DBQs
DBQ #2: World War I[1]
Overview: Historians tend to focus on two questions related to U.S. involvement in World War I: why did the U.S. go to war? And how did the peace treaty fail? This DBQ focuses on the second burning question. When President Wilson asked Congress for a declaration of war in the spring of 1917, he stated that this would be a war “to make the world safe for democracy.” His 14 Points outlined his vision for how to achieve this lofty goal. While Wilson expected opposition from his European allies in Britain and France, he was not prepared for the strength and power of opposition in the U.S. Senate. This question will challenge you to determine who was to blame for the failure to ratify the Versailles Treaty: President Wilson or the U.S. Congress.
Directions
- Read the question carefully.
- Restate the question in your own words.
- Read and take notes on the documents.
- Who is the author?
- When was it written?
- Who was the intended audience?
- What are the main points?
- Categorize the documents:
- Which documents illustrate Wilson’s ineptitude or stubbornness?
- Which documents illustrate liberal opposition?
- Which documents illustrate conservative opposition? (Irreconcilables)
THE QUESTION
It was the strength of opposition forces, both liberal and conservative, rather than the ineptitude or stubbornness of President Wilson that led to the Senate defeat of the Treaty of Versailles.
Using the documents and your knowledge of the time period 1917 -1921, assess the validity of this statement.
A FEW NOTES
The terms liberal and conservative in foreign policy do not mean the same thing as they do in domestic policy. Conservatives favored traditional American isolationism. Liberals favored a new role for the United States in world affairs.
THE DOCUMENTS
Document A: Speech in the U.S. Senate
The first proposition connected with the proposed league is that of a tribunal to settle the matters of controversy which may arise between the different nations.
Will anyone advocate that those matters which are of vital importance to our people shall be submitted to a tribunal created other than by our own people and give it an international army subject to its direction and control to enforce its decrees? I doubt if anyone will advocate that. . . If you do not do so, Mr. President, what will your league amount to? . .
In its last analysis the proposition is force to destroy force, conflict to prevent conflict, militarism to destroy militarism, war to prevent war. In its last analysis it must be that if it has any sanction behind its judgment at all. There is where the difficulty lies. . .
Senator William Borah, Speech in the U.S. Senate, December 6, 1918
Document B: The New Republic
Liberals all over the world have hoped that a war, which was so clearly the fruit of competition and imperialist and class-bound nationalism, would end in a peace which would moralize nationalism by releasing it from class bondage and exclusive ambitions. The Treaty of Versailles does not even try to satisfy these aspirations. Instead of expressing a great recuperative effort of the consciousness of civilization, which for its own sins has sweated so much blood, it does much to intensify and nothing to heal the old and ugly dissension.
The New Republic, May 24, 1919
Document C: President Wilson
When you read Article X, therefore, you will see that it is nothing but the inevitable, logical center of the whole system of the Covenant of the League of Nations, and I stand for it absolutely. If it should ever in any important respect be impaired, I would feel like asking the Secretary of War to get the boys who went across the water to fight. . .and I would stand up before them and say, “Boys, I told you before you went across the seas that this was a war against wars, and I did my best to fulfill the promise, but I am obliged to come to you in mortification and shame and say I have not been able to fulfill the promise. You are betrayed. You have fought for something that you did not get.”
President Wilson, Speech, Sept. 5, 1919
Document D: Hoover to Wilson
I take the liberty of urging upon you the desirability of accepting the reservations now passed. . .
I have the belief that with the League once in motion, it can within itself and from experience and public education develop such measures as will make it effective. I am impressed with the desperate necessity of early ratification.
The delays have already seriously imperiled the economic recuperation of Europe. In this, we are vitally interested from every point of view. I believe that the Covenant will steadily lose ground in popular support if it is not put into constructive operation at once because the American public will not appreciate the saving values of the Covenant as distinguished from the wrongs imposed in the Treaty.
Herbert Hoover to Woodrow Wilson, Nov. 10, 1919
Document E: John Maynard Keynes
According to [the French] vision of the future, European history is to be a perpetual prize fight of which France has won this round, but of which this round is certainly not the last. . For Clemenceau made no pretence of considering himself bound by the Fourteen Points and left chiefly to others such concoctions as were necessary from time to time to save the scruples or the face of President Wilson.
. . The policy of reducing Germany to servitude for a generation, of degrading the lives of millions of human beings and of depriving a whole nation of happiness should be abhorrent and detestable—abhorrent and detestable, even if it were possible, even if it enriched ourselves, even if it did not sow the decay of the whole civilized life of Europe.
Keynes, Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920
Document F: Woodrow Wilson
This election is to be a genuine national referendum. . .
The chief question that is put to you is, of course: Do you want your country’s honor vindicated and the Treaty of Versailles ratified? Do you in particular approve of the League of Nations as organized and empowered in that treaty? And do you wish to see the United States play its responsible part in it?
[The founders of the Government] thought of America as the light of the world as created to lead the world in the assertion of the rights of peoples and the rights of free nations. . This light the opponents of the League would quench.
Woodrow Wilson, “Appeal to the Country,” Oct. 3, 1920
Document G: W.E.B. Du Bois
Forty one nations, including nearly every Negro and mulatto and colored government of the world, have met in Geneva and formed the assembly of the League of Nations. This is the most forward looking event of the century. Because of the idiotic way in which the stubbornness of Woodrow Wilson and the political fortunes of the Republicans became involved, the United States was not represented. But despite its tumult and shouting this nation must join and join on the terms which the World lays down. The idea that we single handed can dictate terms to the World or stay out of the World is an idea born of the folly of fools.
W.E.B. Du Bois, “The League of Nations,” The Crisis March, 1921
Document H: Jane Addams
The League of Nations afforded a wide difference of opinion in every group. The Women’s Peace Party held its annual meeting in Chicago in the spring of 1920 and found our Branches fairly divided upon the subject. . the difference of opinion was limited always to the existing League and never for a moment did anyone doubt the need for continued effort to bring about an adequate international organization.
Jane Addams, Peace and Bread in Times of War, 1922
[1] The Center for Learning, Advanced Placement U.S. History 2: 20th Century Challenges 1914 – 1996 (2000), 12 – 13.
DBQ #1: The Progressive Era
the-progressive-era.pdf
Overview: Some historians argue that there were no common threads unifying the Progressive movement. Instead, individual groups/individuals pursued their own reform agendas on a variety of issues. The following documents reflect the diversity of the movement. However, they may also reveal some common beliefs and impulses that pulled the movement together. You will need to take a careful look at the documents and arrive at your own informed opinion.
Directions
- Read the question CAREFULLY.
- Restate the question in your own words.
- Read and take notes on each document.
- Who is the author?
- When was it written?
- What is the purpose of the document?
- What are the main points
- Categorize the documents:
- Which documents support the idea that the progressive movement was unified?
- Which documents support the idea that the progressive movement was NOT unified?
The Question
To what extent did the Progressive movement represent a unified effort by all groups in society to correct abuses in society and government?
The Documents
Document A: Votes for Women
Until women had obtained “that right protective of all other rights—the ballot,” this agitation must still go on, absorbing the time and energy of our best and strongest women. Who can measure the advantages that would result if the magnificent abilities of these women could be devoted to the needs of government, society, home, instead of being consumed in the struggle to obtain their birthright of individual freedom? Until this can be gained, we can never know, we cannot even prophesy, the capacity and power of women for the uplifting of humanity.
If may be delayed longer than we think; it may be here sooner than we expect; but the day will come when man will recognize woman as his peer, not only at fireside but in the councils of the nation.
Susan B. Anthony
Arena Magazine, 1897
Document B: Pledge for Temperance (Millions of women and men were persuaded by the Women’s Christian Temperance Union to take the following pledge)
We believe that God created both men and women in His own image, and therefore, we believe in one standard of purity for both men and women, and in equal rights of all to hold opinions and to express the same with equal freedom.
We believe in a living wage; in an eight hour day; in courts of conciliation and arbitration; in justice as opposed to greed of gain; in “peace on earth and goodwill to men.”
We therefore formulate and, for ourselves, adopt the following pledge, asking our sisters and brothers of a common danger and a common hope to make common cause with us in working its reasonable and helpful precepts into the practice of everyday life:
I hereby solemnly promise, God helping me, to abstain from all distilled, fermented, and malt liquors, including wine, beer, and cider, and to employ all proper means to discourage the use of and traffic in the same.”
National Women’s Christian Temperance Union
Annual Leaflet, 1902
Document C: Child Labor (Report delivered by Florence Kelley, in her role as chief factory inspector for Illinois)
These, I believe are the gravest obstacles at the present time to the enforcement of the child labor law [in Illinois]: first, the general hypocrisy of the American people, believe that child labor is evil, and that, therefore, we do not tolerate it—when there are working children on the streets before our eyes, every working day in the year, in every manufacturing city; second, the failure to make the work of enforcing the law a desirable and recognized profession into which the ablest man will willingly go.
The trouble is ourselves. We get exactly the sort of care for the children through the officials that the community determines they shall have; and we register our indifference in accepting such printed records as we have now, obscuring the actual conditions of the working children in nearly all the states.
The next step which we need to take is to insist that this is a national evil, and we must have a national law abolishing it.
Florence Kelley
“Obstacles to the Enforcement of Child Labor Legislation,” 1906
Document D: Civil Rights for African Americans
We repudiate the monstrous doctrine that the oppressor should be the sole authority as the to the rights of the oppressed. The Negro race in America, stolen, ravished, and degraded, struggling up through difficulties and oppression, needs sympathy and receive criticism; needs help and is given mob violence; needs justice and is given charity; needs leadership and is given cowardice and apology; needs bread and is given stone. This nation will never stand justified before God until these things are changed.
. . . Of the above grievances, we do not hesitate to complain, and to complain loudly and insistently. To ignore, overlook, or apologize for these wrongs is to prove ourselves unworthy of freedom. Persistent, manly agitation is the way to liberty, and toward this goal the Niagara Movement has started and asks the cooperation of all men and of all races.
Principles of the Niagara Movement (W.E.B. Du Bois)
July 1905
[1] John Newman and John Schmalbach, United States History: Preparing for the A.P. Exam (AMSCO, 2006), 443 – 446
