Paul Bieniek
pbb001@marietta.edu
On Monday night, Marietta College students, faculty, and Marietta community members filed into Thomas 124 to hear political science professor Mark Schaefer, Ph. D., give the latest lecture in the WWI Colloquium series.
According to English professor Nicole Livengood, Ph.D., who helped organize the colloquium, the idea for the series originated from the need to recognize the centennial of WWI through the multiple prisms and perspectives of the liberal arts.
“People don’t like to be in [war], but if you look at books and films it tends be something that people are drawn to,” Livengood said. “Since it is the centennial, I thought this was an opportunity to bring the college and the community together through a topic that interests a lot of people.”
In his lecture, Schaefer discussed the foreign policy of President Woodrow Wilson. Schaefer said that by involving the U.S. in WWI, Wilson moved the United States from a relatively isolationist country to a global power player. He accomplished this by arguing the United States should spread democracy and other “American values” throughout the world with the hope that this would bring lasting peace.
Schaefer argued that ever since this time, both liberals and conservatives have broadly accepted Wilson’s precepts albeit in two slightly different incarnations. Liberals adopted what Schaefer termed the “liberal internationalist” ideology, which strives to promote democracy and the rule of law, protect human rights, and work through the UN and Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs) whenever possible. The foreign policy of Bill Clinton broadly followed this approach.
Conservatives (particularly in recent decades) took up a “neo-conservative” foreign policy. It also seeks to promote the spread of democracy abroad, however it has a distrust of international organizations like the UN. Neo-conservatives believe the United States should act unilaterally to spread democracy so as not to unnecessarily relinquish power. According to Schaefer, neo-conservatives also tend to make absolutist declarations regarding “good” and “evil”, as evidenced by rhetoric used by President Bush in the aftermath of 9/11. Though these ideologies differ slightly in detail, they both can be traced back to the values-based foreign policy of President Wilson.
Schaefer said that though “American values” may be admirable, they are a problematic guide to foreign policy. He argued this decreases U.S. flexibly because “values can demand action even when circumstances aren’t conducive to success.” They also create a problem of credibility; since the U.S. does not have a capacity to stop all injustice in the world, it inevitably has to “pick and choose” when to intervene to stop a genocide or war. The victims that remain overlooked will subsequently view the United States’ claims to moral uprightness with suspicion.
Ultimately, Schaefer thinks it would be beneficial for the US to move away from Wilson and instead embrace a realist foreign policy based on rational self-interest. He stated this would likely lead to the U.S. being somewhat less involved in international conflicts. Moving in this direction may not be easy, however, as Schaefer noted that President Obama initially put forward realist foreign policy positions, but over the course of his administration has often been pressured to adopt Wilsonian views.
Finance major Ian Coverdale was impressed with the speech.
“I thought Dr. Schaefer did a very good job of breaking down complicated political ideas for ordinary people,” he said. “It was interesting to hear how these ideologies have effected international relations the past few decades.”
McCoy Professor of English Dr. Bev Hogue will deliver the final presentation of the WWI Colloquium entitled “E.E. Cummings: Pacifist, Prisoner, Poet” on April 27.
