Wilson’s rigid personality, not the political context, doomed the Versailles Treaty

Evidence

A good example of an historical reconstruction that addresses both issues is the analysis by George and George (1956) of Woodrow Wilson’s role in the crisis over ratification of the Versailles Treaty. The intense, uncompromising qualities of Wilson the man, at least in certain kinds of conflicts, are an essential part of any account of the ratification fight. There is abundant evidence that the political context did not impose a course of action on Wilson that would have kept him from achieving his goal of ratification. All that was required was that he accept certain nominal compromises that his supporters urged upon him, pointing out that they had no practical significance. Moreover, Wilson’s actions are necessary to explain the outcome. Wilson’s supporters were lined up for a favorable ratification vote, but were unprepared to act unless he authorized them to accept mild qualifying language. This he refused to do. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1195 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Wilson’s refusal to compromise cost him treaty ratification despite supporters ready to vote — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1195

Broader Connections

• Wilson’s refusal to compromise cost him treaty ratification despite supporters ready to vote #expands (0.93) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1195