Woodrow Wilson Can’t Be Defended

It takes extraordinary perversity to rise in defense of Woodrow Wilson in 2024. David Frum is equal to that task. What Frum fails to do is present a consistent, coherent, or persuasive case for rehabilitating America’s worst two-term president. Frum’s apologia is so riddled with errors of commission, omission, perspective, and internal inconsistency that his heart hardly even seems to be in it.

Conservatives rightly loathe the man who first brought academic progressivism to the Democratic Party, shaping the approach to governance it follows to this day. When it comes time to respond to Wilson’s conservative critics, Frum doesn’t even appear to understand the arguments enough to address them. Moreover, as I detailed at length two years ago in my “Hater’s Guide to Woodrow Wilson,” there are a great many reasons for people of all persuasions to despise Wilson. Frum scarcely begins to cover that expansive waterfront.

About the Author

Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin is a senior writer at National Review Online and a fellow at National Review Institute.

Featured Tags

It takes extraordinary perversity to rise in defense of Woodrow Wilson in 2024. David Frum is equal to that task. What Frum fails to do is present a consistent, coherent, or persuasive case for rehabilitating America’s worst two-term president. Frum’s apologia is so riddled with errors of commission, omission, perspective, and internal inconsistency that his heart hardly even seems to be in it.

Conservatives rightly loathe the man who first brought academic progressivism to the Democratic Party, shaping the approach to governance it follows to this day. When it comes time to respond to Wilson’s conservative critics, Frum doesn’t even appear to understand the arguments enough to address them. Moreover, as I detailed at length two years ago in my “Hater’s Guide to Woodrow Wilson,” there are a great many reasons for people of all persuasions to despise Wilson. Frum scarcely begins to cover that expansive waterfront.