i am the curator of education and it is my absolute pleasure and honor to welcome you all here this evening for a fantastic conversation that we get to enjoy with c-span and with chrome radio. for those of you who are new to our museum, this museum is not, in fact, new. two weeks after the armistice was signed, kansas city and can together and wanted to create a memorial for those who lived through and those who died in the world war. raised $2.5y million to build the structure that we are in this evening. would like to raise $2.5 million in 10 days for us, we would be happy to discuss this. or, at the $37 million that it translates to in today's dollar. in a 1926, this beautiful art nouveau place opened. it was dedicated to those who have a courage, honor, patriotism and sacrifice to defend the nation and also in the hopes of a just and lasting peace. which is, in part, and in whole our conversation this evening. this evening we are going to be discussing that u.s. entry into world war i in april of 19 sake. it is part of a larger series that is a docudrama. pardon me. the first part of our conversation will be looking at the u.s. in 1914 when the war broke out in europe. and'se will look at bulls reelection in november of 1916, the decision to go to war and the u.s. at war. evening is made it waswo originally going to be three speakers. i do not have the lovely scottish acumen's of the person who should be here in my place, hugh strong who is the key narrator throughout much of this docudrama. he is sending his regrets this evening. he had to go back to the u.k.. but he is doing well and look forward to welcoming him back to the national world war i memorial sometime soon. professor j sexton is the inaugural candor endowed chair at the university of missouri. he has, for the last 20 years than at oxford university. but you all in this hometown crowd might also like to know that, at the university of missouri, he originated at the university of kansas. the goddess of what side you're on, please greet him warmly. again, [indiscernible] , dr.u might have seen jennifer keen on my left, you're right on the american experience. she has been a key speaker in much of the u.s. and the global commemoration of the first world war. she has been working with the 1914-1918 encyclopedia project. she is the cart president for the society of the military history and it she is the professor and chair of the department of history at chapman university. each of theroduce discussion topics, we are going to be playing excerpts from the new podcast docudrama by chrome radio about the u.s. entry into world war i and it is called into the peace broker. the drama was generously supported by the ross near foundation whose ancestor, had close connections with the 1917d states and who, in was taken over from foreign secretaries as head of the united kingdom war mission to the u.s.. contemporary diaries, letters and newspaper reports, enter the peace broker brings america's journey into world war i vividly alive plant we discover a story of duplicity, middle matted intrigue and power politics. for those of you interested in listening more to this -- because we know it sounds really good. it is free for you. you can ask that it at itunes and includes instructions from the per semester -- the professor and script components. this discussion and the podcast will be in due course. let's get started. i would like to introduce our first clip and accept from the docudrama. this comes from the opening of enter the peace broker. it is february 1915. yours has been at war. since the previous august and colonel house is on his house -- on his way to london on an unofficial peace mission. tournament, if you please. -- gentlemen, if you please. [clip] >> the daily mail. february the second 1915. the crew of the steamship that was sent by german submarine on saturday has returned home. by submarine commanded arthur her sing is in the irish sea and three other submarines, all of them obviously german have been reported in a st. george's channel to the south of the waters where you 21 begins their exploits. the berlin of tiger dark comedy on the attacks and the german people will hear the news with great pleasure. as england seems to place her main hope on the starving out of germany. as they deal with us, so we must deal with them. >> february the sixth, 1915 on board the lusitania, the voyage is soon to come to an end. it looked as if we might perish, so fierce was the storm. despite our site, the ship tossed about like a cork in the rapids. this afternoon, as we approached the irish coast, our captain decided to waste the american flag and this created excitement. averly said to them you is fine ship, we do not claim it as one of our own. but, the captain had become greatly alarmed at the possible or ever german submarine and raised the flag in order to reduce the chance that we would be torpedoed. because of his concern, he mapped out a program for the rescue of passengers. the launching of life, etc., etc.. under the stars and stripes, we are arriving safely. thanks be to god. has reacheddward britain's shores. he is the president's right-hand man. he has, by choice, no position.tor area his motives are good, we're told. he is here on an unofficial quest to bring peace to the world. he will visit paris and berlin and london, talk to politicians, talk to the great and the good. he can talk to me, if he cares to. chief found that were missed edward house is staying, will you? house, president wilson, man just arrived. that conversation with florida northwest might be high on his agenda. when i see him, i will tell him that we are all for peace. but not at any price. a negotiated peace sound like to me.rs talk we will win in the end. i'm certain we will and my newspapers are playing a role in securing victory. united states was divided at 1914, as to who they were supporting. they were supporting both the size and yet neutral at the same time. jay could you set the scene for us of 1914? >> there are divisions in 1914. i am glad to hear that in kansas any there is -- kansas city there is no longer division between kansas city and a you. >> there was a warm round of applause. >> what is the stage? had we set the stage in 1914? obviously, the outbreak of a transformative conflict in europe. .t is going to change the world america is going to try not to get involved and is not going to be able to insulate itself from the contagion. the context is not international. i think we need to set the stage with the domestic context, and the united states. 1914, would be the tail end of a decades long process of ,ndustrialization, urbanization transformation of the nation's demography from immigration. this is the great peak. of immigration in american history, the three or four decades before 1914. the united states is changing, it is not a single entity in the 1914. and that is essential to understanding what happens thereafter. i make two more points about what is important in a 1914. what do we need to know before we start thinking about the united states in its entanglement in this great conflict? the first thing we need to know is about america's foreign policy. policy, iforeign would characterize in this. ofone of indecision, one conflicting impulses, conflicting traditions. there is no single american vision of how this very pluralistic, diverse and began to win nation should interact with the wider world. that is important. there has been great debate about how america should interact with the wider world. not just in 1914 but going back. the keeping you would need to the is about 1898 spanish-american war, the moment in which the united states joined -- formally joins the club of imperial european powers when it defeats spain. it takes her colonial possessions, most notably the philippines, puerto rico, guam, cuba, extending american influence in central america and the caribbean. the americans untangled as never had before. it is protecting its power. that this is deeply contentious and devices that home. there is debate about whether america is should be, colonial power. or if it should, in some way, try to roll back the clock to an earlier. in which america was allegedly isolated from the wider world. debate. indecision and the last thing to say is, 1914 setting the stage, it is a moment of great uncertainty across the globe. you do not only have the war in your, you have the mexican revolution entering a new, accelerated phase. this is one of the most important things to know if you are going to study the united states in this. . it is something very few people know a preference thing poncho via is their favorite mexican restaurant. mexico entered at this moment of retracted social, political and economic crisis on america's southern border raising all questions about how the united states should begin to insert its new power. littled you tell us a bit more about the state of the armed forces in the united states in 1914? >> i want to first say that i am from california. so i am neutral in this debate. inot like wilson is neutral 1914. i think it is important to understand the state of the american military in the 14, in part to understand his embracement of neutrality and to pick up on what jay was describing on the american geopolitical situation as a result of the spanish-american war. when we think about the army and the navy that america has, it has them that it needs to handle the kind of responsibilities envisioned having as a result of this transformative moment at the turn-of-the-century. by that, i mean we needed an army that could guard the border with mexico and undertake some police action in the caribbean, that could occasionally be used in a domestic dispute. we had a navy that was primarily focused on the pacific in terms of thinking about guaranteeing our control over the pacific island possession. in 1914, wely know, have a relatively small peacetime army and the national guard and one of the big debates between control of the military forces in the united states, will it a federally controlled or stay controlled? but sometimes you like to look at history looking back and then look at american people and say why were we not more prepared? but i would make the case that we had the military that we needed for the responsibilities that we had defined for ourselves. point would add one other in terms of thinking about wilson and his decision about neutrality, which i think i have been implying is impractical. it would've been difficult for the united states to conceive of getting involved in the war of 1914. but, he has another problem, the composition of the people of the united states. i think one of the most telling phrases in his neutrality address is that what the united states says and does will depend on what the american people say and do. he understands that, in 1914, he does not have a public opinion unified around a notion of entering the conflict. internationalally domestic group that we have at that point in time. ands a nation of immigrants we have a lot of conversation about immigrants today. buck, 100 years ago it was awfully similar. could you speak to the u.s. as a community of immigrants from europe, where that might have torn their loyalties? >> absolutely. this is one of the key points. if anything, we talk about immigration. populationage of the of the united states that was foreign-born today is ill not reached its historic peak, which was right around the turn-of-the-century. it is just decided -- shy of 15% and there is another surge of immigration before the great war. that is coming on the heels of earlier waves of immigration, which should not be forgotten. to the most important ethnic immigrant groups in the great war where those were arrived in the mid 19th century. that is, of course, the irish and the germans. they're going to be very important. what is also important to realize is the majority of them had been in this country for, what, 70 years. this is second-generation, sometimes their generation. the wave of immigrants that arrived right before the great war breaks out in a 1914, most of them are from europe, as well but they are from different parts of your here they are from southern europe, italy, greece. and they are from eastern europe. eastern europe including russia, ukraine, large jewish populations or catholics. all sorts of diverse immigrants coming to the united states and they are first generation maybe second-generation by this time. when wilson is talking about trying to put his finger on the pulse of the american public opinion, i think this is a big part of it. i would just say one more thing. it is not the only difficulty inputting the finger on the pulse because there is all sorts of conflicting identities and tribal loyalties in the united states that we still have today. things like partisan affiliation. things like geographic locale. are you from the midwest, kansas 80, a port city on the aussie and it goes spirit and all of those things either prisms through which people view the great war as it breaks out. it is a pluralistic, diverse society. there is no single american response to the war. that is the essential background for the difficulties confronting the wilson administration. >> i would just add to this portrait of thinking about immigrants being such a key factor in american life in 1914. that part of the trend that jay was mentioning about the world coming a smaller place because of a few ships and communication , that this was a way for immigrants to stay connected to their homeland. especially the families that were still there. you could have generations that had been here more than two or three. but they had not lost touch with where they came from or where there relatives came from. i think it is important to one may think about how americans respond in the. of neutrality and the diversity of responses which is that, if we have to have one a unifying americans respond in 1914 and 1917, it is through humanitarian aid. the matter which group you talk about, as groups are mobilizing within their communities to send aid to the communities from which they were tonight. part of this is political and part of it is having a difference of opinion about who is to blame for the war and who was fighting for what. but, a lot of it is about personal connections that you have. unleashes a huge humanitarian crisis, refugee orphans, these are personal connections made to these communities and americans responded. in that sense, we are divided. but we are united in this kind -- to helpo have make the situation better. i believe that becomes an important foundation upon which wilson is able to build with his idealistic language, that the united states can, in fact make a difference. in the memorial, we have a set of letters of americans writing back to their german family, trying to find out how things are going as well as those efforts of humanitarian on all sides. those who are trying to aid the allied. those who are aiding the central powers and there are phenomenal posters that americans are putting forth to try and rally the efforts. i am so glad you brought up the humanitarian effort. for many of us, what we know about is the lusitania poster. and there are so many more diverse stories. >> one of the key points there is that, when we think about wars and public opinion, we tend to think, who do you support? actually, in addition to this confusion, one way of characterizing american public opinion was that nobody wants the war. they want humanitarian objectives. they want mediation attempts that we just heard in a diplomatic extension of that attitude. woodrow wilson is elected in 1916 under the slogan he kept us out of the war. which is going to be what our second exit from the docudrama is about. here, in this second episode of into the peace broker it is november of 1916 and wilson has just been reelected. [clip] >> the streets and squares were filled to overflowing, results were displayed everywhere by electric white and cinematograph. at first, mr. wilson's reelection to the president he seemed less cancer in. but, the situation began to change. as a result came in from the west. memoir of edith wilson. november 10. been, and had undisturbed throughout. but i could see the strain was beginning to tell on him. great crowd at the station. a lady rushed forward, presented me with a fragrant cluster of a violet and said, happiest wishes to you and to your husband, the next president of the united states. for the first time i felt confident that, despite our reports to the contrary, woodrow had been reelected. the times, november the 13th. mr. wilson engaged the country with nicety. the people craved peace and prosperity. under his administration they had enjoyed peace unbroken and prosperity without example. now, in his second term, he possesses greater freedom of action. the germans suppose that mr. wilson would be defeated. they branded him as the most hated man in germany and proposed to indulge in a ruthless submarine campaign during the last four months of his term on the in-flight assumption that he would have neither the power nor the will to challenge german action. now that they find mr. wilson reelected, they are confident he will remain neutral, whatever germany chooses to do. but they reluctantly confess that president wilson remains president wilson. he does. it we are content that should be so. however, he may be president wilson with a difference. [music] >> that was pretty good. that deserves a round of applause. next time that happens, that is going to be even bigger. were so kind to set me up for that transition, could you explain just a bit, why it was that wilson won the election of 1960? >> the obvious answer is he got the most votes in the electoral college. but not by a long shot. interestingly, we have public memories of these contested, very close presidential elections and it seems like 1916 very rarely is one of those. it is absolutely one of those and comes down to a few thousand votes on the west coast and california that trickle in. i think we heard about that in the statement. when? he winsn those swing states. the big one, in this. , remains what it has always been and remains to be a swing state to this day. it is ohio. which is revealing why he wins that state. thing bigger picture, one -- one factor you have to zoom division within the ranks of the republican party. this is a continuation of the 1912 one, we saw in of course, teddy roosevelt ran a progressive party ticket. opening the door for a democrat to win -- the first democrat to win since cleveland back in the late 19th century. divisions within the republican party are key. wilson areocrats and building a coalition. this is not the new deal coalition. but there are portions of it. the self, the west are the stronghold, making inroads in the cities, immigrant immunities andicularly catholics particularly immigrants of the political machine, like you have in this city in kansas city. wilson building on that, expanding the democratic vote and wins a greater percentage of the popular vote in 1916 and he had in 1912. thatat i hear the trend is 1914, 1917 is a lot like 2017. though, a little bit different and fake news. as seen back in >> clearly wilson set out in depended on who won the hearts and minds of americans. we saw german and british propaganda taking that to heart as well. they tried to see how they could sway americans to their point of view. ermanssitania -- the gr said it was only carrying munitions and that it took the men and women and children into the war zone. she british said this wa uncivilized behavior by a european power. americans are being inundated with propaganda and the british are winning the propaganda war. and understand it better there are some political blows germany can never recover from. 1917, we think of the lusitania. but this was the moment that the bryce report was released. this detail the atrocities the german army did when they invaded belgium. and we have the execution of bell. edith things highlighting women and children as the true victims of the german atrocities. it is hard for germany to ever recover from with reasoned arguments about international law and why they should be allowed to use submarines. this is too legalistic an explanation. >> in 1916, was the u.s. armed forces ready for war. >> in 1914 we had the army and navy we needed. by 1916, you see movement crystallizing in the united states. the preparedness movement argues we need to make preparations to fight in this war. anypacifist movement saw move to strengthen the military as a slippery slope that would inevitably get us into war. it is important to understand how strong these movements are. incremental steps in 1916 to increase the military. we have a small increase in the regular army to get us up to 175,000 men. we increase federal supervision of the national guard to improve training. council ofe national defense, which allows the government to start serving its economy and economic resources. the economic resources are an important way we fight this war. >> as you came into the museum this evening, knowingly or unknowingly, you pass right by the kansas city federal reserve. the federal reserve was a newly formed organization. how important was u.s. funding to the allied war effort and the changes happening? >> the funding is absolutely essential. is picking upg on the point about military preparedness, but also the federal reserve board. a few years before the war started --in both instances what you have is not just the united states developing institutions and forms of political economy its immediate need, but it is also the product of long-running traditions. the aversion to a standing army. that was somehow unamerican. the same thing about the ittralization, the finance, was an even stronger american tradition. especially within wilson's american party. bryan, a verygs significant figure in wilson's administration. ng-running forces wilson is running against. in terms of funding, we see a theal change for where united states said in the national market. -- sits in the national market. the united states have been the great black hole for investment. it sucks in foreign investment. igns that is beginning to change. ist the great war is doing rapidly accelerate that process. between 1914 and 1917, the united states transitions from being a debtor nation to a creditor nation. it entangles of the united states on the british and french efforts and wave it does not with the germans. the same dynamic we are hearing about propaganda plays out in the hardheaded world of finance. the second reason why this is a significant development is there is no going back after 1917. the united states is literally invested in the cause.. those investments will persist after the war. table shape american foreign-policy in the 1920's. -- it will shape american foreign-policy in the 1920's, affect us in the 1930's and then affect world war ii. this is one thing that shapes of the great war itself. when we talk about finance, the students start snoozing. debtoronce again a great nation. this is a contentious political issue about where the united states since in global markets and financial markets. scenariod add that my intomanitarian aid pourig this isng into europe, coming back into the united states. it is creating a market for agricultural goods. the notion we are profiting off the war and the morality of that becomes a public issue. >> in 1917, the federal reserve to raise a central brain for the financial -- creates a central brain for the financial system and a reduction in tariffs. the economy and this is an international moment for american economic history. >> and our third excerpt from 1917,cudrama, march of wondering whether or not we should declare war. it is the newly reelected president woodrow wilsonwond -- wondering whether he should ask congress to declare war. 1970. -- 27,, 1917. meeting with the president. should ask if he congress to declare war or say it already exists. if you put a declaration of war to congress, there would be an acrimonious debate. i told him how anxious i was that he meet the challenges in a credible way so that would be conflict is over his reputation and influence are not reduced and he is able to do the great work that would follow. i took the liberty to suggest that he might not be well-suited to the immediate task. he was too refined, civilized, cultivated. he needed to be less of a philosopher to conduct a brutal, vigorous, successful war. he agreed. >> march 30, perfect weather. woodrow felt he should work on his message to congress. he closed the doors and said no one was to disturb him. we dined . a-- we dined alone. the american people. sat them down in comfortable chairs and said stay there. woodrow has continued his work. making short hand and long hand and then making a copy on his typewriter. meanwhile, i decoded some messages that had come in. >> he was completely condescending. conceived a vision of himself as president peacemaker, but he has been pushed into action. how he idea is to show led the people into a glorious war in defense of democracy. the truth is this whole business has been a catalog of errors. >> april 1. the message is finished. man who likes to shut himself away. engage himself and what he calls thought. the air currents of the world and never visibly ventilate his mind. leader, he is not a peacemaker, he is a stubborn phrase maker. >> april 2, congress convened at 12 noon. when we reached the capital, the crowd outside was almost as large as on inauguration day. woodrow came in. everyone rose to their feet and my heart seemed to stop beating. he delivered the speech and there was utter silence until he pronounced the words, we will not choose the path of submission. whereupon chief justice white, and at confederate soldier, got up and cheered. the response from the galleries and floor was the deafening so und. -- was deafening. >> woodrow wilson, the last united states president to not work with a type writer. he used four words that changed american foreign-policy forever. in declaring war, he changed the direction of the united states and set us on the path we are still on. extent did7, to what the american public believe we were getting into war because of the zimmerman telegram? you were talking about other things americans were drawn to at the time. >> we like to simplify our one pivotal picking moment where it all turns and changes. especially something as important as a declaration of war --it is a comforting way tel-- to tell our history. the lusitania goes down, pearl harbor, these explain us fighting our wars. the zimmerman telegram, the resumption of unconditional submarine warfare, these were not things that dramatically changed anybody's mind. they reaffirmed views people already have. the majority of people already turned to favoring the allies over germany. those who have not made that transformation were not persuaded by these events either. there were a lot of people who looked at the zimmerman telegram who were against entering the war. they do not believe this was a credible threat. they looked at unconditional submarine warfare as aimed at stopping british shipping from the united states. if we were going to punish britain for violating international law the same way we were punishing germany, there would be a problem. persuasive events but they were, since --they were ulative.lative -- cum it was the moment at which he embraced --i would argue one of the things wilson gives us is not nice phrases for us to keep but he gives us this idea that way to make the world a better place. through war you can accomplish good things and this is a recurring theme we have seen since the first world war. >> how united was of the united states towards this war effort? >> it is a good question. a difficult question to answer. thee is no question that divisions we were discussing d.rlier persiste war, and the to first several months of 1917, when you had the acceleration of these events happening -- i agree it is not just one thing that sets off the war. put those who are opposing war or intervention on the background. there are still divisions. inyou look at the votes congress on wilson's war message , they are fairly decisive. it is a decisive vote. the opponents of intervention had drawn the line in the sand earlier. senators stand from the very -- senator stone who was for wilson opposes the war 1914.es in the run uup to the decision to arm those merchant ships was an admission that the united states would be involved in war. stone turns back and supports wilson in april of 1917. he falls in line. but this unity in the democratic party persists. once you declare war, there are so many issues to decide and all those things will be deeply contentious. it is interesting to hear that clip about the x confederate supreme court justice and that cathartic moment of reconciliation. how older americans and younger americans in 1917 what have seen what was happening through the prism of the american civil war, which cap such a shadow -- which cast such a shadow. it was interesting to hear that is how some americans still interpreted 1917. >> while it is hard to parse out all segments of political opinion because we have imperfect measures, it is important to realize that wilson was concerned that there remains a significant anti-war constituency in the united states. one of the first things he proposes is press censorship. this is something congress refuses to authorize and he wants. the compromise is the espionage act. this idea we will immediately have to silence those who voted against the war and spoke out against the war --that they will no longer be able to express those opinions. not because of those opinions matter but because they may influence other people during a long, difficult war that may ta ke several years. this sense he does not have the country completely behind him is demonstrated in his attempt to centralize that kind of power, which we is not seen a government tried to do as much earlier in our nation's history. >> one of the key people behind him was walter high steam -- wal heinstien, who was the u.s. ambassador to london. we will hear in the final clip rama, in april of 1917, the u.s. has just declared war and this is walter heinstien. ambassador to london. ♪ ♪ johnny get your gun ♪ take it on the run ♪ andar them calling you me ♪ ♪every kind of liberty t♪ london.merican embassy, war will invigorate us. it will wake us up and shake us up. we need this war just as much as the germans need taking down. war will end our isolation nad lessand make us hospitable to every immigrant. it will revive our manhood and make us a great seafaring nation. 5 or 10 years from now, alas the dead will be forgotten. the suffering will be a mere memory. the fields will recover their bloom and life will go on as before. but america can learn from the w ar. become greater and stronger. we can cultivate those manly qualities required in wartime. we can be true to our traditions and ancestry. we can free ourselves from our isolationist, landl overish feeling. we can build ships. little ships, ships without number. we can sell to the ends of the ocean and dominate the world both in trade and political ideology. those ships will be loaned to low rate oft a interest. we must make the moral issue clear. we speak of the wrongs been done to us but injury has been also done to our ideals. if we value democracy in the world, this is the chance to further it. no more dreams about peace and conferences and other intellectual diversions. this is war and we must fight in earnest. [bellringing] >> that quote might be a far cry from the conscientious objection. man in our hisotry and certainly informing woodrow wilson. he outlines some essential points in that particular piece, looking at definitions of masculinity and citizenship. he also talked about the importance of ships. about theof you talk u.s. navy and its contribution? >> well, i did not know this was going to come up. i'm am writing a book about shipping lines. is ambassador, what he talking about is the american shipping industry was small in this time. it had grown in the first decades of the 20th century but it is a common concern. he would be disappointed to look at historic ledger books to of u.s. troops sent to france in troops sent of u.s. to france in 1917 went on british ships. that masculine language and how war would somehow revitalize a flagging american manhood. this is the time of the effigy of the suffragettes movement. women were trying to get the right to vote in 1920. this is not an american phenomenon. this is happening around the world and in britain at the same time. his comments address that. we often think about war, especially in this country, as excel of social progress. --we often think about war in this country as an accelerator of social progress. we think of the second world war, which is facilitated -- which facilitated social change. if you want to know how the civil rights movement succeeded in the 1950's and 1960's, you have to start with the second world war. i wonder if the first world war provides the alternative lesson. that war can accelerate social progression. it can embolden those who oppose the expansion of rights. one of the great legacies of the first world war is immigration restriction in 1921. the emergence of white supremacy and the ku klux klan. their effigy is in the 1920's, not after the civil war. the red scare. the anti-communist hysteria in all the product of the same passion we just heard. that is linked to the same war, the war to celebrate change. >> i think people in war do things. it is interesting that the movement you mentioned, the suffrage of female, the civil rights movement, thinking about conscientious objection and having a right to object to serve in the military based on principles instead of your religious affiliation. these are movement huge during the first world war and sovements that many way could have just disappeared. they were the center from the idea they should be setting their special grievances of five and only be thinking about the war. in war this is they see an opportunity to strategize in different ways and recruit members into their organization that might now -- not have seen ust the moment is now for to move on these issues. in some ways, everything you said is true about the regression in terms of the overall tenor of the country when it comes to certain rights. when we think about credible organizations like the naacp that will be so critical throughout the 20th century. in 1909, the naacp is a tiny organization, but it is the first world war that allows for to have a national presence. the recruits soldiers and activists in many communities into its ranks. it is interesting to think about the way people are responding to war, which determines what direction --we can look at world war ii as a great moment eventually, but what about the internment of japanese? i wanted to think about how america is raising this military. we are raising the military primarily through conscription. we do not collect transcription, we collect selective service. the idea that war has been elevating --it elevates the moral tenor of the country because we have another purpose to commit ourselves to. i think through conscription and selective service, which in many ways argues that the entire nation is subject to call from the government to serve the nation in times of war and the sense that you don't have to think about whether or not you support the war. do you support america? you support your responsibility as a citizen. there is the civic religion that is formed during the war that people find appealing. >> all the social changes we are referring to, regardless of how they play out -- how quick the united states's experience of the first world war is compared to the european experience since 1914. there is a great acceleration of change. but there is not the resolution you see in some of the european countries are some of the other , there are allls of these men who went overseas and might have sent back souvenirs to their loved ones. they brought back the trappings of being a doughboy. how were americans received by the europeans? france, they were seen as saviors. --y were seen as an effusion and in fusion of numbers and energy and enthusiasm. there is no doubt that american soldiers felt welcomed in france. they were welcomed by french civilians and soldiers and i think the regard became usual over time. in the beginning, they were -- if you look at the individual doughboy and the experience with french and reddish soldiers, -- french and findsh soldiers, what i interesting in studying the youier experience is, when look at the way the commanders talk about the war afterwords, they are the ones primarily saying america won the war. when you look at the letters from the doughboys when they finally can tell themselves -- telik their families what they went through, they talk about it the way historians talk about it now, it was a coalition. we were part of a great victory, not solely responsible for it. >> at the end of the first world a first ofeally see interest inlobal the united states. fascination. what does the president of the country mean when he issues 14 points? what does it mean for those living within european empires and colonial systems in the 1920's? the words and ideas of wilson and the united states, the genie is out of the bottle after the first world war. there is a lot of fascination forit lays the foundation the future united states power. tohas not always lived up its ideals, wilson did not stand by all of his 14 points at the treaty in versailles. this is just the dawn of technology and hollywood cinema, all of this will follow on the heels of the war. been doing a lot of question asking this evening. this audience has many familiar faces and experts and i would invite you, whether you feel you are an expert or not, to come down and ask some questions of anyone on the panel in regard to our conversations. shoe.ut the soft when you come down, our first question is coming from this gentleman. >> this is for professor sexton. since you talked about the , what aboutloyments our diplomatic war and foreign service? do you think it was correctly deployed and had the right people? as we saw the u.s. military change it ready in 1780 -- in 1918, -- >> fantastic question about america's foreign service and diplomatic corps that traditionally the united states had had a very inept foreign service and a small state department. there is a great story in the 1890's about the longest-serving clerk in the state department was bicycling down the road in washington dc and one observer said to another, there goes our state department. that was the size and power. there were important reforms in the late 19 century which professionalized the foreign service, which brings some kind of administrative regulation to it. nearsould say the story more what we are hearing about the military, it is expanded, certainly since 1898. it does its job better. is it ready and prepared to take on a much larger responsibility as it would have to in the mid-20th century? probably not. let me give you a statistic i happened to read yesterday about american schools teaching foreign languages. the data i have is from 1915 versus 1975, the height of the cold war. they were teaching less than half the foreign languages than they were in 1915. there was an infrastructure in place linked to immigration. geared toe u.s. well assume responsibility but it was not ready yet. from this siden here. >> thank you for your presentation. my question relates to my understanding that at the moment we declared war, it was not yet a foregone conclusion that we would send ground troops to europe, that we could have made it simply an economic war or a at somer, and that point shortly after the declaration of war, somebody made the decision that we would send troops to europe, which made all the difference. i would like to hear if my understanding is correct, how did this come about and was there opposition to it? thank you. there was a short-lived notion that we were only going to actively accelerate our finances and not have to raise a significant number of troops to go. the first people to dissuade us our alliesion were in france and britain. it very clear from the didnning that not only large numbers of americans need put thembut they would in places where they could get to be battlefields faster. the other important element was did noton that wilson control the process of creating the army, there were going to be crazy volunteers negotiating on the sides and raising a regiment. reality was a political here. if you could turn the microphone back on? let's see. >> that was a really good answer. >> basically i would say that was a short-lived notion. the realities on the western front were such that it became very clear that an american presence was demanded. from wilson's point of view, it was going to be more efficient to control it instead of letting volunteers go over themselves. some of those comments by congressmen were little disingenuous. they were also made to appease people who would say, yes, of course america should beat germany, but i do not want to go fight in france. >> thank you. there was going to be a little soft shoe, and it will be mine. as this gentleman is going to ask a question, and this microphone is coming over to you, jennifer. over?uld i bring it thank you very much for the discussion. i do not understand the u.s. neutrality. and i do not think it was neutrality. from 1914k at wilson through 1917, he supported the british blockade. the british blockade basically was a starvation lock-in of blockade- starvation of germany. they starved germany for six months after the war ended. with all of the rhetoric of wilson, how neutral was he? i agree in the point you just that was made by many americans at the time, many within wilson's own political party and cabinet. i agree with you. so maybe the question is gets refrained. strategicand american thinkers are in: -- inclined, why do they not move more quickly? i do not think it was clear-cut decided that that was the right thing to do, to align with britain. it was a return to the domestic political constraints. one thing we did not talk about today but that is important is the position of anglo phobia within the u.s., particularly within wilson's own party. this was the party of irish-americans who hated the english. you know i mean the constraints from the populist wing of the party. it takes time to work these things through. we can talk about, why is there no outrage about the starvation going on in germany, and we can go back to the propaganda, we did not have the visual personal connection people could make. the imagery was not being distributed in the united states. but you could also point to , i read african-american newspapers in 1915 that said, yes, it is terrible what is happening to will men and children in belgium. but is -- but it is also terrible what belgium did in the congo. where was the rage and outrage then? americans for inconsistency of application of principles and who they decide to villain eyes and who is the victim -- who they decide is the villain and who was the victim, people were calling others out on those issues. >> we have time for two more questions. we will start here with you. definitely an intellectual and academic and historian who had written widely . every historian, he must have understood the great cultural and historical differences in europe among the peoples, the with sohics of europe many different ethnic and linguistic groups lived side-by-side and were interwoven within small areas. what did he really hope to pinning ofwith the the 14 points? points, then the 14 context and moment at which it is written is important. the 14 points can be read as an appeal to russia to stay in the war, when you think about sections we tend not to read , it can beeamble seen as an overture to germany about, this can be a reasonable piece, not a piece to destroy you. it can also be seen as an appeal to many of these immigrant groups within the u.s. who have now developed their own interests in the outcome of the war. even within the united states, newidea that there will be opportunities for nationalities to now have independence, these are appealing concepts. in lots of respects, he is thinking in larger political than trying to have the 14 points be a specific blueprint for what piece will look like. when he gets to versailles, look -- think of the inquiry. he brings with him teams of experts who really are going to dig deep and hammer out details. and hass a progressive the expertise that there is data you can find that will solve problems. fantasticnts is a document because there are so many different ways you can interpret what wilson is trying to accomplish. i would argue that redrawing the map of europe is really the least important goal he had in crafting the documents. >> i agree. wilson, wethink of link him with what happens and all of the problems to which you refer about the reconfiguration of the geopolitical chessboard. we think of him as forward looking. there is also a backward looking element of wilson. he is a historian and takes lots of information from the past. one of his greatest heroes was william gladstone, the prime minister of britain in the late 19th century. he had a picture of him on his desk in princeton. he is looking back to a simpler time as well as anticipating a complex time. he is looking back to the few fundamentals of what makes an international system work and what has worked in the past. open markets, a representative government, avoiding the ques, wartic cli mongering and warfare. he is trying from a tradition in the past, not just an american tradition, but a transatlantic one. wilson, in his time, and we must not project him to far forward, because the war -- the world is going to change in which ways wilson cannot anticipate and would not have been comfortable with. >> no pressure after such a fantastic evening. are you ready for the last question? >> im. first, i want to say thank you to all of you. it has been interesting and entertaining. keene, yous, dr. mentioned the doughboys when they arrived in france were widely received as liberators and welcomed with open arms. i understanding is there was debate as to whether there would be introduced into the conflict as reinforcements to fill in gaps, or introduced as separate regiments and units under u.s. command. that conflict over how they would be introduced, does it say something about the u.s. relationship? does it say something about the question of national pride and the pride of the generals themselves? and how does it complicate the question to the degree of the open arm embraced when they arrived? question. a great you laid out a lot of the elements of the debate in terms of what to do with american soldiers. you havegh levels, pershing steadfastly standing by the principal that american armies need to be american led and fight an american sector and that this will be important for woodrow wilson to be able to demonstrate a clear contribution of americans to the victory, and this will help ham -- help him convince others that he is ready to have a major say in peace. --shing will do., except for pershing will do that, except for when he doesn't. when the war takes on momentum of its own, in principle, the american army will remain independent. every american soldier except those who arrive at the end will spend a significant amount of time training the french and british army. soldiervery american has their first experience in line along sign french and alongsideldiers -- french and british soldiers. but these are coalition battles. there are plenty of moments at which pershing has to compromise this principle because of what was happening on the battlefield and the inability of his army to in 1918.in his imaginings are that the major battles will come in 1919 at which point he expects to be fully independent. but the war end's before we get to that point. >> the united states, this issue of how it will remain -- relates in military command structure, it is revealing that the united states calls itself not an ally but an associate power. it is part of, but not quite. very revealing contrast to the second world war. it lends some credence to the idea that world war i is a mile marker on the road to something that happens later with the united states. howe is ambivalence about to do so, not in the case of pershing. he wants military autonomy. but doesn't he think he will be doing this in 1919? no one thinks the war will end as soon as it does. the time, or soon thereafter, many were hoping it would be the war that would in fact end all wars. if you were to find out more of the reasons why it wasn't, i would suggest you go back to something that jennifer just said earlier. look back at the individual stories of the humanitarians and those who led humanitarian drives after world war i. story here at the museum and memorial. we invite you to walk through our gallery. we hold the most global of -- global collection of world war i artifacts. thejust the american story, full story. we are still a nation of immigrants and we look to tell that. we also have some amazing educators that are here. it has truly been a pleasure to sit here with both of you. hugh is onlad that the mend. i know he would have enjoyed this immensely. i hope you all will join us next time. if you enjoyed this evening, and i know that many of you might already be coming back, you could enjoy it -- you could join us for -- starting tomorrow where we began our conversations 1917, america joins the war. if you cannot join us, look at it online. you will find many of the videos .oon to come on our website type, i would to our a book we give interns. there will be a book signing afterwards and we encourage you to stop by the table and ask more questions. i hear there will be a great book about ships coming. check it out on amazon. we might be putting out that news in our newsletter. war.org.s at the world thank you all very much for being here, have a good night. [applause] you are watching american history tv, 48 hours programming of american history every weekend on c-span3. follow us on twitter for information on our schedule and to keep up with latest history announcer: c-span, with history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's television cable companies. it is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. announcer: each week, real america brings you archival films that provide context of today's public affairs issues. make agoing to have to tough decision. i will have to see which of you really will qualify more than the other for the program. i will let you know monday morning. >> thank you, sir. have a good weekend. did you want to see me about my application? >> yes, and some other things. how are you doing? good. i've been thinking about you the last couple weeks. what i have about been asking you to do the last couple of months. not that again, please. >> i would like to spend some time with you. why not? >> can't we just drop it? >> drop it at that? let me put it this way, if you select me this weekend, i will select you for the course. it is up to you. announcer: you can watch this and other american history programs on our website, where all of our video is archived. that is c-span.org/history. next, on the presidency, timothy reese explains how dwight d. eisenhower's upbringing and influence influenced his personal code of behavior. in 34th president was born 1890, the year that the u.s. government declared the american frontier closed. he is the deputy director and supervisory archivist at the dwight d. eisenhower presidential library at the museum. this is 40 minutes. >> we are pleased to have our own tim reeves here. he is my go to guy for all andrmation on archives records administration related questions. i rely on him greatly. he is here to speak to you today about the western

Related Keywords

United States , United Kingdom , Paris , France General , France , Missouri , Cleveland , Ohio , Cuba , California , Togo , Wilson Point , Russia , Kansas City , Kansas , Guam , London , City Of , Ukraine , Puerto Rico , Mexico , Germany , Belgium , Italy , Hollywood , Ireland , Spain , Greece , Berlin , Americans , America , Germans , Britain , French , German , British , Irish , American , States Howe , Martin Wade , Klux Klan , Edith Wilson , Tim Reeves , Woodrow Wilson ,