While I agree with your point, please do not confuse the Democrats of 1912 with Democrats of today ("we Democrats"). The parties have realigned since then. Today's Republicans are not the "party of Lincoln" and today's Democrats are not the party of the segregationists.
While I agree with your point, please do not confuse the Democrats of 1912 with Democrats of today ("we Democrats"). The parties have realigned since then. Today's Republicans are not the "party of Lincoln" and today's Democrats are not the party of the segregationists.
Wilson helped bring in the income tax, the Fed, the federal 8-hour day, the Federal Trade Commission, anti-trust legislation, legislation against child labor.
In my personal case it was small time peace church folk who had been locked up for being vocal about being anti-war and conscientious objectors during a war.
On social issues, you are very much correct. On economic issues, not so much. Wilson very much was economically liberal and hit Charles Evans Hughes hard in 1916 for fighting against the 8 hour day, unions, and excessive big business.
While I agree with your point, please do not confuse the Democrats of 1912 with Democrats of today ("we Democrats"). The parties have realigned since then. Today's Republicans are not the "party of Lincoln" and today's Democrats are not the party of the segregationists.
Wilson helped bring in the income tax, the Fed, the federal 8-hour day, the Federal Trade Commission, anti-trust legislation, legislation against child labor.
Wilson also went out of his way to purge African-Americans from the Federal workforce.
https://newsroom.haas.berkeley.edu/research/how-woodrow-wilsons-racist-segregation-order-eroded-the-black-civil-service/#:~:text=Wilson%20imposed%20segregation%20in%20his,Wilson's%20order%20was%20overtly%20discriminatory.
IтАЩm well aware of that. That was the point to which I was responding. He also had a horrible record on civil liberties during World War I.
I knew folks as a child that did prison time under Wilson/Palmer for political crimes.
They werenтАЩt even reds, just insufficiently pro-nationalist.
Like Eugene Debs.
In my personal case it was small time peace church folk who had been locked up for being vocal about being anti-war and conscientious objectors during a war.
Which was upheld by his GOP successors and largely reversed by New Dealers, despite the Solid South.
On social issues, you are very much correct. On economic issues, not so much. Wilson very much was economically liberal and hit Charles Evans Hughes hard in 1916 for fighting against the 8 hour day, unions, and excessive big business.