Ask your own question, for FREE!
History 16 Online
Falconmaster:

https://prnt.sc/gsuy5n

Falconmaster:

@SkyVoltage43 @Allison

SkyVoltage43:

welp i gtg bye lol

Professional:

You expect me to write it for you? smh lol

Professional:

All you need to do is read n answer the questions while you write xD

Professional:

yes LOLOL

Allison:

I should have known better :']

SkyVoltage43:

bye all

Professional:

Help reading it for you which is something you can do X'D LOL

Professional:

IM JUSTTTT SAYINGGGGGGGGGG

SkyVoltage43:

i gtg home bye

Professional:

what do you need help in....what dont u understand from the assignment

Professional:

google

Allison:

The world must be made safe for democracy.”[1] Thus did President Woodrow Wilson, addressing Congress in 1917, summarize America’s high purpose in entering the First World War. At first glance, Wilson’s particular vision of America’s role in the world may not sound radically new. Since the Founding, Americans had fondly hoped that the United States, through its foreign policy and the example it set, would foster the spread of freedom and self-government among the peoples of the Earth. This aspiration had always been central to what Americans considered exceptional about their republic. But Wilson’s call to spread democracy was more urgent and pressing, more obligatory. To answer this call, the United States would be obliged to take on a much more active role in making the world into something new, and it would do so through force if necessary. Wilson’s foreign policy demanded action for the sake of a principle—the spread of freedom and democracy—that he was unshakably certain was right in and of itself. Wilson’s approach to foreign policy, driven as it was by ideology, also eschewed the Founders’ emphasis on the need for prudence in the application of just principles. In the realm of foreign affairs, the Founders believed they should choose the best course in light of particular circumstances. Prudence was also necessary to weigh the possible consequences—long- and short-term, harmful and beneficial—of our actions rather than acting impulsively in pursuit of even a just end. Wilson’s replacement of prudence with ideology in American foreign policy meant that the tempered pursuit of what is best given the circumstances would give way to the uncompromising pursuit of what is simply right. Wilson’s foreign policy arose from a set of beliefs that were widely shared among Progressives at the time and continue to exert influence on both the Right and Left today. These ideals are fundamentally opposed to the principles of the American Founding. Because they take their bearings from different foundational principles, heirs to the Progressives and the American Founders give very different answers to the questions of why and how we should go about promoting freedom abroad. Heirs to the Progressives tend to emphasize that the primary, if not exclusive, purpose of the use of force abroad should be to promote the freedom and welfare of other peoples. Heirs to the American Founders, on the other hand, tend to believe that the use of force abroad should be employed first and foremost for the sake of securing the lives and liberty of America’s own citizens. Throughout the 20th century, Americans struggled with the question of which approach should guide American foreign policy. The bitter fruit of that struggle has been division, inconsistency, confusion, and a lack of moral clarity among Americans regarding how and for what ends our foreign policy should be conducted. The confusion in popular opinion over the ultimate goal of the war in Iraq illustrates this tension well. Did the war aim to eliminate a threat to United States security, or to bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people? In this and many other recent examples, we see the lingering influence of Progressivism across the political spectrum in America. To varying degrees, elements of Progressive foreign policy thought have embedded themselves in virtually every approach to foreign policy today, from liberal internationalists to hawkish neo-conservatives.

Allison:

Bam. Brainly. Star me.

Falconmaster:

was that copy and pasted XD

Allison:

Just go to http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/synonym and type a word that will help you rephrase it by giving you another word to put in instead of it to help rephrase it easier o:

AngeI:

please i am already 1/4 done rephrasing

AngeI:

bi sh i got this

AngeI:

Why would I delete mine?

Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!
Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!