Was Woodrow Wilson a U.S. dictator? I think he was...

[politicaladdict]

Was Woodrow Wilson a dictator in the literal sense?

Given broad powers to overlook and control pricing and taxing.

Restricted free-speech and it's illegal to criticize his policies and if you did, you'd get a prison sentence and even death somtiems.

Had the power to control newspaper outlets.

Protesters and dissidents beaten up by police under his administration.

"The Committee on Public Information" pretty much considered the propaganda department.

"In the fashion of a police state, the Department of Justice arrested tens of thousands of individuals without just cause. One was not safe even within the walls of one’s own home to criticize the Wilson administration.

The Justice Department created the precursor to the Gestapo called the American Protective League. Its job was to spy on fellow citizens and turn in “seditious” persons or draft dodgers. In September of 1918 in NYC, the APL rounded up about 50,000 people.

And even dragged us into WWI.

Benito Mussolini even admitted to adopting policies to fascism from Woodrow Wilson.

But never the less, he nevr stood in power longer than an average president.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Idiot.

[politicaladdict]

Idiot.

B******!

[Alexander Hamilton]

Idiot.

B******!

lol

[k-onmmunist]

Sorta.

[Mechaman]

No, Wilson was democratically elected.

What's scarier? That Woodrow Wilson was a president or that people voted him into office?

[politicaladdict]

Sorta.

I understand the fact that if had absolute power, atleast temporarily, they were granted by congress.

But nontheless, it seems he had a huge amount of control under his administration.

And did he have as much power Lincoln did in an under martial law?

[politicaladdict]

No, Wilson was democratically elected.

What's scarier? That Woodrow Wilson was a president or that people voted him into office?

Fujimori was elected in Peru and expanded his power.

Lukashenko was elected in Belarus and expanded his power.

And was Hitler elected or appointed?

[Mechaman]

No, Wilson was democratically elected.

What's scarier? That Woodrow Wilson was a president or that people voted him into office?

Fujimori was elected in Peru and expanded his power.

Lukashenko was elected in Belarus and expanded his power.

And was Hitler elected or appointed?

Granted.
Maybe I'm a dumbass on this issue but wasn't Woodrow Wilson elected into office twice?
Didn't he also decide not to run again in 1920 because he got unpopular?
A true dictator gains enough power as to make removal (via democratic means) almost impossible. In the election of 1916 there was a possibility that Wilson would lose the election. Also, while I won't argue that Wilson was possibly one of the most unconstitutional presidents ever he still needed a bit more to accomplish to get that well deserved title of "dictator".
Dictators aren't democratically removed from power, they are removed by force.
Woodrow Wilson was enough of a douche to be a dick, but he didn't have the balls to be a dictator.

Believe me, I would love it if the history books called Wilson a dictator, but I don't think there is enough evidence that he fit the definition of one.

[Alexander Hamilton]

No, Wilson was democratically elected.

What's scarier? That Woodrow Wilson was a president or that people voted him into office?

Fujimori was elected in Peru and expanded his power.

Lukashenko was elected in Belarus and expanded his power.

And was Hitler elected or appointed?

Granted.
Maybe I'm a dumbass on this issue but wasn't Woodrow Wilson elected into office twice?
Didn't he also decide not to run again in 1920 because he got unpopular?
A true dictator gains enough power as to make removal (via democratic means) almost impossible. In the election of 1916 there was a possibility that Wilson would lose the election. Also, while I won't argue that Wilson was possibly one of the most unconstitutional presidents ever he still needed a bit more to accomplish to get that well deserved title of "dictator".
Dictators aren't democratically removed from power, they are removed by force.
Woodrow Wilson was enough of a douche to be a dick, but he didn't have the balls to be a dictator.

Believe me, I would love it if the history books called Wilson a dictator, but I don't think there is enough evidence that he fit the definition of one.

Technically, Wilson was unable to serve the full term he was elected to. I doubt he could've avoided being "democratically removed".

[politicaladdict]

No, Wilson was democratically elected.

What's scarier? That Woodrow Wilson was a president or that people voted him into office?

Fujimori was elected in Peru and expanded his power.

Lukashenko was elected in Belarus and expanded his power.

And was Hitler elected or appointed?

Granted.
Maybe I'm a dumbass on this issue but wasn't Woodrow Wilson elected into office twice?
Didn't he also decide not to run again in 1920 because he got unpopular?
A true dictator gains enough power as to make removal (via democratic means) almost impossible. In the election of 1916 there was a possibility that Wilson would lose the election. Also, while I won't argue that Wilson was possibly one of the most unconstitutional presidents ever he still needed a bit more to accomplish to get that well deserved title of "dictator".
Dictators aren't democratically removed from power, they are removed by force.
Woodrow Wilson was enough of a douche to be a dick, but he didn't have the balls to be a dictator.

Believe me, I would love it if the history books called Wilson a dictator, but I don't think there is enough evidence that he fit the definition of one.

Fujimori resigned after pressure.


Not very many history books even mentioned his policies.

And plus, I had to search more and more on the internet to come to some very rare sources, adnd didn't even know this until you discover the roots of fascism.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

?

[Хahar 🤔]

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

?

lol, fail

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Granted.
Maybe I'm a dumbass on this issue but wasn't Woodrow Wilson elected into office twice?
Didn't he also decide not to run again in 1920 because he got unpopular?
A true dictator gains enough power as to make removal (via democratic means) almost impossible. In the election of 1916 there was a possibility that Wilson would lose the election. Also, while I won't argue that Wilson was possibly one of the most unconstitutional presidents ever he still needed a bit more to accomplish to get that well deserved title of "dictator".
Dictators aren't democratically removed from power, they are removed by force.
Woodrow Wilson was enough of a douche to be a dick, but he didn't have the balls to be a dictator.

Believe me, I would love it if the history books called Wilson a dictator, but I don't think there is enough evidence that he fit the definition of one.

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

I have not much to add.

Word "dictator" is overused and that's not good, because by all stupid analogies we only make real dictatorship throught history looks less serious.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

?

That makes no sense.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Bush was an idiot and abused a law, but still was far from being dictator, even if he would love to.

It's really hard to me to defend Bush

[Alexander Hamilton]

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

?

That makes no sense.

Bush was elected and re-elected by very small margins, yet was pretty much a dictator in that he usurped power and implemented a clearly authoritarian regime, and has Bush gone anywhere? Obama IS Bush.

[Хahar 🤔]

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

?

That makes no sense.

Bush was elected and re-elected by very small margins, yet was pretty much a dictator in that he usurped power and implemented a clearly authoritarian regime, and has Bush gone anywhere? Obama IS Bush.

The last sentence is mostly right (except in foreign policy, which is the only place where the parties differ at all), but that doesn't make either of them dictators.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Remember, Wilson was reelected by the smallest margin in American history; his Party then lost Majorities in Congress at the next election.  Hardly something that would happen under a Dictator.

?

That makes no sense.

Bush was elected and re-elected by very small margins, yet was pretty much a dictator in that he usurped power and implemented a clearly authoritarian regime, and has Bush gone anywhere? Obama IS Bush.

The last sentence is mostly right (except in foreign policy, which is the only place where the parties differ at all), but that doesn't make either of them dictators.

The electoral system is flawed.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Bush was elected and re-elected by very small margins, yet was pretty much a dictator in that he usurped power and implemented a clearly authoritarian regime, and has Bush gone anywhere? Obama IS Bush.

[Psychic Octopus]

Wilson was an awful man, but alas, he was not a dictator.


I'd also like to point out that Bush is a 21st Century example of Wilsonianism in the modern age.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Wilson was an awful man, but alas, he was not a dictator.


I'd also like to point out that Bush is a 21st Century example of Wilsonianism in the modern age.

Except George Bush cared about black people.

[Psychic Octopus]

Wilson was an awful man, but alas, he was not a dictator.


I'd also like to point out that Bush is a 21st Century example of Wilsonianism in the modern age.

Except George Bush cared about black people.

Yes and other ethnic minorities.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

lol