During a decade the old political parties, between which there was now
little more than an artificial alignment, had been breaking up.
Americans were absorbed in the great liberal movement begun under the
leadership of President Roosevelt, the result of which was to transform
democracy from a static to a pragmatic and evolutionary conception,--in
order to meet and correct new and unforeseen evils. Political freedom
was seen to be of little worth unless also accompanied by the economic
freedom the nation had enjoyed before the advent of industrialism.
Clerks and farmers, professional men and shopkeepers and artisans were
ready to follow the liberal leaders in states and nation; intellectual
elements from colleges and universities were enlisted. Paralleling the
movement, at times mingling with it, was the revolt of labour, manifested
not only in political action, but in strikes and violence. Readily
accessible books and magazines together with club and forum lectures in
cities, towns, and villages were rapidly educating the population in
social science, and the result was a growing independent vote to make
politicians despair.

Here was an instance of a democratic culture growing in isolation,
resentful of all external interference. To millions of Americans
--especially in our middle western and western states--bent upon social
reforms, the European War appeared as an arresting influence. American
participation meant the triumph of the forces of reaction. Colour was
lent to this belief because the conservative element which had opposed
social reforms was loudest in its demand for intervention. The wealthy
and travelled classes organized preparedness parades and distributed
propaganda. In short, those who had apparently done their utmost to
oppose democracy at home were most insistent that we should embark
upon a war for democracy across the seas. Again, what kind of democracy?
Obviously a status quo, commercially imperialistic democracy, which the