The Leon reporter. (Leon, Iowa) 1887-1930, 1916-04-13
WILSON AND ROOSEVELT.

WILSON AND ROOSEVELT.
Either republicans are crooked IL
their opposition to President Wilson's
foreign policies, or they are crooked
in their opposition to the nomination
of Col. Roosevelt
If they oppose Wilson on principle
there can be no principle back OF
their opposition to Roosevelt. II
they oppose Roosevelt on principle
there is no principle back of theil
opposition to Wilson. The more
they profess to be for Hughes the
more glazing is their insincerity in
assailing Wilson.
Justice Hughes is essentially the
Wilson type. His outlook on public
life is essentially the Wilson outlook
His theory of public duty is essential
ly the Wilson theory. So far as we
know there is no important difference
between these two men on any lmpor-
tant issue confronting the country
There is probably no vital question
about which they are not in substan-
tial agreement. Justice Hughes is
more republican than President Will
son; President Wilson is more demo-
cratic than Justice Hughes. The
Judge is little more conservative
than the president. The president is
a little more tactful and conciliatory
than the Judge in dealing with those
who are not in accord with him.
What, then, is the purpose OF NOM
mating Justice Hughes? To continue
the Wilson administration under re-
publican auspices? To replace a
II h iao r,
Wilson?
Now with Roosevelt there is an
issue No two men could be more
unlike than Wilson and Roosevelt, eX-
cept Hughes and Roosevelt.
however much contempt he may have
for rival demagogues like Bryan and
Hearst. Wilson despises all the arts
of demagogy, but demagogy is vital
to the kind of a campaign the repub-
lilans are trying to wake against
Wilson. Roosevelt has a gift for in
trigue which has not been equalled
In American politics since Aaron
Burr. Wilson is incapable of in
trigue. Roosevelt is lingo and i'm
perialist. a militarist with the ambi-
ton of a dictator. Wilson is against
jingoism, against imperialism, against
nilitarism and an answering cham
pion of democracy. Roosevelt is for
war for wars sake He believes in
it as one of the virile virtues as ear
nestly as Bernhard or Tirpitz be-
lieves in it, Wilson is for peace as
long as peace can be maintained with
honor. War to him is the last of all
resorts.
Roosevelt's attitude toward govern
ment is consistently Prussian. The
man whom he most closely resembles
is The kaiser. Wilson's attitude to-
ward government is incorrigibly
American. His spirit is the spirit of
Franklin, Jefferson and Lincoln.
So far as Roosevelt is capable OF
sincerity, he is sincere in his hatred
&C Wilson and in his vehement an
tagonism in public life. Roosevelt
would hate. anybody who was presl-
dent, but in some circumstances that
would be merely the hatred OF envy,
In Wilson's case his hatred is elemen-
tai.
The two men embody to an
astounding extent the two conflict
ing ideals of civilization that are en-
gagged in a death grapple on the bat
tlefields of Europe. Roosevelt is the
American equivalent of Germany. His
political philosophy is all Germany:
His highest conception of government
is one in which the state is supreme
and in which the individual exists
for the state, to be remodeled and re-
shaped from the image of God into
whatever image an all-wise and all
powerful state DEGREES best. The
state is the ultimate good, the sum-
mum bonum. It's advancement is the
imperative obligation. Whatever
stands in the way is evil. The first
duty of man is to be soldier. The
first duty of woman is to breed chill
dren for the service of the state.
In peace Roosevelt would NEEDLE
with the daily life of the citizen as
Germany NEEDLES with it. War he
would carry on as Germany carries
on war There is nothing that the
German government has done which
he would not be capable of ordering
in similar circumstances. His re-
sentiment against Germany is only
the resentment that man without
sense of humor feels at his own Carl
cature
TIC Wilson the German theory OF
the state is denial of democracy He
objects to it for himself as we'll as for
others. He has none of Bernhard or
Treitschke in him-no Nietzschem
nightmares about the superman-no
morbid dreams of Weltmacht oder
Niedergang. He cares much about
justice and humanity; little about
domination. To him the spiritual free
dom of democracy and the moral re-
sponsibility Of every individual for
his own life are of infinitely more
value than all the Prusian efficiency
in the world, whether military or in
dustrial.
The moral and political differences
in the two men are strikingly illus
frated in their attitude toward treaty