Fourteen Points

“The Russian representatives have insisted, very justly, very wisely, and in the true spirit of modern democracy, that the conferences they have been holding with the Teutonic and Turkish statesmen should be held within open, not closed, doors and all the world has been audience, as was desired.”

Wilson identifies communist Russia with principles of democracy and openness that America embraces. This rhetorical strategy attempts to strengthen the bond between the Allied Powers which will be broken if Russia makes a separate peace. Teutonic (meaning German) refers to the leaders of Germany and Austria, and the Turks led the Ottoman Empire.

“There is no confusion of counsel among the adversaries of the Central Powers, no uncertainty of principle, no vagueness of detail. The only secrecy of counsel, the only lack of fearless frankness, the only failure to make definite statement of the objects of the war, lies with Germany and her Allies.”

Wilson uses a type of parallel structure called chiasmus to contrast the moral status of the Allied and Central Powers. The first sentence opens by naming one side and the second sentence closes by naming the other. Sandwiched in the middle is the contrast between the Allied Powers’ commitment to principle and the Central Powers’ moral confusion.

“No statesman who has the least conception of his responsibility ought for a moment to permit himself to continue this tragical and appalling outpouring of blood and treasure unless he is sure beyond a peradventure that the objects of the vital sacrifice are part and parcel of the very life of Society, and that the people for whom he speaks think them right and imperative as he does.”

This quotation builds on the earlier point about one side’s moral confusion and the other side’s moral clarity. During his first term in office, Wilson avoided war and ran on this fact in his quest for a second term. He now must explain his change of course. He does so by arguing that “the very life of Society” hinges on the outcome of the war. He introduces an element of pathos to make peace seem desirable. “Peradventure” means a reasonable chance.

“There is, moreover, a voice calling for these definitions of principle and of purpose which is, it seems to me, more thrilling and more compelling than any of the many moving voices with which the troubled air of the world is filled. It is the voice of the Russian people. They are prostrate and all but helpless, it would seem, before the grim power of Germany, which has hitherto known no relenting and no pity. Their power, apparently, is shattered. And yet their soul is not subservient.”

This description of the Russian people continues the use of pathos (an emotional appeal) to inspire the desire for peace—but only for a just peace that does not enslave others (i.e., make them subservient). By talking about the Russian people instead of just Lenin or the government, Wilson implicitly connects the Russians with his democratic vision of self-determination.

“The day of conquest and aggrandizement is gone by; so is also the day of secret covenants entered into in the interest of particular governments and likely at some unlooked-for moment to upset the peace of the world.”

Wilson’s rhetoric here continues to build to a more stirring tone to prepare his listeners to be enthusiastic about his peace proposals. He also employs a bandwagon rhetorical strategy—the world is moving away from old ideas of conquest, so his audience should eagerly join what will be the new peace-loving majority.

“We entered this war because violations of right had occurred which touched us to the quick and made the life of our people impossible unless they were corrected and the world secured once for all against their recurrence. What we demand in this war, therefore, is nothing peculiar to ourselves. It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in; and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by the other peoples of the world as against force and selfish aggression.”

Wilson continues here his appeal to ethos (the speaker’s or audience’s character)—America is in the war for moral reasons that benefit everyone. National self-determination (a key pillar of the points introduced after this paragraph) is grounded in the principle of justice. His use of repetition is also apparent: “safe” and its synonym “secure” appear three times over two sentences.

“Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind, but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.”

Wilson’s tone and diction in his list of points become more precise and straightforward to avoid confusion. He brings in principles such as peace (the first part of the first goal) and repeats keywords that he has previously introduced such as “frankly” and “public.” Secret treaties were one of the causes of the war, and he is eager to see them abolished from global diplomacy.

“A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the Government whose title is to be determined.”

This point on colonial claims could potentially challenge Wilson’s allies. Note the explicit appeal to principle and how he gives equal weight to a people’s self-determination against the claims of the foreign country that controls the colony. Foreign colonies are incompatible with his ideal of national self-determination. Yet the US allies Britain and France are the world’s largest colonial powers. He is in a rhetorically difficult position of rejecting Germany’s territorial expansion without explicitly condemning British and French colonialism.

“An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.”

This is Wilson’s clearest statement of national self-determination. People who speak Polish should have their own country (Polish-speaking regions had been previously divided among Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia). He ties this proposal to terms that are key to his vision of the postwar world such as free, secure, territorial integrity, and international covenant.

“A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.”

Wilson’s final point in his list unites the general principles at its beginning with later calls for specific actions. This concluding point, which is the basis for the later League of Nations and its successor United Nations, provides a mechanism for enforcing peace through international guarantees.

“For such arrangements and covenants we are willing to fight and to continue to fight until they are achieved; but only because we wish the right to prevail and desire a just and stable peace such as can be secured only by removing the chief provocations to war, which this programme does remove.”

This quotation encapsulates the paradox of Wilson’s goals: he wants peace but also wants to inspire America and Russia to keep fighting. He overcomes the apparent contradiction by appealing to rights. A peace that does not preserve rights will lead to further war. Therefore, the Allied Powers must fight this war until a just peace can be achieved; otherwise, wars will continue to break out and lasting peace will be impossible.

“We have no jealousy of German greatness, and there is nothing in this programme that impairs it. We grudge her no achievement or distinction of learning or of pacific enterprise such as have made her record very bright and very enviable…We wish her only to accept a place of equality among the peoples of the world—the new world in which we now live—instead of a place of mastery.”

Wilson asserts that America has no desire to humiliate or punish Germany. This helps cement his moral contrast between the good, peace-loving Americans and those Central Powers that desire conquest. He likely also hopes to strengthen the position of those members of the German government who are open to peace talks.

“An evident principle runs through the whole programme I have outlined. It is the principle of justice to all peoples and nationalities, and their right to live on equal terms of liberty and safety with one another, whether they be strong or weak.”

As Wilson moves toward his closing, he repeats and underlines the idea that his peace proposal is based on moral principles. He is not just trying to end this particular war. He is offering a road map to a world in which both the mighty and weak can live together in prosperity and harmony.