Replies

Conrad Black isn't a leftist. He's a Canadian Conservative. In US terms he's more or less a Nixonian. Hence the big book he wrote on Nixon, and hence (maybe) his ending up in prison.

As a Nixonian, he pretty much accepted the historical interpretation current in his formative years of Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt as great men. Hence his massive book on FDR and hence this article.

While I disagree with Black about Wilson -- he really does overdo it -- I appreciate that he's bringing a different point of view here that might make people think and reconsider opinions that have become automatic and unthinking lately.

Nowadays it's become as commonplace and automatic to damn Wilson as it once was to praise him, and when that happens, maybe it's a good idea to consider whether we've gone too far.

Black may not claim to be leftist, but his piece certainly was. I don’t think we’ve gone far enough with damning Wilson. The damage he inflicted (and later followed up by his disciples) has caused enormous damage to our country. If we were to roll back most of our policies to 1913, just before he took office, we’d be better off for it.

Conrad Black isn't a leftist. He's a Canadian Conservative. In US terms he's more or less a Nixonian. Hence the big book he wrote on Nixon, and hence (maybe) his ending up in prison. As a Nixonian, he pretty much accepted the historical interpretation current in his formative years of Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt as great men. Hence his massive book on FDR and hence this article.

While I disagree with Black about Wilson -- he really does overdo it -- I appreciate that he's bringing a different point of view here that might make people think and reconsider opinions that have become automatic and unthinking lately.

Nowadays it's become as commonplace and automatic to damn Wilson as it once was to praise him, and when that happens, maybe it's a good idea to consider whether we've gone too far

I recall vaguely that Nixon was a big fan of Woodrow Wilson. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but it seems like that I read that somewhere.

You are projecting rubbish into our current era.

The sentiments you see here on FR weighing against Wilson’s legacy were even more vociferously leveled against Wilson in his second term.

He rode into Washington wildly popular among democrats as Obama-like but was able to win the presidency by challenging a divided Republican party; sound familiar? GWH Bush v. H. Ross Perot v. William Jefferson Clinton redux. Wilson received just above 40% of the popular vote.

During his second presidential campaign he had lost a lot of support as it became evident to people that he was not a practical man, just an idealist, a dreamer, good talker, as they say in Texas “All Hat and No Cattle”. He narrowly won his second term in the Electoral College and he received less than 50% of the popular vote.

Wilson approached party leaders to inform them he would seek a third term as president and they told him in effect to get lost.

He left office as a very unpopular president.

His greatest legacy was indirect in that it left voters desiring to bring in a practically minded president and that they did by electing Harding and Coolidge who both won overwhelmingly the popular vote.

The writer fails to mention the above points.