Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) is widely regarded as one of the most transformative presidents in American history. His leadership during the Great Depression and World War II reshaped the role of the federal government and redefined American foreign policy. However, scholars and political observers have long debated the extent to which FDR can be considered a Wilsonian that is, someone who adopted the foreign policy ideals of Woodrow Wilson, the 28th president of the United States. Wilsonianism is often associated with the promotion of democracy, internationalism, and the use of multilateral institutions to maintain peace. To understand whether FDR truly followed in Wilson’s footsteps, we must examine their shared values, points of divergence, and the geopolitical circumstances that shaped their respective presidencies.
Understanding Wilsonian Ideals
Key Features of Wilsonian Foreign Policy
Woodrow Wilson’s approach to international affairs was grounded in moral diplomacy. His vision included the following core principles:
- Promotion of democracy and self-determination around the world
- Opposition to imperialism and secret diplomacy
- Support for collective security through international institutions such as the League of Nations
- Belief in free trade as a vehicle for peace and cooperation
Wilson’s efforts culminated in his Fourteen Points and the creation of the League of Nations, although the U.S. never joined due to domestic opposition. These ideals came to be known as Wilsonianism and have served as a benchmark for assessing future presidents’ foreign policies.
FDR’s Early Political Outlook
A Wilsonian by Association?
FDR began his national political career as Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President Wilson during World War I. This position gave Roosevelt direct exposure to Wilsonian policies and the inner workings of international diplomacy. FDR initially supported Wilson’s call for U.S. entry into the League of Nations and even campaigned for it after the war. These early actions suggest a degree of ideological alignment with Wilson’s vision.
However, Roosevelt was also a pragmatic politician. Though he admired Wilson, he recognized the limitations of Wilson’s idealism, especially in the face of political resistance. This pragmatic streak would come to define FDR’s approach to both domestic and foreign policy, distinguishing him from Wilson’s more rigid moral stance.
The Interwar Period and Isolationism
Adjusting to Political Realities
During the 1920s and 1930s, American foreign policy was dominated by isolationism. After the Senate rejected the Treaty of Versailles and U.S. entry into the League of Nations, the country retreated from international affairs. When FDR assumed the presidency in 1933, he had to navigate a political landscape that was deeply skeptical of foreign entanglements.
Despite these constraints, Roosevelt took steps that reflected a Wilsonian worldview. He recognized the Soviet Union, pursued reciprocal trade agreements, and gradually prepared the U.S. for a more active role in global affairs. Still, his actions were often cautious and incremental, aimed at maintaining domestic support while quietly steering the nation toward engagement.
World War II and the Atlantic Charter
A Revival of Wilsonian Principles
The outbreak of World War II marked a turning point in FDR’s foreign policy. In 1941, Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill issued the Atlantic Charter, which articulated a vision for a postwar world based on self-determination, economic cooperation, and collective security. These principles strongly echoed Wilson’s ideals and laid the groundwork for the creation of the United Nations.
Unlike Wilson, Roosevelt succeeded in building a coalition both at home and abroad to support his internationalist agenda. He skillfully managed public opinion and worked closely with allies to craft a lasting international framework. In this sense, Roosevelt not only revived Wilsonian ideals but implemented them more effectively.
The United Nations: Wilsonianism Realized
From League of Nations to UN
Perhaps the most significant example of Roosevelt’s Wilsonian credentials was his role in establishing the United Nations. Drawing on the lessons of Wilson’s failed League, FDR ensured that the UN would have stronger institutional mechanisms, including a Security Council with permanent members capable of enforcing decisions. Roosevelt’s vision of a global body that could prevent future wars and promote peace directly mirrored Wilson’s earlier aspirations, albeit with more political realism.
FDR’s ability to win bipartisan support for U.S. participation in the UN marked a major departure from Wilson’s experience. His success suggests that he was not merely imitating Wilson but adapting his ideas to fit the geopolitical realities of the mid-20th century.
Differences Between FDR and Wilson
Pragmatism vs. Idealism
While both presidents shared a commitment to democracy and international cooperation, their strategies diverged in important ways. Wilson was driven by a deep moral conviction and often refused to compromise, even when it cost him political support. FDR, by contrast, was a master of political negotiation. He understood that ideals must often be tempered by pragmatism in order to achieve lasting change.
Roosevelt also placed greater emphasis on military preparedness and strategic alliances, especially during World War II. Wilson, by contrast, sought to limit the role of force in international affairs. These differences highlight the evolution of Wilsonianism under Roosevelt’s leadership from a doctrine of moral idealism to one of strategic implementation.
A Wilsonian in Spirit, Not in Method
In answering the question Was FDR a Wilsonian?, the evidence suggests a qualified yes. Roosevelt embraced many of Wilson’s ideals, including the promotion of democracy, support for international institutions, and a belief in collective security. However, he diverged from Wilson in his methods, choosing pragmatism over pure idealism and learning from Wilson’s political missteps.
FDR’s success in creating the United Nations and securing America’s role in global leadership positions him as the president who most effectively realized the vision Wilson set forth decades earlier. Yet he did so by adapting those ideals to a world that had become far more complex and dangerous. In that sense, Roosevelt may be best understood not as a disciple of Wilson, but as a reformer of Wilsonianism one who brought its lofty principles down to earth and made them work in practice.