ROOSEVELT, WILSON, AND THE DEMOCRATIC THEORY OF NATIONAL PROGRESSIVISM

E-ISSN： 1471-6437|29|2|318-334

ISSN： 0265-0525

Source： Social Philosophy and Policy, Vol.29, Iss.2, 2012-07, pp. : 318-334

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

The American Progressive Movement argued for both a democratization of the political process and deference to expert administrators. Relying on the work of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, the article endeavors to explore this tension and make some preliminary suggestions as to how it might be reconciled—at least in the eyes of its adherents—into a single democratic theory. Both Roosevelt and Wilson criticize the principles of the original Constitution for being insufficiently democratic and overly suspicious of the popular will, and they want to make public opinion a more direct force in national politics. Yet both are also suspicious of politics and its potential for corruption by “special interests,” and thus look for ways of empowering expert administrative agencies and insulating them from political influence. Wilson seems to understand the potential conflict between these two aims more than Roosevelt does, although both look to a popularized presidency as a means of reconciling consent and expertise.