War, when we fought a weak nation. We have followed its broader
application to Mexico, when we were willing to ignore the taunts and
insults of another weak nation, even the loss of "prestige," for the sake
of the larger good. And we have now the clue to the President's
interpretation of the nation's mind during the first three years of the
present war. We were willing to bear the taunts and insults of Germany
so long as it appeared that a future world peace night best be brought
about by the preservation of neutrality, by turning the weight of the
impartial public opinion of our democracy and that of other neutrals
against militarism and imperialism. Our national aim was ever consistent
with the ideal of William James, to advance democracy and put an end to
the evil of war.

The only sufficient reason for the abandonment of the Washingtonian
policy is the furtherance of the object for which it was inaugurated, the
advance of democracy. And we had established the precedent, with Spain
and Mexico, that the Republic shall engage in no war of imperialistic
conquest. We war only in behalf of, or in defence of, democracy.

Before the entrance of America, however, the issues of the European
War were by no means clear cut along democratic lines. What kind of
democracy were the allies fighting for? Nowhere and at no time had it
been defined by any of their statesmen. On the contrary, the various
allied governments had entered into compacts for the transference of
territory in the event of victory; and had even, by the offer of rewards,
sought to play one small nation against another. This secret diplomacy
of bargains, of course, was a European heritage, the result of an
imperialistic environment which the American did not understand, and
from which he was happily free. Its effect on France is peculiarly
enlightening. The hostility of European governments, due to their fear