American Progressive Publicists and the First World War, 1914-1917

Abstract

THE subject of progressive attitude toward foreign policy, and in particular toward issue of American intervention in World War I, is in a state of some historiographical confusion. Students approaching question might be puzzled by contradictory generalizations of leading authorities. Thus, while Arthur Link has seen progressivism as a source of isolationist, anti-imperialist and pacific sentiment, Richard Hofstadter, basing his conclusion in large part on work of William Leuchtenburg, has declared that, on contrary, the main stream of feeling in ranks of insurgency was neither anti-war nor anti-imperialist.' This apparently direct conflict of views arises in first place from fact that Link and Hofstadter have different people in mind. Link is primarily concerned with those progressive congressmen and senators, largely from South and West and for most part Democrats, who led opposition to preparedness legislation of 1915-1916 and provided chief source of support for Gore-McLemore resolution in early spring of 1916. Hofstadter seems to be writing about those Republican insurgents against Taft's leadership, whose constituency had presumably followed Theodore Roosevelt and Bull Moose Progressive party in 1912-though Leuchtenburg's contention that majority of progressive members of Congress supported imperialism has since been challenged in case of progressive Republican senators.2