives argued that government positions should be exempt from voting altogether. Why?
·         Before Civil Service reform how were government employees appointed?
·         Should administrative posts go to the friends of the “bosses”?
·         Should experts run the government?
·         Guide students in a discussion of the progressive ideas of liberty.
·         According to Goodnow, what moral and religious influence characterized the Founder’s view of individualism? Read Source #2
·         What historical developments have ushered in a new constitution? (Source #2 end of the pioneer era, new forms of communication, transportation, accumulation of capital, concentration of industry, loss of personal relations between employer and employed).
·         What happens when the sphere of governmental action increases? (Source #2 brings about a constitution of society beyond the wildest dreams of the Founders and widens the sphere of governmental actions).
·         What happens to individual private rights as a result? (Source #2 individual private rights are increasingly narrowed).
·         What is socialism according to Wilson? Read Source #3 (Members of every community find employment for which they are best suited and rewarded according to diligence and merit).
·         Moral influence is secured by what? (Source #3 the public authority).
·         What is the public authority? (Source #3, various answers since Wilson does not make this clear).
·         Are there any limits or checks and balances to public authority? (Source #3, this Wilson does make clear. There are no limits or checks and balances to public authority. Public authority is not limited by individual rights. The State can cross private and public affairs at will).
·         What is the difference between socialism and democracy? (Source #3 there is no essential difference. The motives are the same.)
·         Since the contest is no longer between government and individuals where is it? (Source #3 between government and dangerous combinations and individuals).
·         According to Wilson what is progress? Read Source #4
·         In pre-modern times, where did people look, the past or the future? (Source #4 the past with heroes, glory, tales, heavy armor, and larger spear. The past was filled with giants.)
·         In modern times where do people look? (Source #4 people look not to the past but to the future, something new).
·         Does the progressive preserve the essentials of our institutions? (Source #4 yes).
·         How does the progressive preserve the essentials? (Source #4 Wilson does not say but he believes it to be true).
·         And, why should scientific progress mean a change in government? (Source #4 the Constitution was made under the dominion of the Newtonian machine-like conception of science which means it is out of date).
·         What is the trouble with the Newtonian theory? (Source #4 government is not a machine but it is a living thing).
·         What theory should be preferred and accountable to whom? (Source #4 the theory of organic life, accountable to Darwin).
·         What does Wilson mean by a living Constitution? (Source #4 various, but surely he means that the Constitution should be pliable, changeable, and not fixed).
·         True or False, Woodrow Wilson believed that, while the Constitution is insufficient, the principles of the Declaration of Independence remain valid. (False).
·         In “What is Progress?” Woodrow Wilson means that some citizens of this country have never got beyond the Declaration of Independence
·         Wilson believed that checks and balances were irrelevant in the modern world because faction, as Publius called it in Federalist 10, was no longer a problem.
·         Woodrow Wilson praised constitutions with a lack of separation of powers such as the kind that the British had.
·         Wilson states that each generation should define terms such as liberty, rights, and equality for itself, rather than referring to the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution.

Follow-up/Assessment Questions:
·         Explain the difference between the original meaning of the Declaration and the Founder’s ideas and that of the Progressives when it comes to liberty, disaster relief, and government service.

Prompt Question for Next Lesson:
·         What are the core beliefs of Progressivism?
Day 2
Objectives:
·         SWBAT understand the core beliefs of Progressivism and who articulated the critique of the Founding, rejection of the Declaration of Independence, and the separation of powers.
Sources/Handouts that will be used for discussion/evaluation for this lesson:
Review—Key Question (s):
·         Before the Progressive Era, how did individuals solve their problems?
·         Why didn’t people appeal to the Federal government for assistance?
·         How was the smaller Federal government funded before the Progressive period?
·         After, how was the Federal government funded?

Suggested Key Discussion Points/Questions

·         Woodrow Wilson wrote of the separation of powers that “no living thing can have its organs offset against each other and live.”
·         Woodrow Wilson referred to the Founders' Constitution as “Newtonian” and the Progressive Constitution as Living, Darwinian, and Evolutionary.
·         What two scientific theories does Wilson contrast? What does he mean by this contrast? (Wilson contrasts the Newtonian world view and the Darwinian. Just as Newton has been superseded by Darwin a constitution written for Newtonian mechanics is no longer relevant for a modern Darwinian point of view. The original Constitution is out of date and needs to be revised.)
·         As a result, political constitutions, society, and nations are what? (Wilson argues that these things are alive and accountable to Darwin. These are living things, not machines, and as living organisms they must develop and grow).
o   Political constitutions, society, and nations are not machines.
·         Why does Wilson think that he is a true Jeffersonian? (Source #5 to translate the terms of the abstract Declaration of Independence into the language and problems of his day).
·         How does Wilson intend to realize the conceptions of the author of the Declaration of Independence in his day? (Source #5 Wilson wants a new preface, table of contents, new indictment, in short, he wants an updated Constitution).
·         What is the problem of modern democracy according to Wilson? (Source #5 he wants to dissolve the partnership between the machine and the corporations; this is the new Jeffersonian constitution).
·         Does Wilson think of past generations or of the future; and, what does he want to advance? (Source #5 he looks to the future and the advancement of the rights of mankind).
·         According to Wilson, what does each generation need to do in regards to liberty? (Source #6 each generation must form its own conception of what liberty is).
·         How many generations did Jefferson address? (Source #6 Jefferson did not dictate the aims and objects of any generation but their own).
·         What was the principle of the American Revolution? (Source #6 the principle of individual liberty).
·         Government guarded individual rights but did it undertake to exercise rights for individuals? (Source #6 no it did not).
·         Does the theoretical Declaration apply today? (Source #6 no, because we have our own purposes, principles, and forms of power which are likely to affect our safety and happiness).   
·         From generation to generation, who is the unifying force in our complex system? (Source #7 the president).
·         What two things does he lead? (Source #7 Wilson says that the president is leader both of his party and the nation).  
·         Why can the one political leader, the president, represent the nation? (Source #7 the nation as a whole has chosen him, he is the only national voice, no single force can withstand him, and no combination of forces will easily overpower him. He represents the whole people. He has no special interest except the national thought. The people crave a single leader. People choose a man rather than a party. He can form the country to his own views.)
·         What does he mean that Pennsylvania Avenue should be longer and that there should be more “intimate communication” between the Capitol and the White House? (Source #7 he means that the president should be at liberty to persuade, if not dominate, Congress.)
·         Is the president restricted by law and the Constitution? (Source #7 no, both in law and conscience he can be as big a man as he can. Only his capacity will set a limit. If Congress is overcome it is not because of the Constitution or lack of constitutional powers on his part. The president is backed by the nation; the Congress is not.)
·         As the president’s duties grow should he do more administration, direct, legislate, and act? (Source #7 yes, the president should not separate powers and offer legislation).
·         As the president’s duties increase what else should increase? (Source #7 the president’s administration, less as executives [per the Constitution], and more as directors and leaders of the nation).
·         Does Wilson believe in the three separate branches of government? (Source #7 no, he thinks the executive, the president, should legislate as part of the living, breathing constitution).
·         Woodrow Wilson argued that the President should be able to mold, shape, and transform his office and his power however he saw fit, without any meaningful constitutional limitations. (Source #7).
·         The concept of a Presidential legislative “mandate” arises from the Progressive understanding of the Presidency. (Source #7).
·         According to Wilson, we are not framing a constitution but what do we need and what should we do? (Source #8 we need a science of administration and run a constitution).
·         Government today is now simple or complex? (Source #8 complex with scores of masters). And, now with complex government, what do we need? (Source #8 administration to handle the complexity of modern government).
·         What must we now follow? (Source #8 the views of the nation).
·         What was rotten fifty years ago? (Source #8 the civil service).
·         What has delayed us? (Source #8 the flawed constitution has delayed us).
·         Administration lies outside what? (Source #8 the proper sphere of politics and removed from it).
·         Is administration political? (Source #8 no).
·         When can bureaucracy exist? (Source #8 when the state is removed from the political life of the people and its objects, policy, and standards must be bureaucratic).
·         What new type of civil service is Wilson proposing? (Source #8 one that is cultured, self-sufficient, acting with sense and vigor yet connected to popular thought by elections and public counsel).
·         What modern conception of government is Wilson proposing? (Source #8 he proposes the interlacing of local and federal self-government).
·         Woodrow Wilson wrote that public opinion should be “efficient” in establishing the administrative state, but not “meddlesome” in the bureaucracy’s day-to-day affairs. Source #8

Follow-up/Assessment Questions:
·         How do you evaluate the strength or weakness of Wilson’s argument?
·         Is the Constitution a living, breathing, Darwinian document?
·         Is the Constitution irrelevant for a scientific age?
Prompt Question for the Next Lesson:
·         How did Progressive ideas also impact state and local administration?











History, Grade 8
Student Sources Supplement __
The Progressive Era
1.      Source #1 (Excerpt from Liberalism and Social Action – John Dewey)
Text Box: As a leading Progressive scholar from the 1880s onward, Dewey, who taught mainly at Columbia University, devoted much of his life to redefining the idea of education. His thought was influenced by German philosopher G.W. F. Hegel, and central to it was a denial of objective truth and an embrace of historicism and moral relativism. As such he was critical of the American founding.

Not till the second half of the nineteenth century did the idea arise that government might and should be an instrument for securing and extending the liberties of individuals. This later aspect of liberalism is perhaps foreshadowed in the clauses of our Constitution that confer upon Congress power to provide for “public welfare” as well as for public safety. . . .

But the majority who call themselves liberals today are committed to the principle that organized society must use its powers to establish the conditions under which the mass of individuals can possess actual as distinct from merely legal liberty. They define their liberalism in the concrete in terms of a program of measures moving toward this end. They believe that the conception of the
state which limits the activities of the latter to keeping order as between individuals and to securing redress for one person when another person infringes the liberty existing law has given him, is in effect simply a justification of the brutalities and inequities of the existing order. . . . 

The only form of enduring social organization that is now possible is one in which the new forces of productivity are cooperatively controlled and used in the interest of the effective liberty and the cultural development of the individuals that constitute society. . . . 

Organized social planning, put into effect for the creation of an order in which industry and finance are socially directed in behalf of institutions that provide the material basis for the cultural liberation and growth of individuals, is now the sole method of social action by which liberalism can realize its professed aims.

Liberalism and Social Action
John Dewey (1859–1952)  
2.      Text Box: Progressive political science was based on the assumption that society could be organized in such a way that social ills would disappear. Goodnow, president of Johns Hopkins University and the first president of the American Political Science Association, helped pioneer the idea that separating politics from administration was the key to progress. In this speech, given at Brown University, he addresses the need to move beyond the ideas of the Founders.

Furthermore, the religious and moral influences in this country, which owed much to the Protestant Reformation, all favored the development of an extreme individualism. They emphasized personal responsibility and the salvation of the individual soul. It was the fate of the individual rather than that of the social group which appealed to the preacher or aroused the anxiety of the theologian. It was individual rather than social morality which was emphasized by the ethical teacher and received attention in moral codes. Everything, in a word, favored the acceptance of the theory of individual natural rights. . . . 

The pioneer can no longer rely upon himself alone. Indeed with the increase of population and the conquest of the wilderness the pioneer has almost disappeared. The improvement in the means of communication, which has been one of the most marked changes that have occurred, has placed in close contact and relationship once separated and unrelated communities. The canal and the
railway, the steamship and the locomotive, the telegraph and the telephone, we might add the motor car and the aeroplane, have all contributed to the formation of a social organization such as our forefathers never saw in their wildest dreams. The accumulation of capital, the concentration of industry with the accompanying increase in the size of the industrial unit and the loss of personal relations between employer and employed, have all brought about a constitution of society very different from that which was to be found a century and a quarter ago. . . . 

At the same time the sphere of governmental action is continually widening and the actual content
of individual private rights is being increasingly narrowed.

The American Conception of Liberty 
Frank Goodnow (1859–1939)Source #2 (Excerpt from The American Conception of Liberty – Frank Goodnow)

















3.      Source #3 (Excerpt from Socialism and Democracy - Woodrow Wilson)
Text Box: Wilson makes clear in this article the consequences of rejecting the idea of inherent natural rights for the idea that rights are a positive grant from government.

Roundly described, socialism is a proposition that every community, by means of whatever forms of organization may be most effective for the purpose, see to it for itself that each one of its members finds the employment for which he is best suited and is rewarded according to his diligence and merit, all proper surroundings of moral influence being secured to him by the public authority.

‘State socialism’ is willing to act through state authority as it is at present organized. It proposes that all idea of a limitation of public authority by individual rights be put out of view, and that the State consider itself bound to stop only at what is unwise or futile in its universal superintendence alike of individual and of public interests. The thesis of the state socialist is, that no line can be drawn between private and public affairs which the State may not cross at will; that omnipotence of legislation is the first postulate of all just political theory. . . .

The difference between democracy and socialism is not an essential difference, but only a practical difference—is a difference of organization and policy, not a difference of primary motive. . . .

The contest is no longer between government and individuals; it is now between government and dangerous combinations and individuals. Here is a monstrously changed aspect of the social world. In face of such circumstances, must not government lay aside all timid scruple and boldly make itself an agency for social reform as well as for political control?

Socialism and Democracy
Woodrow Wilson









4.      Text Box: After earning a Ph.D. in both history and political science at Johns Hopkins University, Wilson held various academic positions, culminating in the presidency of Princeton University. Throughout this period, he came to see the Constitution as a cumbersome instrument unfit for the government of a large and vibrant nation. This speech, delivered during his successful campaign for president in 1912 and included in a collection of speeches called The New Freedom, puts forward the idea of an evolving, or “living,” constitution.

Progress! Did you ever reflect that that word is almost a new one? No word comes more often or more naturally to the lips of modern man, as if the thing it stands for were almost synonymous with life itself, and yet men through many thousand years never talked or thought of progress. They thought in the other direction. Their stories of heroisms and glory were tales of the past. The ancestor wore the heavier armor and carried the larger spear. “There were giants in those days.” Now all that has altered. We think of the future, not the past, as the more glorious time in comparison with which the present is nothing. Progress, development,—those are modern words. The modern idea is to leave the past and press onward to something new. . . . 
If I did not believe that to be progressive was to preserve the essentials of our institutions, I for one could not be a progressive. . . . 

[T]he Constitution of the United States had been made under the dominion of the Newtonian Theory. . . . 

The trouble with the theory is that government is not a machine, but a living thing. It falls, not under the theory of the universe, but under the theory of organic life. It is accountable to Darwin, not to Newton. . . . 

Living political constitutions must be Darwinian in structure and in practice. Society is a living organism and must obey the laws of life, not of mechanics; it must develop. All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an era when “development,” “evolution,” is the scientific word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.

What is Progress?
Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924)Source #4 (What is Progress? - Woodrow Wilson)  










5.      "Address to the Jefferson Club of Los Angeles" (excerpt), Woodrow Wilson
Text Box: As I was coming here this evening and reflected upon the name of this association, my thoughts naturally went back to that great man whose name you have adopted. And I asked myself, what would Jefferson say if a number of men of the Democratic faith were gathered in the year 1911, if he were present? Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence. But the Declaration of Independence, so far as I recollect, did not men¬tion any of the issues of the year 1911. I am constantly reminding audiences that I have the pleasure of addressing that the rhetorical introduction of the Declaration of Independence is the least part of it. That was the theoretical expression of the views of which the rest of the document was meant to give teeth and substance to. The Declaration of Independence is a long enumerated of the issues of the year 1776, of exactly the things that were then supposed to be radical matters of discontent among the people living in America—the things which they meant to remedy, to remedy in the spirit of the introductory para¬graphs, but which the introductory paragraphs themselves did not contain. 

Now, the business of every true Jeffersonian is to translate the terms of those abstract portions of the Declaration of Independence into the language and the problems of his own day. If you want to understand the real Declaration of Independence, do not repeat the preface. Make a new table of contents, make a new set of counts in the indictment, make a new statement of the things you mean to set right, and then call all the civilized world to witness, as that great document does, that you mean to settle these things in the spirit of liberty, but also in the spirit of justice and responsibility. If you remember how that great document calls on all mankind to witness that we are not doing this thing in the spirit of insurgents but in the spirit of free men, men who have the true interests of humanity at heart—now, in a similar spirit, how are we going to realize the conceptions of the author of the Declaration of Independence in our own day?...

The question is not whether all men are born free and equal or not. Suppose they were born so, you know they are not. They may have been born free and equal, but they are neither free not equal if the things of this sort can go on and continue to go on so that the problem of the Jeffersonian is to discredit and break up the machine. How to dissolve the partnership between the machine and the corporations—that is the problem of modern democracy…. 

We ought to be afraid of thinking of our own generation only, when we ought to think of the long future of America. Because I, for one, feel, as I am sure you do, that I would have reason to be ashamed of having sprung from a great race of Americans if I do not do everything in my power to make the future of American greater than her past. Born of a free people, we, above all other men, are under bonds to prove ourselves worthy of freedom. And not only that, but to hand the freedom on, enhanced, glorified, purified, in order that America may not look back for her credit upon the days of her making and of her birth, but look forward for her credit to the things that she will do in the advancement of the rights of mankind.
Address to the Jefferson Club of Los Angeles Woodrow Wilson

6.      The Author and Signers of the Declaration of Independence, Woodrow Wilson
Text Box: It is common to think of the Declaration of Independence as a highly speculative docu¬ment; but no one can think so who has read it. It is a strong rhetorical statement of griev¬ances against the English government. It does, indeed, open with the assertion that all men are equal and that they have certain inalienable rights, among them the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It asserts that governments were instituted to secure these rights, and can derive their just powers only from the consent of the governed; and it solemnly declares that “whenever any government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation in such principles, and organizing its powers in such forms, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” But such sentences do not afford a general theory of government to formulate policies upon. No doubt we are meant to have liberty; but each generation must form its own conception of what liberty is. No doubt we shall always wish to be given leave to pursue happiness as we will, but we are not yet sure where or by what means we shall find it. That we are free to adjust government to these ends we know; but Mr. Jefferson and his colleagues in the Continental Congress pre¬scribed the law of adjustment for no generation but their own. They left us to say whether we thought the government they had set up was founded on “such principles,” its powers organized in “such forms” as seem to us most likely to effect our safety and happiness. They do not attempt to dictate the aims and objects of any generation but their own…. 
No one now needs to be told what the principle of the American Revolution was: it was the principle of individual liberty. Though the men who signed the Declaration of Independence were no theorists but practical statesmen, a very definite conception of what the government of enlightened men ought to be lay back of everything they did, and that conception they held with a passionate conviction. They believed government to be a means by which the individual could realize at once his responsibility and his freedom from unnecessary restraint. Government should guard his rights, but it must not under¬take to exercise them for him…. 

So far as the Declaration of Independence was a theoretical document, that is its the¬ory. Do we still hold it? Does the doctrine of the Declaration of Independence still live in our principles of action, in the things we do, in the purposes we applaud, in the measures we approve? It is not a question of piety. We are not bound to adhere to the doctrines held by the signers of the Declaration of Independence: we are as free as they were to make and unmake governments. We are not here to worship men or a document. But neither are we here to indulge in mere rhetorical and uncritical eulogy. Every Fourth of July should be a time for examining our standards, our purposes, for determining afresh what principles and what forms of power we think most likely to effect our safety and happiness. That and that alone is the obligation the Declaration lays upon us. It is no fetish; its words lay no compulsion upon the thought of any free man, but it was drawn by men who thought, and it obliges those who receive its benefits to think likewise…

The Author and Signers of the Declaration of Independence
Woodrow Wilson



7.      Woodrow Wilson - "The President of the United States"
8.      Text Box: For Wilson, constitutional checks and balances and the separation of powers are indicative of the flawed thinking of America's Founders. They are means of limiting government, when the fact is that government alone can provide the people's needs. Wilson looks to the presidency—the singular voice of the people—as the best hope for overcoming the old order.

Greatly as the practice and influence of Presidents has varied, there can be no mistaking the fact that we have grown more and more inclined from generation to generation to look to the President as the unifying force in our complex system, the leader both of his party and of the nation. To do so is not inconsistent with the actual provisions of the Constitution; it is only inconsistent with a very mechanical theory of its meaning and intention. The Constitution contains no theories. It is as practical a document as Magna Carta....

As legal executive, his constitutional aspect, the President cannot be thought of alone. He cannot execute laws. There is no national party choice except that of President. . . . He is not so much part of its organization as its vital link of connection with the thinking nation. He can dominate his party by being spokesman for the real sentiment and purpose of the country, by giving direction to opinion, by giving the country at once the information and the statements of policy which will enable it to form its judgments alike of parties and of men. 

For he is also the political leader of the nation, or has it in his choice to be. The nation as a whole has chosen him, and is conscious that it has no other political spokesman. His is the only national voice in affairs. Let him once win the admiration and confidence of the country, and no other single force can withstand him, no combination of forces will easily overpower him. His position takes the imagination of the country. He is the representative of no constituency, but of the whole people. When he speaks in his true character, he speaks for no special interest. If he rightly interpret the national thought and boldly insist upon it, he is irresistible; and the country never feels the zest of action so much as when its President is of such insight and calibre. Its instinct is for unified action, and it craves a single leader. It is for this reason that it will often prefer to choose a man rather than a party. A President whom it trusts can not only lead it, but form it to his own views. . . . 

They [presidents] thought that Pennsylvania Avenue should have been even longer than it is; that there should be no intimate communication of any kind between the Capitol and the White House; that the President as a man was no more at liberty to lead the houses of Congress by persuasion than he was at liberty as President to dominate them by authority,—supposing that he had, what he has not, authority enough to dominate them. . . . 

The President is at liberty, both in law and conscience, to be as big a man as he can. His capacity will set the limit; and if Congress be overborne by him, it will be no fault of the makers of the Constitution,—it will be from no lack of constitutional powers on its part, but only because the President has the nation behind him, and Congress has not. He has no means of compelling Congress except through public opinion. . . . 

And yet in the exercise of the power to suggest legislation, quite as explicitly conferred upon them by the Constitution, some of our Presidents have seemed to have a timid fear that they might offend some law of taste which had become a constitutional principle. . . . 

But we can safely predict that as the multitude of the President's duties increases, as it must with the growth and widening activities of the nation itself, the incumbents of the great office will more and more come to feel that they are administering it in its truest purpose and with greatest effect by regarding themselves as less and less executive officers and more and more directors of affairs and leaders of the nation,—men of counsel and of the sort of action that makes for enlightenment. 

Woodrow Wilson - "The President of the United States"

8.      The Study of Administration Woodrow Wilson
Text Box: Writing a year before Congress created the Interstate Commerce Commission, the first independent regulatory agency, Wilson argues in this article that it is only through such agencies—separate from the political process and independent of the electorate—that government can pursue its necessary ends. 

This is the reason why administrative tasks have nowadays to be so studiously and systematically adjusted to carefully tested standards of policy, the reason why we are having now what we never had before, a science of administration. The weightier debates of constitutional principle are even yet by no means concluded; but they are no longer of more immediate practical moment than questions of administration. It is getting to be harder to run a constitution than to frame one. . . . 

There is scarcely a single duty of government which was once simple which is not now complex; government once had but a few masters; it now has scores of masters. Majorities formerly only underwent government; they now conduct government. Where government once might follow the whims of a court, it must now follow the views of a nation.

And those views are steadily widening to new conceptions of state duty; so that, at the same time that the functions of government are every day becoming more complex and difficult, they are also vastly multiplying in number. Administration is everywhere putting its hands to new undertakings. . . . 

Such an explanation seems to afford the only escape from blank astonishment at the fact that, in spite of our vast advantages in point of political liberty, and above all in point of practical political skill and sagacity, so many nations are ahead of us in administrative organization and administrative skill. Why, for instance, have we but just begun purifying a civil service which was rotten full fifty years ago? To say that slavery diverted us is but to repeat what I have said—that flaws in our constitution delayed us. . . 

Most important to be observed is the truth already so much and so fortunately insisted upon by our civil-service reformers; namely, that administration lies outside the proper sphere of politics. Administrative questions are not political questions. Although politics sets the tasks for administration, it should not be suffered to manipulate its offices. . . .

Bureaucracy can exist only where the whole service of the state is removed from the common political life of the people, its chiefs as well as its rank and file. Its motives, its objects, its policy, its standards, must be bureaucratic. . . .

The ideal for us is a civil service cultured and self-sufficient enough to act with sense and vigor, and yet so intimately connected with the popular thought, by means of elections and constant public counsel, as to find arbitrariness of class spirit quite out of the question. . . .

This interlacing of local self-government with federal self-government is quite a modern conception.

The Study of Administration Woodrow Wilson