![\"The](\"https:\/\/magoosh.com\/hs\/files\/2017\/06\/LeagueNations_49-241x300.jpg\")
\nThe proposal for a League of Nations was the fourteenth of President Woodrow Wilson\u2019s 14 Points, which were the terms he took to the Paris Peace Conference at the end of World War I. The League was designed to handle global diplomatic problems before they turned into wars and was the most controversial part of the final treaty. Critics in the United States Senate feared that it would require America to be involved in international conflicts. Source: The Ohio State University<\/a>. <\/p>\n
Where should we begin the overview of the League of Nations?<\/h2>\n
There are a couple of places we could begin:<\/p>\n
1. The ending of WWI, and the anger many European nations had for Germany for starting what they saw as a war of aggression and needless bloodshed (remember the MAIN causes of WWI? Militarism, Alliances, Imperialism, and Nationalism).
\n2. The defeated and humiliated Germans, which would lead nicely into an understanding of the foundation of the next World War. <\/p>\n
However, since this is U.S. history, I will begin with Woodrow Wilson and his Fourteen Points. <\/p>\n
What were Wilson\u2019s 14 points?<\/h2>\n
Woodrow Wilson\u2019s 14 points<\/a> were the United States\u2019s official position for a post-WWI world. Remember that many believed that World War i would be the war to end all all wars. The visions of a post-WWI world were sweeping and echoed visions of Utopias; after all, many believed that the carnage of WWI would be meaningless if the world continued in the same way. Wilson\u2019s 14 points were in line with these beliefs. <\/p>\n Furthermore, Wilson knew that Russia in 1917 was entertaining other ideas of the world \u2013 ideas that made capitalism obsolete. In his 14 points, Wilson would offer up another idea for how nations could interact with each other peacefully. <\/p>\n In the fourteenth point, Wilson stated<\/a>, \u201cA general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.\u201d This point was the foundation of the League of Nations.<\/p>\n In a response to the disastrous system of alliances that are often credited with beginning WWI, the League of Nations would be primarily a global peace-keeping organization. Member nations would vote on how to deal with problems, first diplomatically, then, economically. There would be no League of Nations army set to enforce the policies. Instead, the member nations would be primarily responsible for carrying out the League\u2019s wishes. <\/p>\n There were, of course, many weaknesses in this structure. First and foremost, the League failed in its ultimate mission: prevent another world war. There are likely many reasons for this, including: Let\u2019s look at two documents to help us make sense of that question. <\/p>\n The first excerpt comes from Woodrow Wilson giving a speech in Pueblo, Colorado in September 1919. Wilson was touring the nation trying to build support for the League. <\/p>\n \u201cMy fellow citizens, as I have crossed the continent, I have perceived more and more that men have been busy creating an absolutely false impression of the treaty of peace and the Covenant of the League of Nations. Reflect, my fellow citizens that the membership of this great League is going to include all the great fighting nations of the world, as well as the weak ones. And what do they unite for? They enter into a solemn promise to one another that they will never use their power against one another for aggression; that they never will violate the territorial integrity of a neighbor; that they never will interfere with the political independence of a neighbor…I wish that those who oppose this settlement could feel the moral obligation that rests upon us not to turn our backs on the boys who died, but to see the thing through, to see it through to the end and Here, Wilson is arguing that entering the League of Nations is a moral duty for the United States, or else the war would have been fought in vain. <\/p>\n But Wilson wasn\u2019t the only one who had something to say about the League. <\/p>\n The Republican Senator, Henry Cabot Lodge, had some strong words for Wilson and his proposed League: <\/p>\n “Mr. President: I can never be anything else but an American, and I must think of the United States first. I have never had but one allegiance – I cannot divide it now. I have loved but one flag and I cannot share that devotion and give affection to the mongrel banner invented for a league. Internationalism is to me repulsive.<\/p>\n The United States is the world’s best hope, but if you fetter her in the interests and quarrels of other nations, if you tangle her in the intrigues of Europe, you will destroy her power for good and endanger her very existence. Leave her to march freely through the centuries to come as in the years that have gone. No doubt many excellent and patriotic people see a coming fulfillment of noble ideals in the words ‘league for peace.’<\/p>\n We all respect and share these aspirations and desires, but some of us see no hope, but rather defeat, for them in this murky plan. For we, too, have our ideals, even if we differ from those who have tried to establish a monopoly of idealism. Our first ideal is our country. Our ideal is to make her ever stronger and better and finer, because in that way alone can she be of the greatest service to the world’s peace and to the welfare of mankind.” Lodge was not arguing for isolationism here \u2013 recall that he believes the United States has a place in the world. Rather, he is arguing against what he calls internationalism, the idea that a nation would give up its sovereignty to international actors. Ultimately, Lodge\u2019s point of view won the day and the United States did not join the League of Nations. <\/p>\nWhat was the League of Nations?<\/h2>\n
\n1. The League was made up primarily of Allied nations in WWI, giving it the nickname \u201cthe League of Victors.\u201d
\n2. Although the League was designed to be a global organization, many nations never joined, joined for a brief period of time, or never followed through on the recommendations of the League.
\n3. The biggest nation at the time \u2013 the nation that proposed the League \u2013 never joined the organization. Can you guess which nation that was? Yup. The United States. <\/p>\nWhy didn\u2019t the United States join the League of Nations?<\/h2>\n
\nmake good their redemption of the world. For nothing less depends upon this decision, nothing less than liberation and salvation of the world.\u201d
\nSource: Stanford History Education Group.<\/a><\/p>\n
\nSource: Stanford History Education Group.<\/a> <\/p>\n